I went poking around and found this CalMatters article lamenting the very lax state of CA DMV enforcement for potentially or provably dangerous drivers. So it looks like you are spot on about lack of enforcement and my nervous Lyft driver was probably going to be just fine Well, unless he was already on probation or suspension and was still underselling his situation to me. A quote:
Between March 2017 and March 2022, Trevor Cook received two citations for running red lights, got two speeding tickets and was deemed responsible for two collisions, including one in which someone was injured, court records show. (A third red-light ticket was dismissed.) At-fault collisions add a point to a driver’s license, according to the DMV. But the incidents were spaced out enough that none resulted in a suspension.
That’s like saying assault often involves a firearm so assault should be a firearms offense.
Obviously if a cop turns up at a traffic accident and there is evidence one of the drivers committed a crime (e.g. is drunk, was obviously travelling over the speed limit, was witnessed to be on their phone when the accident happened, etc) they are going to charge them with that crime.
But thats all a cop should do, it’s the insurers (or the civil court if it comes to that) job to assign blame (which is usually a matter of percentages between the different parties not one party being 100% to blame). The idea it’s the cops job to do that an hand out points because of it is crazy to me. The fact that law is on the books in CA is just another dumb law that’s never applied in the real world.
Huh? Everything I listed is a driving offense, whether they are civil or criminal in your state.
Isn’t the accident enough evidence that (short of an insurance scam where the front driver swoops in front & slams on their brakes) the rear driver was doing something wrong because they crashed into the car in front of them, one or more of too fast, too close &/or not paying attention?
In rare cases, the driver in front can be found at fault. But in general, it’s the driver’s responsibility to drive in a way where they can avoid plowing into another car. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
No that’s not how laws work. Cops can’t go “well there’s no evidence of what crime you committed but you must be guilty of a crime so I’m going to charge you”.
Yup and if there is evidence that gives the cops probable cause that you committed one of those you can be charged with that specific crime (e.g. the damage is consistent with traveling at unsafe speed, there is a witness that saw you on the phone, etc). But absent that evidence it’s not the job of the cops to assign blame for the accident.
Totally if you rear end someone you will almost always be found to be at fault by the insurers (and probably 100% at fault).
But that doesn’t make it a crime unless you rear ended someone because you were commiting something that was a crime (e.g. being drunk, looking at your phone, speeding, etc).
E.g. being distracted by thinking of what you’re going to make for dinner is not illegal under MD distracted driver laws, so if you rear end someone because of that (as long you are not speeding, drunk, tailgating, etc) it is not a crime in MD.
Almost always (the example in another thread where someone cuts in front of you and then break checks you is an exception, where the driver in front is probably guilty of a crime not you). It’s also the case you are not at fault if someone stops on the freeway for a non-emergency reasons.
But again being at fault does not mean you committed a crime, unless there is a specific crime you were committing that caused you to crash into the car in front.
Exactly. And in every state I have ever lived in, if a cop shows up they will invariably cite the driver who rear-ends the vehicle in front of them. But it’s a traffic citation, not criminal.
I had a driver rear-end me once, and I insisted on calling the police.* The cop told them they were going to give them a citation, at which point the other driver started to make excuses that that they weren’t actually driving too fast or too closely. The cop calmly replied, “Ma’am, you hit them [meaning me]…so you were obviously driving too fast or too closely to be able to stop. End of story.”
*If an accident is not my fault, I always insist on calling the police. This was after a bad experience once where I didn’t do this, and the other driver changed their story after the fact to put the blame on me. I find that people have a harder time lying directly to a cop at the scene of an accident with potential witnesses present.
Isn’t there a legal difference between a traffic infraction and a crime? In the sense that the level of proof required to find you “responsible” rather than “guilty” is much lower. I have always thought that this was the case, but I don’t know the legal basis for this belief.
Maybe this varies by state.
Sort of like you can’t go to jail for a normal speeding ticket, you just get a fine and points in your driving record. If you get enough points that your license gets revoked or your insurance gets canceled or both and you keep driving, THEN you’re in criminal territory.
Not to sidetrack this sidetrack (but I think the OP has their answer: yes report it)
But I don’t think so. AFAIK the only difference is it’s not arrestable. You can if you choose still demand your day in court and the prosecution still needs to prove beyond reasonable doubt. IANAL and obviously different jurisdictions will have different rules.
In a magistrate hearing, the state or police have a much lower level of proof that they need before you are found guilty, a preponderance of the evidence and not beyond reasonable doubt is the evidence required for a guilty finding in Massachusetts.
I’m a currently inactive Uber driver and I think the OP should report him. There’s a reason he wasn’t able to get a driver’s account on his own. Could be a paperwork issue, could be a background check issue. Either doesn’t excuse implementating his son. Stuff like thus gives all drivers a bad name. Also the driver’s app periodically requires the user to take a selfie before starting a session; I’m curious how he was able to get around that.
Well, unless he was already on probation or suspension and was still underselling his situation to me. A quote: