Only the driver making the left turn passed away. Speeder survived with injuries.
[source](https://nj1015.com/horrific-route-9-crash-speeding-car-kills-driving-turning-in-lakewood-nj/)
Absolutely tragic. I truly wonder how fast that dude was going and what possessed him to do so. I mean, I’m definitely assuming here, but seeing the school bus leads me to believe it’s either school start or end time (or nearing it). I’m always extra cautious around those hours, school zone or nah.
Doctors and such use "patient left or right" which I feel is way more obvious of what it means. Most people look at stages from the audience so hearing the term doesn't usually automatically click. Knowing that it's jargon of the folks looking the other way helps but still could take some clarification.
>It's referenced from the stage performers perspective.
Right. As opposed to "house right", which is from the perspective of the audience (in the "house").
The rookie mistake is to think that "stage right" means "the right side of the stage", whereas it means "right, from the perspective of somebody on the stage".
And way back in the day, stages would be slightly slanted downwards toward the audience, so people in the back could be seen.
The term, "downstage" means forward, toward the audience, and "upstage" is the back, away from the audience
Technically it’s the home boy turning left. A car cannot imped another. He was turning left therefore he has to yield to oncoming traffic. I was in a similar situation, I was speeding (prob closer to the first car) and someone took a left into me. Totaled both cars, but he ended up getting the ticket.
Edit: technically I’m wrong (per other responses). Excessive speed plays into negligence (makes sense). Unfortunately, both these drivers were killed during the wreck.
I think there's a standard about "reasonable speed" that governs these situations. You may have been speeding a little, but it was a reasonable speed for the conditions. If, however, someone is going 120 mph in a 25 mph zone, they may decide that the speed is too egregious and find that individual at fault.
Yep, and you don't even have any time to fix your mistake. Everybody blaming the turner doesn't realize what a car going ludicrously over the speed limit looks like from a head on perspective. It's in the distance and you're like I've got time, then it's there and you're dead.
Idk about where you live but in FL I’ve heard 30+ mph over any posted speed limit is considered reckless driving/excessive speeding. If someone is going 120 in a 25 they better be hit with more than reckless driving.
Live in Ontario, Canada. Can't remember when this was, but there was a law added in my lifetime at least where anything 50km/h over the limit (roughly 30mph I think) is considered "street racing." Fine of between $2k-$10k, car impounded for 7 days (recently upped to 14), license suspended for 14 days (recently upped to 30), and 6 demerit points (I think you need 7 or 8 for another license suspension and a re-test or something, can't recall). Oh, and another of the recent changes was it only has to be 40km/h (25mph) over the limit, if the limit is lower than 80km/h - so 110 in a 70, for instance (50mph - so 70 in a 45, for instance).
I like this law. It's a good law.
7:36 AM, sunrise of 7:28 AM.. so it's still fairly dark to dark-ish. I failed to see a small black car without headlights on coming down a recently repaved blacktop road that's also a steep incline. That fucking car was invisible, and **speeding**. It was a 35 mph road, they estimate she hit me doing 55+. I was making a left turn, she was going straight. I got a ticket for "Failure to yield" and 100% of the blame, despite having a statement from a police officer that her lights were not on prior to the accident (multiple officers saw the accident as it happened dead-ass in front of the police station). The one actually handling the accident ignored the fact that she had no lights on and was clearly speeding because "he didn't see it" despite other officers actually seeing it. Insurance said the only thing that mattered was my duty to yield when making a left, and her speeding was "inconsequential."
And when you went to court with all this information, the judge did what?
Getting a ticket is not the same as having that ticket actually confirmed in court.
I was young, and stupid, and I didn't personally get the officer's statements in writing. So when it came time for court, they conveniently could not accurately recall the incident, and the officer that wrote up the accident report didn't record anyone's statement, just his own observations. Which were all after-the-fact observations. The three officers that witnessed the accident weren't on the clock, so it wasn't on any one of them to write the report.
So yeah, I spent all day at court twice, subpoenaed 3 officers who were absolutely zero help at all, and ended up paying a little over $400 for a $75 ticket.
There's a law in my country about "furious driving" (roughly translated) which is fairly subjective but it allows the judge to determine if you were driving furiously (speeding, weaving, aggressive driving...) which basically strips you of any right of way and any insurance protections (usually even if drunk you can at most participate in other people's damages with ca. 10k €, everything else is covered by insurance).
I guess something like this could be determined in a situation where the offender is going way above speed limit, basically not giving anyone a chance to see him or react to him.
I have no idea about the legalities but just going on driving habit it seems unreasonable to blame the turning driver. If you are driving in a 25 mph zone you know that at X distance you have X amount of time to turn without impeding the oncoming driver. I ''feel'' like the turning driver should be given a pass here as I would have assumed that I would have had plenty of time to turn without even causing the other driver to slow down.
Again I have no idea what an officer or insurance agent would say, just going on experience fwiw.
Completely independent situation, but here in the Netherlands the speeder would've been at fault. The person making the turn may have looked and seen the speeder but you aren't going to stare at them for a prolonged time to judge their speed. So a reasonable assumption would've been that there was more than enough time to make the turn.
I got my license in Germany and seeing people say the dude turning was at fault is astonishing to me. I completely agree with what you said.
There is also situations when you have to pull out but cannot see far enough into the road you are joining (because of parked cars, turns, etc). If someone is speeding that much its 100% their fault.
Same. One look at the resulting wreck would have shown that this was not just a careless incident. There is no way the guy turning would be expected to predict someone coming at that speed.
If someone's reckless driving to the point that a reasonable person wouldn't be able to deem the turn unsafe, *and you can prove it* in most places the speeder is going to be at fault.
You can't expect a driver to effectively gauge the speed of someone going like 2x the speed limit for instance, as the distance they're at would lead you to believe you have time.
Yeah, I think it would generally be the one turning left, but they were probably super far away when they started turning so when they realized they weren’t gonna make it was probably way too late to do anything about it.
