Who would be at fault here, driver or pedestrian? (Pedestrian hit by vehicle)

In My Humble Opinion
21

Here’s the Washington law.

(4) Whenever any vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk or at any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection to permit a pedestrian, bicycle, or personal delivery device to cross the roadway, the driver of any other vehicle approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass such stopped vehicle.

I had a case that sounds exactly like the one the OP mentioned (didn’t watch it). A 12 year old girl was very seriously injured by a truck that didn’t see her because a car in the right lane was stopped to let her cross. The trucker’s insurance company paid a lot of money to that girl. She’s now in college, but still having residual issues.

22

In the video (which I heartily recommend NOT watching), there is a box truck in the right lane, stopped at the green light. No way for a driver to know why.

Then a person appears from around the truck, running across the crosswalk. There is just enough time for a super vigilant driver to lock up their brakes, I think. I imagine any legal action will involve determining the actual speed of the driver and how many milliseconds they had between seeing the pedestrian and striking them.

Pedestrians should (IMHO) bear some responsibility avoiding traffic, especially when the pedestrian is running, and they run around a blind corner. It is not expected that traffic treats all crosswalks as stop signs during green lights when they cannot see beyond the truck or bus that is not moving on their right. If this were law, city traffic would turn into gridlock.

23

Why would the pedestrian have such insurance? Do some states have “pedestrian auto vehicle insurance” and require everybody to carry it?

I have car insurance in a no-fault state but I don’t think it covers me as a pedestrian. And not all pedestrians have cars.

– I think they’re both at fault in that either of them could have avoided the incident; but whether both of them or one of them and if so which one is at fault legally seems likely to depend on how the particular jurisdiction’s laws are written.

And if the intersection had traffic lights and the driver had a green light (I haven’t watched the video, just the descriptions), then I think more of the blame should be on the pedestrian, as under those circumstances the pedestrian didn’t have the right of way (or at least, they don’t in NYState). Whether, if the truck had stopped for the pedestrian, it was partly also their fault depends on whether they did so while the pedestrian was clearly stopped, or whether they stopped (or remained stopped) because they thought the pedestrian was about to move in front of them or could see that the pedestrian was already starting to do so. Drivers need to avoid a pedestrian if possible to do so even if the pedestrian isn’t supposed to be there.

24

Is there any discussion possible?
The driver is 100% at fault. (and an idiot and terrible driver)

25

For all those worried about watching, IMO, it is not all that graphic, and it is quite small and somewhat blurry. I mean, it is a through the windshield shot of a car hitting a running pedestrian and they bounce pretty hard, but there is no blood, dismemberment, or anything. And the person moves afterwards, so not clearly dead on the scene. A lot of us see A LOT worse in purportedly family entertainment. Just MO.

When my wife gets home, I’ll ask her for her opinion. She arbitrates A LOT of lawsuits involving traffic accidents. But I’m pretty sure she would agree with my assessment below (tho she could put it in clearer legalese.)

Are we discussing criminal or civil liability? In my state (IL) I’d imagine the driver would both get a ticket AND be liable for damages. A green light does not give a driver freedom to just blast through an interesction. In IL, I’m pretty sure (if folk insist, I may look it up) that the law states that you must ascertain whether an intersection is clear before proceeding. (Not sure whether the crosswalk/signal in the vid was an intersection or just a ped crosswalk.).

Heck, there is a weird wrinkle in that the ped was in a marked crosswalk BUT ALSO crossing against a signal. So maybe both the ped AND the driver would get tickets.

Another element is who struck whom, and who had the last chance to avoid the accident? The answer to both is IMO indisputably the car. Also, it appears to have been raining, which would further suggest the driver ought to have been driving more slowly.

