Here is society's view on this....the woman made a small mistake, and the motorcyclist is dead because he is on a motorcycle...had he been in a car he would have walked away...his choice...that is not going to change...get over it. If there is no drinking, speeding, or reckless driving involved highly unlikely she will be charged with anything else. Even if someone tries to sue her...if it goes to a jury trial, you will never find 12 people that believe it is 100% her fault.

 

Even an optimum settlement doesn't bring back the dead rider. Nor does it ever fill the void that family members will have for the rest of their lives.

 

Best post in the thread. Reality bites,and the same ol' tired *** chant of "Damn Cager killed a rider" is one turd that doesn't float. "Rider blows it by out riding his/her skill set" is a better description,more often,than not. Been in 3 high speed wrecks in 47 years,600,000 miles. 2 resulted in deaths,none were even remotely avoidable. Only 1 involved a driver of a 4 wheeled vehicle. Avoided hundreds of other potential bad scenarios by doing just what you alluded to,not depending on anyone else's judgement. Your *** is literally "in the wind",along with your life,out on 2 wheels. Part of the exhilaration of the whole experience. And the onus is on the rider,no one else,to live to ride another day.

 

Exactly! Back in 72' I had an accident due to a left turner. When a settlement was offered my lawyer told me we could "go for more" but that due to a thing called "contributory negligence" all it would take is 1 juror that didn't like motorcycles and I would lose the case.

 

Actually, contributory negligence is what MJHJEA describes in his well written post, not really what Tom84FXST is talking about.

Tom84FXST is describing how the jury members might look at the case based on a bias against motorcycles. By the way, this would be a civil case and would only need simple majority. One juror would not cost you the case.

MJHJEA is describing that, in so many cases of motorcycle accidents, the rider is partially responsible for what happened. This is independent of the actions of the party who causes the accident. This is contributory negligence. Regardless of the action of the car, if the rider's actions contributed to the accident or prevented him from avoiding it, he is partially responsible.

In a left turn collision, this would be determined based on the speed of both vehicles, any skid marks left, etc... If the rider locks it up and hits the left turner, a determination of speed would be made, and whether or not the rider should have been able to stop or avoid impact if he reacted appropriately.

Speed limits vary by area and density. In my area, there are very few uncontrolled left turns on roads with limits over 30MPH. In that situation, it would be difficult for a rider to argue he could not have avoided the collision.

None of this excuses the cager - they are still responsible for their actions. As riders, we are responsible to ourselves to try to stay alive. The concept of contributory negligence should also cause us to consider that 100% of the blame is seldom on either party.

I am also not in anyway claiming that every accident can be avoided simply by the rider paying better attention, but the reality is that many could be, and the severity of others could be reduced.

We can blame the cagers all we want - it is well deserved. We will still be just as injured or worse, so continuing to do so without also looking at all of the contributing factors will only yield more dead riders.

 

[QUOTE=Stiggy;13541931]Exactly, which is why you need a pit bull of a personal injury attorney to aggressively make your case so the jury will decide in your favor based on the evidence of the SUV driver's not paying attention to oncoming traffic (obviously had she seen the motorcyclist, she would not have entered the intersection to make her left turn until the motorcyclist had cleared it).

 

That requires a search warrant and would be searched only in fatal or major injury collisions.

 

And thankfully so.

 

There was a fatality in this accident, the motorcyclist lost his life. (By the way in the LE Agency that I worked with in Florida we used the word crash, not accident). There are NO traffic accidents, somebody screwed up and caused a crash that killed and/or injured someone.

Ride Safe - Ride Smart


"He Who Lives In Joy Does His Creator's Will".
The Baal Shem Tov, Founder of Chasidic Judaism... ca. 1750's

 

Twistnride, I would be very interested to hear what those scenarios were if you are alright with sharing. We can all learn from each others experiences. I personally have never been down on a bike. I learned my lesson the hard way, however, letting my guard down once. And it almost cost me my life. Ironically it happened to be the same scenario as this original post. Trying to beat a thunderstorm home late one night, I didn't take any of the precautions I mentioned in one of my earlier posts. Being lit up like a Christmas tree, how could I not be seen? But the mere fact that I was aware of the chance I was taking is what also saved me. Swerving off the pavement at 50mph, cutting through 4 or 5 front lawns, and stopping a few feet from someone's front porch…..but I went unscathed. The motto I adopted when riding is the same motto we use with firearms…."always" treat them as if they are loaded, even when you are positive they are not. i.e. treat a cage as if they don't see you, even when you are positive that they do. Most times you don't get a second chance on a bike. You're usually dead or busted up for life.