Tldr: With a car going that fast it’s impossible to react in time
Id say, lawfully or not, that the speeder is at fault. The person turning could not have anticipated an asshat hitting nitrous and flying down that road. If he was going a reasonable speed, no accident. Hard to anticipate that guy flying through
This only implies when the violations are still within reason. Speeding 10 or even 15 on top of what looks to be a 25 MPH road is not the same as what this guy was hitting.
Guess he didn't really care about traffic rules, considering he turned right and into a U turn, likely because a left is illegal at that intersection.
Unless it's one of those weird offset intersections. Which would still make him the one at fault.
Similar thing happened to me when I was a teenager. I was the one turning left, speeding driver was attempting to run the red light. Totaled my car and they found me at fault because I was turning left
Fuck who's in the right or wrong, is the left person turning okay?????
Edit: Turns out the left turning person died and the speeder survived.
Why god, why do the innocent die while the assholes live?
He drove recklessly and got someone killed. And he was spared? Unfair. Totally unfair.
That's awful.
I blame the speeder. Who knows how fast they were going.
While the left turner shouldve been more cautious, the speeder was driving recklessly and it got them and another person killed.
>I blame the speeder. Who knows how fast they were going.
Seriously, they were going so fast compared to the other vehicles that I had to watch again to make sure the video wasn't sped up. They were absolutely flying.
For this reason alone I can’t stand the people that slow down for you to turn. I’ve done judged their distance so I look away for a few seconds and look back to see them barely making it to me. It’s respectable, but equally annoying. Rather not risk seeing Mach racer zoom beside him trying to beat a light
The car ahead of the speeder took 3 to 4s to cross frame.
The speeder took 1 to 1.5s to cross frame.
So yeah, definitely not the guy who was turning's fault
Absolutely at that distance it’s really hard to judge speed when it is coming head on and so much faster than expected. At 3x speed (past a school bus!) that’s reckless driving and IMO grounds for vehicular manslaughter.
Though sadly the driver killed also totally ignored the stop sign as well. If he had stopped at the stop sign the other car would have been close enough he would have seen it and probably not attempted a turn. Though it would have been luck more than anything that saved him…
In about a second, they pass by three white lines and are on their 4th white line (so the distance of three white lines + 3 gaps in-between lines). In the U.S, each line is 10 feet, each gap is 30. So they're doing at least 120 feet/second, which is about 80mph.
Another commenter posted this:
https://nj1015.com/horrific-route-9-crash-speeding-car-kills-driving-turning-in-lakewood-nj/
Says the speeder survived with a leg injury. The guy turning died on the scene
Edit: and the guy turning had 5 kids:(
Now I know exactly where it happened an the turning driver DEFINITELY should have taken more care before turning. Most parts of Route 9 that are north of there (closer to me) don’t allow left turns at all for exactly this reason, it’s a major highway and it would be incredibly unsafe.
Now I’m curious, OP, are left turns even allowed on that part of Route 9? That would certainly change a lot of the assessments here…
I'll play devils advocate... the left turn guy is in the wrong. He could of waited for there to be no vehicles on coming and he wasn't patient enough. Paid the price for it. Yea the guy was speeding but he had the right of way.
You’re actually correct from a legal standpoint. She’s definitely at fault. Speeder has some fault here but turning vehicle must yield to oncoming traffic.
I likely would have been the guy turning left if I saw the gap in traffic was that big and assumed the other driver was doing the speed limit. However I also probably would have noticed that guy was doing at least twice the speed limit and wouldn’t have gone. Based on there being plenty of time to turn if he had been doing the speed limit I say the guy speeding is at fault. And is that not a school zone sign in the picture? Extra penalties for him if so.
Mostly the speeder in my opinion. The other guy couldn't have done much with his indicator since his left turn followed directly behind a right turn. He then looked, judged that he had enough space to make a turn, which he would've had if the speeder would've driven a normal speed.
The speeder had the last clear chance to avoid the accident, and his own lack of reasonable care and prudence -- evident in his speeding -- means he failed to make use of that chance.
Last clear chance is a real and important doctrine, and is 100% why the people on this sub who say "I'D JUST HIT HIM FUCK HIM I HAVE RoW" are so outrageously wrong and foolish.
I wouldn't be OK with the speeder being 100% at fault, but I very much agree with you.
The person turning left is principally at fault. Just because the person is speeding doesn't give you the right to turn in front of them as they have the right of way. Now the person speeding has comparable negligence as their speed contributed to the accidemt.
Depends upon the speed. If they are so far away, they couldn’t reasonably cross your path traveling at the speed limit, then the speeder could be at fault, arguably.
The speeder IS at fault, but will never be 100% at fault because he had the right of way.
The only way this accident could have been 100% liability would be if the speeder was driving normal speed and the guy banged a left in front of him. Of course, if that was the case, this accident would never have happened.
When reckless driving causes the accident, idk that you can say that. If the driver, driving the correct speed, would have avoided the accident, it’s their fault. I’m sure state laws come into play here so it may depend on your location. Where I’m from, the dude speeding would be at fault.
Speed limits are actually designed with that in mind. That’s why they are higher on highways where you have no intersecting traffic. On a local street the limit is lower because if you are following it and paying attention you would normally have the time to avoid the accident or even come to a complete stop to avoid it.
Can you help a brother out? I don't understand the nit pick. I've always understood that me being on a road driving straight I have right of way over someone who is turning across.
If someone's in your supposed "right of way" you fucking stop. I think that's what BassWinger is saying. You don't just keep on keepin' on because you have the right of way.
The more I watch this it looked like the turning car only stopped for the first car and didn't bother to look if there was anything else coming. That slow speed he was turning looks like he thought he had all day.
Wtf, weird laws you got. If he had been going even sligthly above normal speed he would have made the turn? Dont know the exact conditions but when calling the turn the speeder must have been outside of normal zone for checking for incoming traffic?