This goes to something I’ve long thought, but few people have agreed with me. Being a good driver and avoiding accidents TO SOME DEGREE depends on good luck. I bet nearly every one of us has done something like the driver in the vid at least once. If the driver had been a second earlier or later, nothing woulda happened. Every driver is momentarily distracted at times. Most of the time we are fortunate that AT THAT INSTANT someone doesn’t dart into the street, the driver in front doesn’t slam on their brakes, etc… But I digress…

Of course, the pedestrian in the vid was a fucking idiot - running across the street, against the signal, with ZERO view of whether traffic was coming. I have ZERO sympathy for them, but I still think their negligence is outweighed by the driver’s. And we haven’t even discussed distinguishing contributory vs comparative negligence… :roll_eyes:

As a bike rider, this sorta thing happens ALL THE TIME. Our local bike paths cross some 4-lane streets. All have marked crosswalks, and some have buttons to signal flashing lights. But even if the folk in the lane closest to you stop and wait, you have to wait to see if the fok in the second lane will do so as well. A large percentage of the time they appear to continue without slowing, apparently oblivious to the clearly visible bikers waiting at the side of the road, and unconcerned with whatever reason the other drivers might be stopping. Heck, often driver in lane 1 stops and waves you across, and the driver BEHIND that car whips out into the second lane and speeds past the stopped car. People are fucking idiots. No one is looking out for you as well as yourself.

Similar concerns are one reason I generally disfavor cars thinking they are being kind or generous or courteous and stopping and waving bikes through, when the car has the right of way. This driver might think they are being courteous. But the other drivers have no idea why the first driver isn’t just following the rules of the road and allowing the bike to wait until their turn.

Bottomline, either criminal or civil liability involve resolving various questions of fact to be resolved by a judge/jury. There is no simple unambiguous answer.

26

That is a stunningly ignorant POV. If a pedestrian steps off a curb 5 milliseconds before a bus passes through the space the pedestrian just occupied, is the bus driver at fault? And if so, why? As either a matter of common law, traffic law, or general moral principles?

That pedestrian acted with willful disregard for the law and their own safety. Damn shame they got unlucky, but they did it to themselves.

There are accidents of timing and spacing such that there is no solution after the conflict presents itself. The only way to ensure no such accidents ever occur are to prevent the existence of motor vehicles.

27

Of course there is an unambiguous answer:

The driver is going way too fast for the circumstances.
The driver is overtaking 2 or 3 cars without any possibility to see why they have stopped.

The driver should just have slowed down, honked their horn at the woman making a crossing without the light and got on with their day.
Now he’s at the police station trying to get a hold of his lawyer to defend him against a attempted murder charge.
And when he finally gets home he gets to relive her body bouncing off his windshield everytime he closes his eyes.
It will be a great comfort that he was technically correct.

Morally, practical and every other way that matters he’s an idiot for driving like he did.

He is in the wrong (and so is the pedestrian)

28

That seems pretty on point. Fault would almost certainly be on the driver if this occurred in Washington.

It’s an oddly written law, though. Or rather, I obviously understand it, but as a lawyer feigning ignorance, you can have fun with it.

First, it hinges on why that Truck was stopped, which is a bit odd that it gets to their intent. If he’s stopped to just read a magazine and not to let the pedestrian pass, then I’m not sure it’s the other driver’s fault.

Second, what an odd list. Only applies to: Pedestrians. People riding bikes. Robots. That’s it. I guess skateboarders, rollerbladers, strollers, etc. are fair game?

Lastly, if that person is running, and not walking, are they still a pedestrian? Before I googled I would say definitely yes, but every definition I see involves a person walking.

Anyways, I’m just bored and not being serious here.

29

Well, the driver wasn’t trying to kill anyone (attempted murder). In Washington it would be vehicular assault.

I’ve never seen it charged without drugs or alcohol involved. But it could be. (I’ve had cases where the driver killed a pedestrian, and they didn’t even get a ticket. Typically it’s an infraction for “failure to yield.”

RCW 46.61.522 Vehicular assault—Penalty. (1) A person is
guilty of vehicular assault if he or she operates or drives any
vehicle:
(a) In a reckless manner and causes substantial bodily harm to
another; or
(b) While under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug,
as defined by RCW 46.61.502, and causes substantial bodily harm to
another; or
(c) With disregard for the safety of others and causes
substantial bodily harm to another.
(2) Vehicular assault is a class B felony punishable under
chapter 9A.20 RCW.
(3) As used in this section, “substantial bodily harm” has the
same meaning as in RCW 9A.04.110. [2001 c 300 § 1; 1996 c 199 § 8;
1983 c 164 § 2.]

