No, it’s definitely more of a crosswalk than an intersection. There is no intersecting street at the traffic light. The purpose of the traffic light is solely to protect the pedestrians in the crosswalk.
It also looks like a busy pedestrian area. There is another traffic light-protected crosswalk about 50-100 feet away.
Also, the video is graphic only because you know it’s real and because the pedestrian may indeed be seriously injured. But I guarantee you’ve seen far worse on broadcast TV.
I watched the beginning of the video – I don’t see a light at all. Is there a light there? Was it green?
I have crosswalks where I live, and there’s no way that I’m running in front of a big truck without making sure there’s no car coming.
This thread is a good lesson on why jury selection is so important. Some of us blame the pedestrian, some of us blame the driver. If I represented the injured pedestrian, I’d be wary of jurors who thought they wouldn’t get hit because they’d be more careful.
Well, I cross a crosswalk, with blinking lights that I can turn on with a button press, every day on the way to work. When there’s a truck in the way, I poke my head out, watch a few cars blow through the crosswalk, start waving my hands to get them to stop, etc. I’m definitely more careful than that pedestrian.
Yes, there is a traffic light and it is green.
It is to the left of the crosswalk on a post in a vertical orientation. Not the way it would be done in the U.S. suspended over the roadway on a horizontal wire or horizontal mounting arm.
With that said, warning lights for crosswalks in the U.S. are often on the side of the road like this one, but they aren’t typically traffic lights.
Well, if it’s controlled by traffic lights and it’s green, it’s not what I would consider a traditional crosswalk. You’re allowed to proceed through a green traffic light within the posted speed limit. Obviously, be aware of your surroundings, but I don’t slow down at every green light, even if there’s a truck in the way.
@Procrustus, are you saying that the law prohibits passing a stopped car at a green light? What if the truck is letting people out or in? What if the truck is just double-parked there? That’s it, no traffic can pass?
That’s a good take. And also something I do (the polite jog).
Overall, if this went to a trial, and negligence did cause this, I think the ultimate “who’s fault question” would be phrased like this:
Who’s fault was it: Driver ____% Pedestrian ____% = 100%.
You then write in the percentages of fault. You have to write in percentages that total 100. You can write any combination of numbers that totals 100 (even 0/100). Based on the video, I would write 50-50. States vary on how they would handle a 50-50 split*. In Texas, the driver would not be liable (has to be 51% or more fault to be liable) and the Pedestrian would lose/get nothing. Other States say 50. Other States say your fault is whatever the percent says it is (you could be 1% at fault and be liable, but I think you’d only pay 1% of the damages). *None of this is known to the Jury when they write in the percentages.
From my reading, if another car is stopped at the crosswalk, you have a duty to slow down enough to ascertain whether they are stopped for a pedestrian before you plow through, even if the light is green.
That’s not an unreasonable requirement. In the example i gave above (where a pedestrian stumbled and fell as she crossed in front of my car) the pedestrian was not at fault for being in the crosswalk against the light. Pedestrians also include children and others who might not use for caution. Heck, maybe the truck is stopped for a moose that’s crossing. You really really don’t want to hit a moose. Anyway, the fact that the truck is stopped suggests there’s some information you need, and you should slow down and learn that information.
Also why eyewitness testimony is so potentially fallible. Folk have missed the light, the crosswalk, the lack of a cross street…
OK, here is just one arbitrator’s (my wife’s) opinion reflecting her understanding of IL law. But there is no strict liability, and no irrefutable correct answer.
The driver is pretty definitely criminally liable for blowing through the crosswalk/intersection w/o ensuring it was clear. In her opinion, it would be even clearer if there were no cross street and (presuming) there was a sign saying “Ped crossing,” if the driver then blew through a marked crosswalk w/o ascertaining what was on the other side of the truck.
As far as civil liability is concerned, she could easily imagine finding the ped comparatively/contributorily negligent enough to bar recovery.
As everyone knows (I assume) this is one area that really varies state by state. In Washington, we often get a summary judgment ruling that the pedestrian in a crosswalk is “fault free.” And no amount of comparative fault under 100% would preclude recovery. (it would just reduce the award by that percentage).
No doubt. But
If i were on the jury, i would watch the video. As i have no actual responsibility to do so, I’m gonna pass.
And, to be entirely clear, that was just her quick answer, w/o having reviewed any of the applicable law. Nearly all of her cases are car on car, rather than ped.
I have been in states that have laws that are VERY protective of peds. AFAIK, IL is not such a state.
One of my wife’s recurring gripes is the “character blindsided by a truck or bus.” For a while it seemed like we were seeing that quite regularly - even in rom-coms or otherwise nonviolent fare. IMO, it is pretty nearly always a cheap shortcut in storytelling.
I mean that pushes a bit of the blame away from the driver. But if you are overtaking a box truck going into junction, where the truck completely blocks your view of anything to your right, and you are travelling at a speed where you can’t stop. Then if something appears and you can’t stop it’s on you.
So against my better judgement I watched the video and go back to my original statement. 100% (maybe 99%) on the driver. It’s not junction it’s a pedestrian crossing, of course that truck was stopped was because a pedestrian was crossing. If you barrel through you are asking to run someone over. Definitely criminally and civilly liable.
It’ll come down to local laws. Opinions vary, I hold the opposite opinion from you on the pedestrian–in my opinion it’s all on the person who was running into the street against the traffic signal.
But again, the court will handle it.
Yes, I would say the driver is mostly at fault. The pedestrian was crossing against the light, so…
Now if this was in the middle of a street- entirely different call,
So there is a terminology ambiguity here. As I understand it a crosswalk is usually used to mean a pedestrian crossing at a junction, where you have lights (or stop signs) as well as roads heading off to the left and/or right. In that case someone stopped on the right could be stopped to allow someone cross the road you’re on against the light, but more likely they are just trying to turn right and can’t for some reason that doesn’t effect you as someone trying to keep straight.
But thats not the case here you have a pedestrian crossing in the middle of block with no road junction, just the crossing. That’s a whole different situation, if someone is stopped on the right there that is almost certainly because someone is in front of them on the crossing. So yeah do NOT pass them.
Both clearly at fault.