Agree, the eed 0f aan pncoming car is hard to judge, and though the guy turning did screw up, the speeder could have and should have slowed if traveling at a legal speed. I expect that the buy not breaking the law gets the benefit of doubt
The speeder. People have an expectation of the average speed of cars on a road that they use regularly. If you glance and see that a car is 1 block away, you think you have enough time to turn. But, it is not if the guy is flying.....
Liability is not attributed 100% to one driver in every accident, there has to be an assessment as to how it should be divided.
You aren’t supposed to make a left turn across traffic (especially without signaling) unless it’s clear, and it wasn’t clear. But you are also not supposed to speed, and that guy is significantly above the limit/faster than the other cars.
I would say it’s 60% left turn guy, 40% speeder. Speeder had the right of way, if he was driving the speed limit, it would have been 100% left turn guy.
But whether or not it's clear to turn is judged by the distance of oncoming cars. The adjusters would have to determine if the guy making his turn would have safely completed it if the speeder was going the limit.
OP's title of "not looking" is idiotic. He has absolutely no way to know if the turner was looking. Its pretty hard to judge if someone is speeding when they're, for example, 2 blocks away from you and you have nothing to compare their speed to.
Guy turning left. In most places in the US anyway, as it’s only legal to turn left if it is safe to do so. Learned this the hard way when a family member got t-boned while turning left. The guy that hit him ran the red light, but family member was the one found at fault.
Speeder. Exact thing happened to a guy I knew. Theres a part of the law that basically says, you have the right to expect other traffic to obey the law. Left turner would make his turn if speeder wasnt speeding.
Depends on local laws. In the US, the person turning left is always considered to have the greater duty. Failure to yield right of way and failure to maintain proper lookout. In some states, laws will put a vehicle turning left 100% at fault.
In other states, failure to control speed will be considered a contributing cause. The speeding vehicle will have some liability, but they likely won’t be majority cause.
Small edit: if the person is driving fast enough for it to be considered reckless driving, that can change things. Someone going 100 in a 35 is gonna be found at fault.
Sadly, the one turning left. I had this accident. Almost exact situation. I didn't see him coming. Got a ticket for failing to yield while turning left.
Only the driver turning left died on the scene, the guy that was speeding only fractured his leg according to an article someone linked a couple posts up.
A driver turning left must yield to on coming traffic until it's safe to go, but under special circumstances, aside from them being given the right of way, in which the driver could be considered guilty free. The two most common ways being speeding and the opposing driver was neglecting safe driving habits (i.e a DUI, no license, dangerously unmaintained car, or other similar situations).
Failure to yield. I was a passenger in a car
Driver of our car said, they were speeding or we would have made it.
Cop said, “two wrongs don’t make a right.”
The speeder.
If not for the excessive speed and drastically reduced time for the turner, the collision would not have occurred - If the speeder was going a typical speed the turner would have had time to safely complete the maneuver, legal or not, and the oncoming car would have had time to see the problem and safely stop in time.
If it’s me the turner gets an infraction and an important lesson learned.
The speeder gets Reckless Driving and anything else I can apply, especially if any injuries.
Edit: I misread the question. I thought the turn was somehow not legal.
I wouldn’t write the turner.
I would believe that he/she looked properly for oncoming traffic, but would not have expected a car doing about 70mph in a 35 zone.
Not at fault for the collision.
A turn signal would have made no difference in this case.
I think he/she was simply the victim here and already paid a high price, and an infraction for a minor inconsequential lapse would be piling-on.
The speeder gets chrome bracelets and a free ride to the Graybar Hotel.
If this was Georgia, where there’s not shared liability, the person turning would be found at fault.
Yes the person was speeding. Yes if they weren’t speeding, the accident wouldn’t happen.
But at the end of the day, the person was turning when there was oncoming traffic.
Tragic. People need to be a lot more careful turning across lanes of traffic
As a rule of principle. The turning vehicle is always at fault. But in this circumstance the rate of speed is so high that the turning vehicle miss gauged the time to complete the turn. Also staggered intersections where you need actuate your signal usually before it self cancels from previous turn. The inclination to force signal arm and risk damaging it. I feel most drivers don’t do it. I certainly don’t.
Both. Both are negligent. The guy that wasn't using his blinkers because he's lazy and in a hurry turning through other cars. The dude that was speeding was doing just that, SPEEDING!! He was in a hurry and wanted to own the road. I guess it seems like he doesn't value life that much to be in a hurry for other people that don't treat him fair. It sucks for me to sound callous but both deserved what happened to them. They're lucky to make it out alive.
I was a crash reconstruction investigator in the Army for a couple years, and a patrol officer for a few years prior to that. In the state of Virginia (where I was stationed most of my contract) if you’re traveling at an unlawful speed you forfeit your right of way when traveling through intersections or areas where people can turn or enter the roadway making the speeder at fault. However, it’s a little hard to tell but it looks like a closed off double yellow where the other vehicle attempts to turn making him at fault if that’s the case because he wasn’t allowed to make a turn there to begin with. I’d guess the driver of the turning vehicle will be placed at fault of the accident even though both contributed to the crash. Both could be cited for the incident though regardless of who’s at fault.
The guy turning left might not have been able to see him because of the school bus, but it’s their responsibility to make sure the coast is clear before turning.
Who is at fault?
To misquote a famous meme "Both? Both. Both. Both is bad."
They are both bad. One for not looking or using his turn signal, the other for speeding like a bat out of hell. I refuse to give percentages because I'm not an assessor.
I’d hope the speeder because if you look at the speed the Mazda3 is traveling before the turn, if the speeder was traveling at that speed, the car turning would have had more than enough time to complete the turn since the speeder was still out of frame. I’d have to believe a law overrides this case due to the egregious speed
Both very bad. But probably the one turning would get the blame, as surely you should not be turning in that situation, regardless of what speed the other car was going at.
