- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Traffic investigators of the OT
Posted on 3/16/19 at 1:10 am to Jim Rockford
Posted on 3/16/19 at 1:10 am to Jim Rockford
This is why you have dashcams and rear window cams.
I'm ALWAYS watching you motherfrickers and most people don't have cameras. Playing "she said, camera showed" is way better than playing "she said, he said" in court. Unless, of course, the cameras "lost power" and "weren't recording" for some reason...
I'm gonna get the full worth of my 1998 Toyota Tercel when you hit me. My neck's gonna hurt, too.
I'm ALWAYS watching you motherfrickers and most people don't have cameras. Playing "she said, camera showed" is way better than playing "she said, he said" in court. Unless, of course, the cameras "lost power" and "weren't recording" for some reason...
I'm gonna get the full worth of my 1998 Toyota Tercel when you hit me. My neck's gonna hurt, too.
This post was edited on 3/16/19 at 1:11 am
0
Posted on 3/16/19 at 5:48 am to Jim Rockford
quote:
A is approaching an intersection and has the right of way.
This is the determining factor.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 5:54 am to fightin tigers
quote:If B is at fault, and A had some drugs in his system, would that make A at fault? I just don't see how someone can be at fault, but all of a sudden if the other person has drugs in their system (doesn't mean that they are on drugs at the time) then now they are to blame?
Legally B.
Insurance will probably fight it out and assign some blame to A, but not much.
Assumes no drugs or alcohol involved
Posted on 3/16/19 at 7:08 am to Jim Rockford
B, unless A changed their mind after beginning their turn or from a turn lane. From a safety standpoint, assuming a signaling driver will turn is as bad as assuming a driver will stop at a stop sign.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:15 am to Jim Rockford
B did the hitting. B
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:31 am to Jim Rockford
I think be but I don't know.
moral of story: Don't trust a blinker (including mine)
moral of story: Don't trust a blinker (including mine)
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:34 am to Jim Rockford
If this is a right on red type situation for B (or right at a stop sign) then B is at fault. Intersection was not clear when B made the turn. No ands, ifs, or buts about it. B has to wait for the intersection to be clear before turning right. B should've waited till A committed to the turn rather than relying solely on blinker.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 9:36 am to Jim Rockford
Dat suckuh B bees in thuh wronk!
Posted on 3/16/19 at 9:39 am to ultratiger89
quote:This. How did B proceed through an intersection and get hit? OP never said they turned in front of A.
To many variables your scenario is to ambiguous. Is b to the right, ahead, or left of a? Is it a four way stop?
Posted on 3/16/19 at 10:29 am to Jim Rockford
quote:
A is approaching an intersection and has the right of way. He is signaling a right turn. B is stopped at the intersection. Seeing A's right turn signal, B proceeds through the intersection but A does not stop, and hits B. Who is at fault?
If this is a 4-way stop, B has the right of way (from your description it sounds like B was fully stopped before A reached the intersection).
If it's not a 4-way stop and A had enough opportunity to stop but they simply didn't then some percentage of blame might be assigned to A but it will be mostly the fault of B.
If it's not a 4-way stop, A wasn't speeding and there wasn't enough time to reasonably keep from hitting B, then B is at fault.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 1:04 pm to Jim Rockford
So I'm assuming A would cross B from let to right in front of B, BUT could also turn right and travel on a lane next to B.
I think B would be at fault but that A would also have some fault. They also have a duty to not hit other cars.
I think B would be at fault but that A would also have some fault. They also have a duty to not hit other cars.
This post was edited on 3/16/19 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 3/16/19 at 4:16 pm to dawgsjlw
quote:
If B is at fault, and A had some drugs in his system, would that make A at fault? I just don't see how someone can be at fault, but all of a sudden if the other person has drugs in their system (doesn't mean that they are on drugs at the time) then now they are to blame?
Welcome to the law.
If you are DUI you are at fault pretty much no matter what the case.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 6:08 pm to TaderSalad
quote:
B is at fault. Intersection was not clear when B made the turn. No ands, ifs, or buts about it. B has to wait for the intersection to be clear before turning right. B should've waited till A committed to the turn rather than relying solely on blinker.
This is the correct answer.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News