30

(Thank you for once again showing why Americans are way worse drivers than even Italians.)

That is a fucking terrible POV.
The penalty for having a brainfart at a crossing should be getting honked at, not instant death.

31

Further it demands the other driver, the would-be passer, know the mental state of the driver of the stopped vehicle. A clear impossibility, at least in the general case.

32

The law prohibits passing a car stopped at a crosswalk. You don’t need to know the mental state of the stopped vehicle.

Obviously, a pedestrian is negligent if they dart off the curb into traffic, even at a crosswalk. But once they safely enter a crosswalk, and at least one vehicle stopped for them in this case, the law gives them an absolute right to keep going. It would be safer if they stopped again at the end of lane one and took another look. In my state, at least, they have no duty to do so. The law allows them to presume the vehicles will obey the law unless and until they have a reason to conclude otherwise.

33

I agree; both are at fault, though only one was in danger of injury.

34

Not really. It prohibits passing a stopped car if the car is stopped for a list of reasons. Which reason exists, or doesn’t, in the mind of the stopped driver.

The approaching driver may be able to directly discern the probable reason themselves if time and unobstructed sightlines happen to be available. But if not then what?

35

When I’ve been in a similar circumstance, that other cars are stopped and I can’t see why, I’ve proceeded, but cautiously.

36

I read the thread first, then watched. So that might have some influence I’m not appreciating. But it looked like the person was running to “beat traffic”. Like, she knew a car was coming and was trying to get across the street in a hurry. Something I have done many times.

I can’t possibly know that by just watching, but just my take. If true, it means she wasn’t expecting that car to stop and just misjudged the speed/how fast she could cross. This doesn’t mean the other driver should not have slowed down/stopped, but might bear on fault.

Lots of assumptions have to be made in just watching. Be helpful to know what they were both thinking and what they saw or not.

37

The driver is at fault and the pedestrian is an idiot. Safe driving means expecting an idiot to jump out from behind anything you can’t see around or through.

38

The traffic light was green when the vehicle blew through the intersection and hit the pedestrian.

In my opinion, the pedestrian is partially at fault because they basically jaywalked (actually ran) through a crosswalk with a “DON’T WALK” sign that was presumably illuminated (or the international equivalent). They also ran around the stopped truck into the next lane without verifying there was no oncoming cross traffic.

The driver is partially at fault for proceeding through an intersection at too high a speed for conditions while not being able to see if the intersection was clear. The driver couldn’t see around the stopped traffic and he had no reason to know why they were stopped—but a likely possibility is that they were stopped because the intersection was not clear. The driver should have slowed greatly and even stopped if necessary until he could see if the intersection was clear.

Not sure how I would apportion relative fault here, but my gut feeling is that the driver is somewhat more at fault than the pedestrian. Maybe a lot more.

If the situation were changed and there were no other stopped vehicles at the intersection, and the pedestrian ran into the intersection from the left directly in front of the vehicle and was struck, I would put the fault entirely on the pedestrian—unless the vehicle was speeding through the intersection, which if they were would accrue some fault to the driver of the vehicle.

39

My take was that somebody stayed put to let her cross, so she double-timed it in appreciation. Anyway, that’s what I do when a driver waves me to cross. (Well, these days it’s more of a jog.)

40

I’m not watching the video, but from this thread, it’s not really a crosswalk – it’s an intersection with a light that was green for the driver. Are you saying that I can’t pass a car stopped at a green waiting to make a turn? A car waiting to turn right because of pedestrians or a car waiting to turn left because of oncoming traffic – I am not allowed to pass them on a green light?

Anyway, from the descriptions here, it’s the pedestrian’s fault – they were running across the street at a red light, in front of a truck that’s blocking the view of any oncoming traffic.