7/24/23 Trial of Usman Shahid -- driver who killed two Oakton teens

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only place I’ve seen it written that he was unlicensed was in that Reddit thread. Even NBC4’s report yesterday didn’t say that. I’m not believing that “fact” until I see it reported on a legitimate site.

He wasn't unlicensed. He had a learner's permit.

a "learner's PERMIT" is not a license. it is a "permit" --- those are DIFFERENT THINGS.

The "permit" means you are PERMITTED to drive ONLY with an actual LICENSED driver in the car. Your insurance company does not increase the rates for having a person with a learners permit using the vehicle because they cannot drive without a licensed driver in the car. Insurance companies do not consider a permit holder to be an actual licensed driver. The legal system makes a distinction.

Shahid was NOT a licensed driver. He did not have a license to drive. He had a permit to use a vehicle ONLY when a licensed driver was in the car.

In Virginia, all drivers are required to have insurance. Usually people with a learner's permit are covered under their parents' car insurance but not always, in which case they need to get their own car insurance. Everyone requires a driver to be a licensed driver, including car insurance, police, etc. Someone with a learner's permit has a restricted license otherwise they would be driving without a license.

In Virginia, a person with a learners permit is NOT required to be included on your insurance as a driver, and the charges do not go up while you have a permit. The person who is the licensed SUPERVISING driver (supervising the permit holder) and/or the owner of the car carry the insurance.


You are wrong, PP. Just admit it. As far as the law is concerned, in VIRGINIA, Shahid is Not a "licensed driver".

Per the VIRGINIA DMV: "A learner’s permit allows individuals to practice driving with a licensed driver."

https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/licenses-ids/learners/apply#:~:text=A%20learner's%20permit%20allows%20individuals%20to%20practice%20driving%20with%20a%20licensed%20driver.

[Anonymous]

Defense attorney, "Usman had no choice but to speed up to 81 mph in a 35 mph zone to beat the yellow light - its the 4Runner driver's fault and that is all there is to it!" This sounds like a high school mock trial defense - he needs to rot in jail for a long time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Defense attorney, "Usman had no choice but to speed up to 81 mph in a 35 mph zone to beat the yellow light - its the 4Runner driver's fault and that is all there is to it!" This sounds like a high school mock trial defense - he needs to rot in jail for a long time.

Wait. Is that an actual quote from the defense atty? Or are you just mocking the ridiculousness of Shahid's position. I hope the defense atty did not actually say what you put in quotes.

[Anonymous]

Paraphrased, but that is essentially what was just reported by Paul Wagner on Ch 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Paraphrased, but that is essentially what was just reported by Paul Wagner on Ch 4

Hope they post a video!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only place I’ve seen it written that he was unlicensed was in that Reddit thread. Even NBC4’s report yesterday didn’t say that. I’m not believing that “fact” until I see it reported on a legitimate site.

He wasn't unlicensed. He had a learner's permit.

a "learner's PERMIT" is not a license. it is a "permit" --- those are DIFFERENT THINGS.

The "permit" means you are PERMITTED to drive ONLY with an actual LICENSED driver in the car. Your insurance company does not increase the rates for having a person with a learners permit using the vehicle because they cannot drive without a licensed driver in the car. Insurance companies do not consider a permit holder to be an actual licensed driver. The legal system makes a distinction.

Shahid was NOT a licensed driver. He did not have a license to drive. He had a permit to use a vehicle ONLY when a licensed driver was in the car.

In Virginia, all drivers are required to have insurance. Usually people with a learner's permit are covered under their parents' car insurance but not always, in which case they need to get their own car insurance. Everyone requires a driver to be a licensed driver, including car insurance, police, etc. Someone with a learner's permit has a restricted license otherwise they would be driving without a license.

In Virginia, a person with a learners permit is NOT required to be included on your insurance as a driver, and the charges do not go up while you have a permit. The person who is the licensed SUPERVISING driver (supervising the permit holder) and/or the owner of the car carry the insurance.


You are wrong, PP. Just admit it. As far as the law is concerned, in VIRGINIA, Shahid is Not a "licensed driver".

Per the VIRGINIA DMV: "A learner’s permit allows individuals to practice driving with a licensed driver."

https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/licenses-ids/learners/apply#:~:text=A%20learner's%20permit%20allows%20individuals%20to%20practice%20driving%20with%20a%20licensed%20driver.

