Were there witnesses?
The only witnesses I am aware of is the driver’s husband who is a police officer.
Not exactly a great witness for the plaintiff.
Plus the two kids who survived.
Not exactly great witnesses for the defendants.
[QUOTE=SciFiSam]
If the driver admitted to driving over the speed limit even in those conditions, why was she released without charge? That’s baffling.
[/QUOTE]
Charged with what? Speeding? Driving too fast for road conditions?
Doubtful that driving 10 km over the speed limit, even at night on a wet road, would amount to dangerous driving, which is the relevant criminal offence.
10 over the limit that was set for daylight, dry conditions.
When it’s dark, you slow down so you don’t overdrive the reach of your headlights.
When it’s raining/drizzling, you slow down because the wet road increases stopping distances. Also, the rain on the windshield reduces visibility.
When it’s dark and raining, you slow down a whole lot.
She could have been anywhere from 20-50 over depending on just how poor conditions were.
Speeding at least. Dangerous driving might be applicable too, but she’s not even denying speeding. Not that such a minor charge would mean much, of course, but it’s just strange that she hasn’t even been charged with that.
…people don’t get arrested for self-admitting going faster than the speed limit. When was the last time you heard of that happening anywhere in the world?
I realize this was Canada, but in the US, you **can’t be arrested for going the speed limit **even when hazardous road conditions suggest you should be going slower. The exception is when you aren’t supposed to be driving at all, because the mayor or governor has declared an emergency, and limited driving to the absolutely necessary (doctors and nurses going to work, for example), and put some stipulation on it, like no faster than 30mph, or 20 under the limit, or whatever, but then, the instructions are now the limit. Even then, you could probably get out of a ticket by claiming you hadn’t heard the announcement.
Is Canada different?
What, even when she just killed someone? And it’s not as if it would be dependant solely on her word.
Note to others: I never said “arrested.” I’m not under the impression that anyone gets thrown in jail for speeding, but I know you do actually have speeding laws in the US and Canada - people on here complain about them a lot.
…she wasn’t charged for speeding because people generally don’t get charged for self-admitted acts of speeding: even when they kill someone. Can you find any examples of this happening anywhere?
Without her word: we only have the evidence from the crash reconstruction. And based on that evidence they decided not to proceed with charges. So maybe they didn’t find evidence that she was travelling faster than the speed limit.
I’m sure they took her contact information-- in the US they do that even if you don’t kill someone. You may not get a ticket at the scene, but one may come in the mail a week later.
I don’t know anything about Canadian rules of evidence, but the chances are that if it ever went to trial in the US, a jury would never hear about her admission at the scene.
Now, if she’d been driving without a license, and had no form of ID on her at all to verify contact info, then she might well have been detained.
This may be true in your state but it’s not true in many and probably most US jurisdictions (though I think you mean cited, since arrests for speeding are vanishingly rare.)
I do mean cited-- ticketed-- but what state can cite you for going the exact posted speed limit at night or in the rain? If there is a superseding law that cars must travel no faster than 55mph in the rain or after dark, I would expect that to be posted as well.
There are some states with very high limits on highways that are straight, and less-traveled, so I suppose they may have night and day speeds, but even if there is a state-wide night speed while day speeds vary, I would still expect that to be posted.
Are you saying there are states where there is an unposted night/rainy conditions limit, lower than the posted rate, and people are just supposed to know?
Now, I realize that police sometimes cite people for “unsafe operation,” without being more specific than that, but that is not the same thing as saying that you are should be driving below the limit under certain conditions, and can be cited for failing to do so.
Florida, for one. Or Nebraska. Or Pennsylvania.
Geez, no wonder there are people who think that the posted limit is just a suggestion. I know people who insist that you can be pulled over for driving slower than the other cars on the road, even when they are all speeding, and you are driving exactly the speed limit. It’s a misreading of these kind of laws. Really, there ought to be something posted like “Limit 70 (55 nighttime and hazardous conditions),” if you can be pulled over for driving 70 during a light rain after midnight.
Personally, I wouldn’t be against different posted limits for daytime and nighttime. People can handle school zones, and separate limits for trucks, I think we could handle day/night limits, and we’d probably get to go faster, legally, during the day, without worrying about getting pulled over at night just for driving the posted limit.
And Wisconsin. I don’t think you’re going to get pulled over, though, unless you are obviously driving recklessly. What will happen is you’ll be cited after you pile up into a snow bank or hydroplane off the road and cause an accident.
That typically only happens when you are driving slower than the flow of traffic in the left lane.
Even then, it’d have to be a time of day when the left lane was used exclusively for passing. Sometimes, like rush hour, beltways have several crowded lanes of people going the speed limit, because there are lot of cop cars with radar guns sticking out the driver’s side window. There could be a blow-up doll with a police hat in the driver’s seat, but the radar gun is what everyone sees.
If everyone is traveling at the speed limit, you aren’t driving slower than the flow of traffic.