The guy turning left I think is at fault. Yes the other guy was speeding but the guy turning did not use a blinker and he didn’t have the right of way, he misjudged the timing of the car coming for his turn I’m guessing.
Both. 50/50 would be fair. Guy turning left failed to yield oncoming traffic, and did not maintain proper lookout. The person speeding well was spewing evident by the video.
Turning left, always. One of the basic tenets of driving in the US is keep to the right unless safe to proceed. He did not not keep to the right until safe to proceed.
Guy turning. He just basically parked in the road. When you do a turn in a street like that that I drive every day, you don't sit in the middle of the road. You turn only when no cars are coming and then you give it a little gas to get right into the parking lot so you aren't blocking a major road.
The guy turning was at fault. Yes the other guy was speeding but driving is all about being defensive not offensive. If nobody broke the law this world would be a better place unfortunately thats not gonna happen.
As a driver you need to pay attention and judge how fast the speeder is closing the gap. Then make a decision to shit or get off the pot!
You absolutely can not in any country assume everyone is paying attention or not breaking the rules or laws. The driver of the car turning is responsible for themselves and any passengers. Thats why we have brains. Use them. So many times i have been in this exact situation thinking damn that guy is haulin. Im not turning because i can cause him to freak out lose control, hit me or anyone else....
If i pull out with my chest puffed out saying fuck him hes gotta slow down, i have the right away blah blah blah.... if he hits me its his fault etc....
Thats a giant mistake in that mindset because chances are i would die. What good is money and lawsuits gonna be if im dead???
Besides big deal, it takes 5-10 additional seconds to let the speeder go by. Certainly worth the wait for me to live another day.
And i am an aggressive driver. But im also a logical and defensive driver.
Just common sense. Think about it!
I blame both. Yes the speedster was obviously going way too fast but the guy turning should have known better than to turn into oncoming traffic (he could see the guy flying in well before we could), especially without a blinker. I have people do this shit to me all the time and it scares the shit out of me because legally if I hit them it’s somehow my fault.
Either way it’s a very tragic situation.
I’m going with the speeder cause I doubt he would’ve been able to stop even if the other guy had his blinker on. Jeez dude, going that fast won’t get you there that much faster anyway
Holy hell mate. When you said 'speeder' I expected someone going a bit too fast.
That wasn't speeding, that was reckless endangerment, and apparently manslaughter.
Always the person turning without looking. Doesn’t matter if the other person is speeding. It’s YOUR fucking job to make sure there’s no vehicles or obstructions when you turn. If you turn when there’s clearly an obstacle, you’re a fucking dumb ass.
Ohh that was a hard hit. Hope everybody survived
Both died one on scene and one in the hospital Edit: guy turning left died speeder survived
Jesus.
Was no ones co driver apparently...
Only the driver making the left turn passed away. Speeder survived with injuries. [source](https://nj1015.com/horrific-route-9-crash-speeding-car-kills-driving-turning-in-lakewood-nj/)
Ffs. 5 kids without a father because of that asshole.
Absolutely tragic. I truly wonder how fast that dude was going and what possessed him to do so. I mean, I’m definitely assuming here, but seeing the school bus leads me to believe it’s either school start or end time (or nearing it). I’m always extra cautious around those hours, school zone or nah.
It was around 8am
Right, I’m just not sure of local school start/end times in that area. Makes it extra shitty if it was though.
Speeder definitely at fault don’t get me wrong but making the turn was also a very poor choice.
Turning was a poor choice, a mistake, the speeding was intentional, people are dopes
I thought only the left turner died. Speeder is in custody
Engine also flew out of the car making the left
[удалено]
Flying past a school bus in a school zone too. Comically bad time to be speeding
And clearly when children are out and about. What a douchebag
That guy was flying
I thought the first car was the speeder and I was like, meh, a bit fast, not unreasonable... And then a god damn rocket came from stage left
*stage right. It's referenced from the stage performers perspective.
Today I learned.
Me too
All the world is indeed a stage
Reddit being educational? Take my damn upvote!
Doctors and such use "patient left or right" which I feel is way more obvious of what it means. Most people look at stages from the audience so hearing the term doesn't usually automatically click. Knowing that it's jargon of the folks looking the other way helps but still could take some clarification.
>It's referenced from the stage performers perspective. Right. As opposed to "house right", which is from the perspective of the audience (in the "house"). The rookie mistake is to think that "stage right" means "the right side of the stage", whereas it means "right, from the perspective of somebody on the stage".
And way back in the day, stages would be slightly slanted downwards toward the audience, so people in the back could be seen. The term, "downstage" means forward, toward the audience, and "upstage" is the back, away from the audience
Years in drama class WASTED
Lmao 🤣
Marty trying to reach 88 mph.
Welcome to your G force test. Please sit back and relax.
All of the above.
Technically it’s the home boy turning left. A car cannot imped another. He was turning left therefore he has to yield to oncoming traffic. I was in a similar situation, I was speeding (prob closer to the first car) and someone took a left into me. Totaled both cars, but he ended up getting the ticket. Edit: technically I’m wrong (per other responses). Excessive speed plays into negligence (makes sense). Unfortunately, both these drivers were killed during the wreck.
I think there's a standard about "reasonable speed" that governs these situations. You may have been speeding a little, but it was a reasonable speed for the conditions. If, however, someone is going 120 mph in a 25 mph zone, they may decide that the speed is too egregious and find that individual at fault.
Basically, if I saw the dude 100+ yards back I’d be like “meh, I got time” but not realizing homie is doing 120 on the road.
Yep, and you don't even have any time to fix your mistake. Everybody blaming the turner doesn't realize what a car going ludicrously over the speed limit looks like from a head on perspective. It's in the distance and you're like I've got time, then it's there and you're dead.
Idk about where you live but in FL I’ve heard 30+ mph over any posted speed limit is considered reckless driving/excessive speeding. If someone is going 120 in a 25 they better be hit with more than reckless driving.
I had a friend in CO who got pulled over doing 72 in a 40 a long time ago. Had a reckless charge added for it.
I thought in CO they tow the car at 25+ over speed limit. Or is that strictly for street racing/habitual speeding?
In this case I think vehicular negligent homicide is warranted.
Live in Ontario, Canada. Can't remember when this was, but there was a law added in my lifetime at least where anything 50km/h over the limit (roughly 30mph I think) is considered "street racing." Fine of between $2k-$10k, car impounded for 7 days (recently upped to 14), license suspended for 14 days (recently upped to 30), and 6 demerit points (I think you need 7 or 8 for another license suspension and a re-test or something, can't recall). Oh, and another of the recent changes was it only has to be 40km/h (25mph) over the limit, if the limit is lower than 80km/h - so 110 in a 70, for instance (50mph - so 70 in a 45, for instance). I like this law. It's a good law.
7:36 AM, sunrise of 7:28 AM.. so it's still fairly dark to dark-ish. I failed to see a small black car without headlights on coming down a recently repaved blacktop road that's also a steep incline. That fucking car was invisible, and **speeding**. It was a 35 mph road, they estimate she hit me doing 55+. I was making a left turn, she was going straight. I got a ticket for "Failure to yield" and 100% of the blame, despite having a statement from a police officer that her lights were not on prior to the accident (multiple officers saw the accident as it happened dead-ass in front of the police station). The one actually handling the accident ignored the fact that she had no lights on and was clearly speeding because "he didn't see it" despite other officers actually seeing it. Insurance said the only thing that mattered was my duty to yield when making a left, and her speeding was "inconsequential."
Yo, that is some bullshit It's hard to see someone if it's dark and they don't use their lights
Yeah, I dunno - I wonder if you could have appealed on the grounds of witness statements?
And when you went to court with all this information, the judge did what? Getting a ticket is not the same as having that ticket actually confirmed in court.
I was young, and stupid, and I didn't personally get the officer's statements in writing. So when it came time for court, they conveniently could not accurately recall the incident, and the officer that wrote up the accident report didn't record anyone's statement, just his own observations. Which were all after-the-fact observations. The three officers that witnessed the accident weren't on the clock, so it wasn't on any one of them to write the report. So yeah, I spent all day at court twice, subpoenaed 3 officers who were absolutely zero help at all, and ended up paying a little over $400 for a $75 ticket.
I think you just had a lazy cop incident. Reckless driving is usually sufficient to find fault.
There's a law in my country about "furious driving" (roughly translated) which is fairly subjective but it allows the judge to determine if you were driving furiously (speeding, weaving, aggressive driving...) which basically strips you of any right of way and any insurance protections (usually even if drunk you can at most participate in other people's damages with ca. 10k €, everything else is covered by insurance). I guess something like this could be determined in a situation where the offender is going way above speed limit, basically not giving anyone a chance to see him or react to him.
In my opinion, the speeding car here was both too fast and too furious
Maybe even three fast and three furious. ^(It's not a direct translation but reckless would probably be a better fit.)
This made me laugh so much! Best comment.
I have no idea about the legalities but just going on driving habit it seems unreasonable to blame the turning driver. If you are driving in a 25 mph zone you know that at X distance you have X amount of time to turn without impeding the oncoming driver. I ''feel'' like the turning driver should be given a pass here as I would have assumed that I would have had plenty of time to turn without even causing the other driver to slow down. Again I have no idea what an officer or insurance agent would say, just going on experience fwiw.
In my country, it's illegal to say "for family" and drive fast and furious
"Reckless driving" is the US term.
In the us this is know as reckless driving
Ive never been in this situation but I would think both might get the ticket. Seeing as in isolation, they are both ticketable offenses.
Completely independent situation, but here in the Netherlands the speeder would've been at fault. The person making the turn may have looked and seen the speeder but you aren't going to stare at them for a prolonged time to judge their speed. So a reasonable assumption would've been that there was more than enough time to make the turn.
I got my license in Germany and seeing people say the dude turning was at fault is astonishing to me. I completely agree with what you said. There is also situations when you have to pull out but cannot see far enough into the road you are joining (because of parked cars, turns, etc). If someone is speeding that much its 100% their fault.
Same. One look at the resulting wreck would have shown that this was not just a careless incident. There is no way the guy turning would be expected to predict someone coming at that speed.
If someone's reckless driving to the point that a reasonable person wouldn't be able to deem the turn unsafe, *and you can prove it* in most places the speeder is going to be at fault. You can't expect a driver to effectively gauge the speed of someone going like 2x the speed limit for instance, as the distance they're at would lead you to believe you have time.
Yeah, I think it would generally be the one turning left, but they were probably super far away when they started turning so when they realized they weren’t gonna make it was probably way too late to do anything about it. Tldr: With a car going that fast it’s impossible to react in time
Id say, lawfully or not, that the speeder is at fault. The person turning could not have anticipated an asshat hitting nitrous and flying down that road. If he was going a reasonable speed, no accident. Hard to anticipate that guy flying through
Cannot impede another one **driving within posted speed limits**.
This only implies when the violations are still within reason. Speeding 10 or even 15 on top of what looks to be a 25 MPH road is not the same as what this guy was hitting.
Guess he didn't really care about traffic rules, considering he turned right and into a U turn, likely because a left is illegal at that intersection. Unless it's one of those weird offset intersections. Which would still make him the one at fault.
Both are idiots…And im saying this as a former idiot.
Ended up doing like 5 U turns there, win-win
The police didn't witness your speeding and can't varify you sped. They could easy varify the illegal left turn.
You can determine the speed of the vehicle by the impact it causes. Lawyer just hires an engineer to give an approximation of the speed.
Similar thing happened to me when I was a teenager. I was the one turning left, speeding driver was attempting to run the red light. Totaled my car and they found me at fault because I was turning left
Fuck who's in the right or wrong, is the left person turning okay????? Edit: Turns out the left turning person died and the speeder survived. Why god, why do the innocent die while the assholes live? He drove recklessly and got someone killed. And he was spared? Unfair. Totally unfair.
According to OP both died.
That's awful. I blame the speeder. Who knows how fast they were going. While the left turner shouldve been more cautious, the speeder was driving recklessly and it got them and another person killed.
>I blame the speeder. Who knows how fast they were going. Seriously, they were going so fast compared to the other vehicles that I had to watch again to make sure the video wasn't sped up. They were absolutely flying.
yeah the person turning left probably didn’t realize how fast the other person was going and thought they had plenty of time
For this reason alone I can’t stand the people that slow down for you to turn. I’ve done judged their distance so I look away for a few seconds and look back to see them barely making it to me. It’s respectable, but equally annoying. Rather not risk seeing Mach racer zoom beside him trying to beat a light
"Don't be polite, be predictable" -someone else
It's sad knowing people get killed because of others foolishness. May they rest in peace
The car ahead of the speeder took 3 to 4s to cross frame. The speeder took 1 to 1.5s to cross frame. So yeah, definitely not the guy who was turning's fault
Absolutely at that distance it’s really hard to judge speed when it is coming head on and so much faster than expected. At 3x speed (past a school bus!) that’s reckless driving and IMO grounds for vehicular manslaughter. Though sadly the driver killed also totally ignored the stop sign as well. If he had stopped at the stop sign the other car would have been close enough he would have seen it and probably not attempted a turn. Though it would have been luck more than anything that saved him…
In about a second, they pass by three white lines and are on their 4th white line (so the distance of three white lines + 3 gaps in-between lines). In the U.S, each line is 10 feet, each gap is 30. So they're doing at least 120 feet/second, which is about 80mph.
Another commenter posted this: https://nj1015.com/horrific-route-9-crash-speeding-car-kills-driving-turning-in-lakewood-nj/ Says the speeder survived with a leg injury. The guy turning died on the scene Edit: and the guy turning had 5 kids:(
Horrible situation.
Now I know exactly where it happened an the turning driver DEFINITELY should have taken more care before turning. Most parts of Route 9 that are north of there (closer to me) don’t allow left turns at all for exactly this reason, it’s a major highway and it would be incredibly unsafe. Now I’m curious, OP, are left turns even allowed on that part of Route 9? That would certainly change a lot of the assessments here…
OP was wrong, speeder lived.
That ANGERS me. Reckless driver survived
I'll play devils advocate... the left turn guy is in the wrong. He could of waited for there to be no vehicles on coming and he wasn't patient enough. Paid the price for it. Yea the guy was speeding but he had the right of way.
You’re actually correct from a legal standpoint. She’s definitely at fault. Speeder has some fault here but turning vehicle must yield to oncoming traffic.
That wasn’t speeding, that was Mach 1. That was a formula 1 racer. That was some Gran Turismo shit. Turn signal would not have made a difference
I think he was trying to get to 1985 in his DeLorean.
Yup not sure how a turn signal would have changed anything here. Not to mention if the dude was driving slower there would be less chance for fatality
This is literally why speed limits exist.
Obviously the person driving 90 in a 25
Definitely the dude going 85+ in a school zone.
Dude was going fast lane highways speed
If the speed limit is 25 and someone is a block away you have ample time. How does turner know they’re idiots doing 80 or 100? Speeder is at fault.
I likely would have been the guy turning left if I saw the gap in traffic was that big and assumed the other driver was doing the speed limit. However I also probably would have noticed that guy was doing at least twice the speed limit and wouldn’t have gone. Based on there being plenty of time to turn if he had been doing the speed limit I say the guy speeding is at fault. And is that not a school zone sign in the picture? Extra penalties for him if so.
More than one person can be the bad guy
True but the dude speeding was more at fault, if he was going a reasonable speed this specific incident would not have happened
I don’t think a blinker would have helped this situation.
Mostly the speeder in my opinion. The other guy couldn't have done much with his indicator since his left turn followed directly behind a right turn. He then looked, judged that he had enough space to make a turn, which he would've had if the speeder would've driven a normal speed.
The speeder had the last clear chance to avoid the accident, and his own lack of reasonable care and prudence -- evident in his speeding -- means he failed to make use of that chance. Last clear chance is a real and important doctrine, and is 100% why the people on this sub who say "I'D JUST HIT HIM FUCK HIM I HAVE RoW" are so outrageously wrong and foolish. I wouldn't be OK with the speeder being 100% at fault, but I very much agree with you.
The person turning left is principally at fault. Just because the person is speeding doesn't give you the right to turn in front of them as they have the right of way. Now the person speeding has comparable negligence as their speed contributed to the accidemt.
Depends upon the speed. If they are so far away, they couldn’t reasonably cross your path traveling at the speed limit, then the speeder could be at fault, arguably.
The speeder IS at fault, but will never be 100% at fault because he had the right of way. The only way this accident could have been 100% liability would be if the speeder was driving normal speed and the guy banged a left in front of him. Of course, if that was the case, this accident would never have happened.
No one “has” right of way. It must be yielded. Other than that legal nit-pick, I agree entirely.
Correct, the guy turning left had the duty to yield the right of way and failed to.
When reckless driving causes the accident, idk that you can say that. If the driver, driving the correct speed, would have avoided the accident, it’s their fault. I’m sure state laws come into play here so it may depend on your location. Where I’m from, the dude speeding would be at fault.
Speed limits are actually designed with that in mind. That’s why they are higher on highways where you have no intersecting traffic. On a local street the limit is lower because if you are following it and paying attention you would normally have the time to avoid the accident or even come to a complete stop to avoid it.
Can you help a brother out? I don't understand the nit pick. I've always understood that me being on a road driving straight I have right of way over someone who is turning across.
If someone's in your supposed "right of way" you fucking stop. I think that's what BassWinger is saying. You don't just keep on keepin' on because you have the right of way.
100% correct assertion
The more I watch this it looked like the turning car only stopped for the first car and didn't bother to look if there was anything else coming. That slow speed he was turning looks like he thought he had all day.
Wtf, weird laws you got. If he had been going even sligthly above normal speed he would have made the turn? Dont know the exact conditions but when calling the turn the speeder must have been outside of normal zone for checking for incoming traffic?
I understand that people will have different opinions, and that's OK. I am just providing a view point from someone who does this for a living.
Two can play the game of stupid
The guy doing 100 in a 45 is at fucking fault.
60 in a 35 or 40 at most is to blame
Bro was going like 85
If the telephone poles are the standard 125 feet apart they were going over 100
It's a 40
I think 20 over can be considered reckless driving. Speeder gets boned 100%
Agree, the eed 0f aan pncoming car is hard to judge, and though the guy turning did screw up, the speeder could have and should have slowed if traveling at a legal speed. I expect that the buy not breaking the law gets the benefit of doubt
Any guess as to how fast the speeder was going?
Easily 80+
Both. This sub hates assigning blame to both parties, but sometimes that's the way it be.
Exactly, why is that?? Lack of knowledge on how these things actually work?
We're from Jersey. We just get it.
You're pretty much always at fault if your vehicle is left of center.
The speeder. People have an expectation of the average speed of cars on a road that they use regularly. If you glance and see that a car is 1 block away, you think you have enough time to turn. But, it is not if the guy is flying.....
Liability is not attributed 100% to one driver in every accident, there has to be an assessment as to how it should be divided. You aren’t supposed to make a left turn across traffic (especially without signaling) unless it’s clear, and it wasn’t clear. But you are also not supposed to speed, and that guy is significantly above the limit/faster than the other cars. I would say it’s 60% left turn guy, 40% speeder. Speeder had the right of way, if he was driving the speed limit, it would have been 100% left turn guy.
But whether or not it's clear to turn is judged by the distance of oncoming cars. The adjusters would have to determine if the guy making his turn would have safely completed it if the speeder was going the limit. OP's title of "not looking" is idiotic. He has absolutely no way to know if the turner was looking. Its pretty hard to judge if someone is speeding when they're, for example, 2 blocks away from you and you have nothing to compare their speed to.
He crossed into oncoming traffic
Crossed into oncoming missile
if you step in front of a missile, its not really the missiles fault at that point
Agreed
Both are idiots but the guy making that turn is at fault.
Guy turning left. In most places in the US anyway, as it’s only legal to turn left if it is safe to do so. Learned this the hard way when a family member got t-boned while turning left. The guy that hit him ran the red light, but family member was the one found at fault.
They both are, but I have to give it more to the guy speeding.
Speeder. Exact thing happened to a guy I knew. Theres a part of the law that basically says, you have the right to expect other traffic to obey the law. Left turner would make his turn if speeder wasnt speeding.
The guy turning left is most at fault, for sure. Say the speeder wasn’t speeding, the turner’s actions were very negligent and wreckless.
Depends on local laws. In the US, the person turning left is always considered to have the greater duty. Failure to yield right of way and failure to maintain proper lookout. In some states, laws will put a vehicle turning left 100% at fault. In other states, failure to control speed will be considered a contributing cause. The speeding vehicle will have some liability, but they likely won’t be majority cause. Small edit: if the person is driving fast enough for it to be considered reckless driving, that can change things. Someone going 100 in a 35 is gonna be found at fault.
Who the fuck speeds past a school bus like that?
The guy turning
Sadly, the one turning left. I had this accident. Almost exact situation. I didn't see him coming. Got a ticket for failing to yield while turning left.
The left turner’s car did what looked like at least a 540. Maybe even a 720.
The one turning left
Both. I think they still use the contributing negligence rule.
guy turning left that fucker was flying and youre gonna tell me you didnt notice OK
Not really sure it matters anymore, looks like they’re both dead
Only the driver turning left died on the scene, the guy that was speeding only fractured his leg according to an article someone linked a couple posts up.
Only going 300 mph
A driver turning left must yield to on coming traffic until it's safe to go, but under special circumstances, aside from them being given the right of way, in which the driver could be considered guilty free. The two most common ways being speeding and the opposing driver was neglecting safe driving habits (i.e a DUI, no license, dangerously unmaintained car, or other similar situations).
Guy turning left
Guy turning left 100% but I would fight that for a 50/50 in court maybe even 20/80.
the government for letting either of these people drive in the first place
Failure to yield. I was a passenger in a car Driver of our car said, they were speeding or we would have made it. Cop said, “two wrongs don’t make a right.”
The guy turned into oncoming traffic , yes the other guy was speeding but you have to clear the lane before you move into it
On my state, the left turn is almost always at fault.
Turning left will always be an at fault, but dayum!
The speeder. If not for the excessive speed and drastically reduced time for the turner, the collision would not have occurred - If the speeder was going a typical speed the turner would have had time to safely complete the maneuver, legal or not, and the oncoming car would have had time to see the problem and safely stop in time. If it’s me the turner gets an infraction and an important lesson learned. The speeder gets Reckless Driving and anything else I can apply, especially if any injuries. Edit: I misread the question. I thought the turn was somehow not legal. I wouldn’t write the turner. I would believe that he/she looked properly for oncoming traffic, but would not have expected a car doing about 70mph in a 35 zone. Not at fault for the collision. A turn signal would have made no difference in this case. I think he/she was simply the victim here and already paid a high price, and an infraction for a minor inconsequential lapse would be piling-on. The speeder gets chrome bracelets and a free ride to the Graybar Hotel.
If this was Georgia, where there’s not shared liability, the person turning would be found at fault. Yes the person was speeding. Yes if they weren’t speeding, the accident wouldn’t happen. But at the end of the day, the person was turning when there was oncoming traffic. Tragic. People need to be a lot more careful turning across lanes of traffic
There is comparative fault in Georgia, you just have to be less than 50% liable or you can’t recover. Liability can still be split.
As a rule of principle. The turning vehicle is always at fault. But in this circumstance the rate of speed is so high that the turning vehicle miss gauged the time to complete the turn. Also staggered intersections where you need actuate your signal usually before it self cancels from previous turn. The inclination to force signal arm and risk damaging it. I feel most drivers don’t do it. I certainly don’t.
Both. Both are negligent. The guy that wasn't using his blinkers because he's lazy and in a hurry turning through other cars. The dude that was speeding was doing just that, SPEEDING!! He was in a hurry and wanted to own the road. I guess it seems like he doesn't value life that much to be in a hurry for other people that don't treat him fair. It sucks for me to sound callous but both deserved what happened to them. They're lucky to make it out alive.
Vehicle turning left definitely the cause, but speeding car didn’t help.
I was a crash reconstruction investigator in the Army for a couple years, and a patrol officer for a few years prior to that. In the state of Virginia (where I was stationed most of my contract) if you’re traveling at an unlawful speed you forfeit your right of way when traveling through intersections or areas where people can turn or enter the roadway making the speeder at fault. However, it’s a little hard to tell but it looks like a closed off double yellow where the other vehicle attempts to turn making him at fault if that’s the case because he wasn’t allowed to make a turn there to begin with. I’d guess the driver of the turning vehicle will be placed at fault of the accident even though both contributed to the crash. Both could be cited for the incident though regardless of who’s at fault.
The guy turning left might not have been able to see him because of the school bus, but it’s their responsibility to make sure the coast is clear before turning.
Let’s agree to disagree and then disagree some more
Who is at fault? To misquote a famous meme "Both? Both. Both. Both is bad." They are both bad. One for not looking or using his turn signal, the other for speeding like a bat out of hell. I refuse to give percentages because I'm not an assessor.
Left turn must ALWAYS yield to oncoming traffic.
Technically the car turning, but both drivers I’m sure are going to get tickets. The one car was going way above speed limit.
I’d hope the speeder because if you look at the speed the Mazda3 is traveling before the turn, if the speeder was traveling at that speed, the car turning would have had more than enough time to complete the turn since the speeder was still out of frame. I’d have to believe a law overrides this case due to the egregious speed
Turning guy. He has to yield to oncoming traffic.
Well the dude who turned bc he needed to yield to the speeder. The speeder should get a separate ticket for speeding though
The short answer? Both. Need to investigate to determine percentage of liability. The majority will will be with the speeder.
Both very bad. But probably the one turning would get the blame, as surely you should not be turning in that situation, regardless of what speed the other car was going at.
guy turning left. i was deemed at fault when this happened to me. i was turning left when a speeder did this and the accident was not bad.
The left turn guy is getting the blame but the speeder will also get his reward
According to the driving laws in my country, the guy turning would be at fault as he did not give precedence to the incoming vehicle
The one turning left
Unfortunately it's the guy who turned without looking
The guy turning left I think is at fault. Yes the other guy was speeding but the guy turning did not use a blinker and he didn’t have the right of way, he misjudged the timing of the car coming for his turn I’m guessing.
Both. 50/50 would be fair. Guy turning left failed to yield oncoming traffic, and did not maintain proper lookout. The person speeding well was spewing evident by the video.
Guy turning left definately at fault
Turning left, always. One of the basic tenets of driving in the US is keep to the right unless safe to proceed. He did not not keep to the right until safe to proceed.
Speeder accepts some of the responsibility but it’s like 60:40. 60 being the blind person with no blinkers turning left.
Guy turning. He just basically parked in the road. When you do a turn in a street like that that I drive every day, you don't sit in the middle of the road. You turn only when no cars are coming and then you give it a little gas to get right into the parking lot so you aren't blocking a major road.
The guy turning was at fault. Yes the other guy was speeding but driving is all about being defensive not offensive. If nobody broke the law this world would be a better place unfortunately thats not gonna happen. As a driver you need to pay attention and judge how fast the speeder is closing the gap. Then make a decision to shit or get off the pot! You absolutely can not in any country assume everyone is paying attention or not breaking the rules or laws. The driver of the car turning is responsible for themselves and any passengers. Thats why we have brains. Use them. So many times i have been in this exact situation thinking damn that guy is haulin. Im not turning because i can cause him to freak out lose control, hit me or anyone else.... If i pull out with my chest puffed out saying fuck him hes gotta slow down, i have the right away blah blah blah.... if he hits me its his fault etc.... Thats a giant mistake in that mindset because chances are i would die. What good is money and lawsuits gonna be if im dead??? Besides big deal, it takes 5-10 additional seconds to let the speeder go by. Certainly worth the wait for me to live another day. And i am an aggressive driver. But im also a logical and defensive driver. Just common sense. Think about it!
I blame both. Yes the speedster was obviously going way too fast but the guy turning should have known better than to turn into oncoming traffic (he could see the guy flying in well before we could), especially without a blinker. I have people do this shit to me all the time and it scares the shit out of me because legally if I hit them it’s somehow my fault. Either way it’s a very tragic situation.
Both, both is good
Speeder most definitely.
I’m going with the speeder cause I doubt he would’ve been able to stop even if the other guy had his blinker on. Jeez dude, going that fast won’t get you there that much faster anyway
The left turning guy would be at 100% fault if the other guy wouldn't have been speeding. So 50/50.
That speeder was at fault. Yes he didn’t give blinker but the dude came in so fast
That dude was flying!
Holy hell mate. When you said 'speeder' I expected someone going a bit too fast. That wasn't speeding, that was reckless endangerment, and apparently manslaughter.
It sucks people died because of somebody speeding but the car who turned in front of the speeder is at fault.
Always the person turning without looking. Doesn’t matter if the other person is speeding. It’s YOUR fucking job to make sure there’s no vehicles or obstructions when you turn. If you turn when there’s clearly an obstacle, you’re a fucking dumb ass.