You are both wrong. In Virginia, drivers/owners can pay $500. to NOT have insurance. This will change on July 1, 2024:

https://www.wsls.com/news/virginia/2024/04/23/all-virginia-drivers-will-be-required-to-have-car-insurance-by-july-1/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only place I’ve seen it written that he was unlicensed was in that Reddit thread. Even NBC4’s report yesterday didn’t say that. I’m not believing that “fact” until I see it reported on a legitimate site.

He wasn't unlicensed. He had a learner's permit.

a "learner's PERMIT" is not a license. it is a "permit" --- those are DIFFERENT THINGS.

The "permit" means you are PERMITTED to drive ONLY with an actual LICENSED driver in the car. Your insurance company does not increase the rates for having a person with a learners permit using the vehicle because they cannot drive without a licensed driver in the car. Insurance companies do not consider a permit holder to be an actual licensed driver. The legal system makes a distinction.

Shahid was NOT a licensed driver. He did not have a license to drive. He had a permit to use a vehicle ONLY when a licensed driver was in the car.

In Virginia, all drivers are required to have insurance. Usually people with a learner's permit are covered under their parents' car insurance but not always, in which case they need to get their own car insurance. Everyone requires a driver to be a licensed driver, including car insurance, police, etc. Someone with a learner's permit has a restricted license otherwise they would be driving without a license.

In Virginia, a person with a learners permit is NOT required to be included on your insurance as a driver, and the charges do not go up while you have a permit. The person who is the licensed SUPERVISING driver (supervising the permit holder) and/or the owner of the car carry the insurance.


You are wrong, PP. Just admit it. As far as the law is concerned, in VIRGINIA, Shahid is Not a "licensed driver".

Per the VIRGINIA DMV: "A learner’s permit allows individuals to practice driving with a licensed driver."

https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/licenses-ids/learners/apply#:~:text=A%20learner's%20permit%20allows%20individuals%20to%20practice%20driving%20with%20a%20licensed%20driver.

You are both wrong. In Virginia, drivers/owners can pay $500. to NOT have insurance. This will change on July 1, 2024:

https://www.wsls.com/news/virginia/2024/04/23/all-virginia-drivers-will-be-required-to-have-car-insurance-by-july-1/

BUT, I imagine since Shahid's family lives in an apartment, the BMW was financed, therefore a lien exists on the vehicle, therefor there is at least some insurance on the vehicle.

[Anonymous]

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/legal/fairfax-county-jury-deliberates-case-man-charged-with-manslaughter-death-of-high-schoolers/65-74f49f1f-62d2-41e2-b2f2-f637288d09d2

Prosecution closing was ten minutes, defense was two hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only place I’ve seen it written that he was unlicensed was in that Reddit thread. Even NBC4’s report yesterday didn’t say that. I’m not believing that “fact” until I see it reported on a legitimate site.

He wasn't unlicensed. He had a learner's permit.

a "learner's PERMIT" is not a license. it is a "permit" --- those are DIFFERENT THINGS.

The "permit" means you are PERMITTED to drive ONLY with an actual LICENSED driver in the car. Your insurance company does not increase the rates for having a person with a learners permit using the vehicle because they cannot drive without a licensed driver in the car. Insurance companies do not consider a permit holder to be an actual licensed driver. The legal system makes a distinction.

Shahid was NOT a licensed driver. He did not have a license to drive. He had a permit to use a vehicle ONLY when a licensed driver was in the car.

In Virginia, all drivers are required to have insurance. Usually people with a learner's permit are covered under their parents' car insurance but not always, in which case they need to get their own car insurance. Everyone requires a driver to be a licensed driver, including car insurance, police, etc. Someone with a learner's permit has a restricted license otherwise they would be driving without a license.

In Virginia, a person with a learners permit is NOT required to be included on your insurance as a driver, and the charges do not go up while you have a permit. The person who is the licensed SUPERVISING driver (supervising the permit holder) and/or the owner of the car carry the insurance.


You are wrong, PP. Just admit it. As far as the law is concerned, in VIRGINIA, Shahid is Not a "licensed driver".

Per the VIRGINIA DMV: "A learner’s permit allows individuals to practice driving with a licensed driver."

https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/licenses-ids/learners/apply#:~:text=A%20learner's%20permit%20allows%20individuals%20to%20practice%20driving%20with%20a%20licensed%20driver.

You are both wrong. In Virginia, drivers/owners can pay $500. to NOT have insurance. This will change on July 1, 2024:

https://www.wsls.com/news/virginia/2024/04/23/all-virginia-drivers-will-be-required-to-have-car-insurance-by-july-1/

Do you really think this kid's parents bought him a BMW for a graduation present but then did not either put him/the car on their insurance or provide for him/require him to have separate car insurance?

I suppose it's possible that they paid the $500 for the uninsured motorist fund.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Defense attorney, "Usman had no choice but to speed up to 81 mph in a 35 mph zone to beat the yellow light - its the 4Runner driver's fault and that is all there is to it!" This sounds like a high school mock trial defense - he needs to rot in jail for a long time.

Wait. Is that an actual quote from the defense atty? Or are you just mocking the ridiculousness of Shahid's position. I hope the defense atty did not actually say what you put in quotes.

Trying to strategically / intentionally set up for a retrial by having Incompetent or ineffective assistance of counsel?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only place I’ve seen it written that he was unlicensed was in that Reddit thread. Even NBC4’s report yesterday didn’t say that. I’m not believing that “fact” until I see it reported on a legitimate site.

He wasn't unlicensed. He had a learner's permit.

a "learner's PERMIT" is not a license. it is a "permit" --- those are DIFFERENT THINGS.

The "permit" means you are PERMITTED to drive ONLY with an actual LICENSED driver in the car. Your insurance company does not increase the rates for having a person with a learners permit using the vehicle because they cannot drive without a licensed driver in the car. Insurance companies do not consider a permit holder to be an actual licensed driver. The legal system makes a distinction.

Shahid was NOT a licensed driver. He did not have a license to drive. He had a permit to use a vehicle ONLY when a licensed driver was in the car.

In Virginia, all drivers are required to have insurance. Usually people with a learner's permit are covered under their parents' car insurance but not always, in which case they need to get their own car insurance. Everyone requires a driver to be a licensed driver, including car insurance, police, etc. Someone with a learner's permit has a restricted license otherwise they would be driving without a license.

In Virginia, a person with a learners permit is NOT required to be included on your insurance as a driver, and the charges do not go up while you have a permit. The person who is the licensed SUPERVISING driver (supervising the permit holder) and/or the owner of the car carry the insurance.


You are wrong, PP. Just admit it. As far as the law is concerned, in VIRGINIA, Shahid is Not a "licensed driver".

Per the VIRGINIA DMV: "A learner’s permit allows individuals to practice driving with a licensed driver."

https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/licenses-ids/learners/apply#:~:text=A%20learner's%20permit%20allows%20individuals%20to%20practice%20driving%20with%20a%20licensed%20driver.

You are both wrong. In Virginia, drivers/owners can pay $500. to NOT have insurance. This will change on July 1, 2024:

https://www.wsls.com/news/virginia/2024/04/23/all-virginia-drivers-will-be-required-to-have-car-insurance-by-july-1/

BUT, I imagine since Shahid's family lives in an apartment, the BMW was financed, therefore a lien exists on the vehicle, therefor there is at least some insurance on the vehicle.

And, if the insurance company wants to play hardball, they can deny coverage to the Shahid's, since Usman was not yet a licensed driver, and did not meet the requirements of having an adult in the car with them. There seems to be no house to put a lien on to meet any liability payments.

[Anonymous]

What year was the BMW?

[Anonymous]

From a NBC4 article:

"The girls were taken to hospitals with life-threatening injuries. The driver of the BMW and a passenger, who also was a juvenile, also were taken to hospitals.

Two other passengers in the BMW fled, but police were able to identify them."

Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only place I’ve seen it written that he was unlicensed was in that Reddit thread. Even NBC4’s report yesterday didn’t say that. I’m not believing that “fact” until I see it reported on a legitimate site.

He wasn't unlicensed. He had a learner's permit.

a "learner's PERMIT" is not a license. it is a "permit" --- those are DIFFERENT THINGS.

The "permit" means you are PERMITTED to drive ONLY with an actual LICENSED driver in the car. Your insurance company does not increase the rates for having a person with a learners permit using the vehicle because they cannot drive without a licensed driver in the car. Insurance companies do not consider a permit holder to be an actual licensed driver. The legal system makes a distinction.

Shahid was NOT a licensed driver. He did not have a license to drive. He had a permit to use a vehicle ONLY when a licensed driver was in the car.

In Virginia, all drivers are required to have insurance. Usually people with a learner's permit are covered under their parents' car insurance but not always, in which case they need to get their own car insurance. Everyone requires a driver to be a licensed driver, including car insurance, police, etc. Someone with a learner's permit has a restricted license otherwise they would be driving without a license.

In Virginia, a person with a learners permit is NOT required to be included on your insurance as a driver, and the charges do not go up while you have a permit. The person who is the licensed SUPERVISING driver (supervising the permit holder) and/or the owner of the car carry the insurance.


You are wrong, PP. Just admit it. As far as the law is concerned, in VIRGINIA, Shahid is Not a "licensed driver".

Per the VIRGINIA DMV: "A learner’s permit allows individuals to practice driving with a licensed driver."

https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/licenses-ids/learners/apply#:~:text=A%20learner's%20permit%20allows%20individuals%20to%20practice%20driving%20with%20a%20licensed%20driver.

You are both wrong. In Virginia, drivers/owners can pay $500. to NOT have insurance. This will change on July 1, 2024:

https://www.wsls.com/news/virginia/2024/04/23/all-virginia-drivers-will-be-required-to-have-car-insurance-by-july-1/

BUT, I imagine since Shahid's family lives in an apartment, the BMW was financed, therefore a lien exists on the vehicle, therefor there is at least some insurance on the vehicle.

And, if the insurance company wants to play hardball, they can deny coverage to the Shahid's, since Usman was not yet a licensed driver, and did not meet the requirements of having an adult in the car with them. There seems to be no house to put a lien on to meet any liability payments.

How is this known? Also, there could be other assets seized. Unless the family used the time between the accident and now to hide them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only place I’ve seen it written that he was unlicensed was in that Reddit thread. Even NBC4’s report yesterday didn’t say that. I’m not believing that “fact” until I see it reported on a legitimate site.

He wasn't unlicensed. He had a learner's permit.

a "learner's PERMIT" is not a license. it is a "permit" --- those are DIFFERENT THINGS.

The "permit" means you are PERMITTED to drive ONLY with an actual LICENSED driver in the car. Your insurance company does not increase the rates for having a person with a learners permit using the vehicle because they cannot drive without a licensed driver in the car. Insurance companies do not consider a permit holder to be an actual licensed driver. The legal system makes a distinction.

Shahid was NOT a licensed driver. He did not have a license to drive. He had a permit to use a vehicle ONLY when a licensed driver was in the car.

In Virginia, all drivers are required to have insurance. Usually people with a learner's permit are covered under their parents' car insurance but not always, in which case they need to get their own car insurance. Everyone requires a driver to be a licensed driver, including car insurance, police, etc. Someone with a learner's permit has a restricted license otherwise they would be driving without a license.

In Virginia, a person with a learners permit is NOT required to be included on your insurance as a driver, and the charges do not go up while you have a permit. The person who is the licensed SUPERVISING driver (supervising the permit holder) and/or the owner of the car carry the insurance.


You are wrong, PP. Just admit it. As far as the law is concerned, in VIRGINIA, Shahid is Not a "licensed driver".

Per the VIRGINIA DMV: "A learner’s permit allows individuals to practice driving with a licensed driver."

https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/licenses-ids/learners/apply#:~:text=A%20learner's%20permit%20allows%20individuals%20to%20practice%20driving%20with%20a%20licensed%20driver.

You are both wrong. In Virginia, drivers/owners can pay $500. to NOT have insurance. This will change on July 1, 2024:

https://www.wsls.com/news/virginia/2024/04/23/all-virginia-drivers-will-be-required-to-have-car-insurance-by-july-1/

Insane. Why did VA ever allow this? People can sue for so much even for a small fender bender. If you don't insure your car you shouldn't be able to sue for future imagined damage to yourself and cars. People file fraudulent lawsuits all the time making up illnesses and counting made up future problems and they don't even have insurance.