re: Lacy lawyer interview

You’re mixing necessity with courtesy. I tend to agree with your specific points. I might stay on scene. It’s courteous. But I wouldn’t fault someone for not stopping let alone accuse them of a crime.

Seems to still be confusion about the crash. From all the multiple versions reported,

Could it be that, Lacy (Veh 1) traveling south is passing several cars in the wrong lane of travel.

Prior to Veh 1 completing the pass of all cars, Veh 2 traveling north sees Lacy in his lane of travel and rather than stay in their lane, takes evasive action and exits the roadway to the right,

Veh 3 traveling north following Veh 2 notices the sudden departure of Veh 2 to the right shoulder and immediately faces Lacy in their lane of travel. Sudden shock and immediate reaction was to turn into the southbound lane of travel and into the path of Veh 4

Veh 4 traveling south in the southbound lane strikes Veh 3.

The crash takes place in front of Veh 1 before he ever completes the pass of ALL the vehicles. Veh 1 then drives around the crash site and travels away southbound away from the scene.

According to the attorney. Lacy did not make contact with any vehicle and the impact was between vehicle 3 & vehicle 4.

The “but for’ rule of assigning fault or responsibility;

But for Vehicle 1 driving reckless by speeding and passing in a no passing zone, there is a higher than not probability that the actions of vehicle 2 and Veh 3 never occur and Veh 4 is not involved.

Also

But for driver of vehicle 3 seeing Lacy vehicle 1, vehicle 3 crossed the center line striking vehicle 4.