Oakton crash

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The driver of the Toyota was expecting a car coming up at 30 to 40 mph, not 80 to 100!

The driver of the 4Runner should have depth perception. You can tell if a car or anything is coming at you fast.. imagine a baseball... it's the difference between catching and ducking. You can tell the car is coming at you fast... you simply can tell.

Nice try, but the Virginia code is clear:

§ 46.2-823. Unlawful speed forfeits right-of-way.
The driver of any vehicle traveling at an unlawful speed shall forfeit any right-of-way which he might otherwise have under this article.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The driver of the Toyota was expecting a car coming up at 30 to 40 mph, not 80 to 100!

The driver of the 4Runner should have depth perception. You can tell if a car or anything is coming at you fast.. imagine a baseball... it's the difference between catching and ducking. You can tell the car is coming at you fast... you simply can tell.

DP. No, you cannot always "simply tell" that a car that appears to be a certain distance away is going to close that gap far faster than you realize. Comparing it to a baseball coming at you is nonsense.

Have you never, ever glanced in your rear view mirror and seen a car behind you that seemed almost on the horizon, looked back at the road momentarily because you're driving, and suddenly that distant car is practically at your bumper? That's what speeding does, especially very high rates of speed. The Toyota driver literally might never have seen the BMW coming until the last second. Because, SPEED. Not "depth perception" on the Toyota driver's part. Extreme speed on the BMW driver's part. Stop being one of the people here trying to find ways to excuse any of what the BMW driver did.

[Anonymous]

The idea that the 4Runner should have known that the BMW distance is just wrong as proved by the terrible crash on River Road in MD a few years ago. Depth perception is off when someone is going at an excessive rate of speed. That young male driver got 12 years in jail for basically wiping out a family due to stupidity.

https://patch.com/maryland/bethesda-chevychase/driver-going-115-mph-river-road-crash-sentenced-3-deaths

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The driver of the Toyota was expecting a car coming up at 30 to 40 mph, not 80 to 100!

THIS!

I'm sickened by seeing posts here piling on the Toyota driver for, gasp, trying to make a left turn. Who are these PPs acting as if the BMW going 80 to 100 shares any culpability here?

I guess none of those here who are trying to shift blame onto the Toyota driver have ever had the experience of starting to make a turn, seeing a vehicle in the distance and judging that there is time and space to make the turn -- only to realize suddenly that the vehicle is going FAR faster than you could tell visually at the distance involved. Looking at an oncoming car, if it's far enough away, you cannot necessarily judge that it's speeding at that point, you just see it and judge based on distance, not knowing that the vehicle will close the distance gap between you much, much faster than it appears it will.

The investigation will tell for sure if the Toyota driver has any culpability, but as others have noted, the high speed of the BMW will be key. If the BMW had not been speeding so very fast, it likely might not have bounced off the Toyota and gone up on the sidewalk where it killed those poor teens.

Hi BMW Dad.

I can’t believe some of you are blaming the Toyota driver. Reminds me of the driver speeding on River Road who killed 3 member of a Whitman family making a left turn.

No one is blaming anyone. The 4Runner driver can easily see how fast the car is coming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As of its 5:22 p.m. update, the Post is identifying the teen pedestrians as Oakton HS students. Here is part of that article:

Two Oakton High School students were killed and another was critically injured Tuesday when two vehicles collided and spun out of control at an intersection where the youths were walking, Fairfax County police said.

The victims, all teenage girls, were a block from their school, police said. This is the final week of the school year at Oakton and Tuesday was an early-release day, with classes ending at 11:30 a.m., shortly before the fatal accident.

The crash occurred about 11:46 a.m. at Blake Lane and Five Oaks Road in the Oakton area, on the opposite side of Route 66 from the school, according to Maj. Eli Cory, a police spokesman. He said the three girls, whom he did not identify, were taken to a hospital, where authorities later said two of them were pronounced dead. He said the third student’s injuries were “life-threatening."


The driver and a passenger from one of the vehicles, who also are juveniles, were injured but not seriously, he said. It was unclear if they also went to Oakton.

Cory said a BMW was traveling south on Blake “at a very high rate of speed” while the driver of a Toyota 4Runner, headed north on Blake, was attempting to turn left onto Five Oaks. The BMW stuck the 4Runner, then “ricocheted off the side of the road, hit the three pedestrians, hit a pole on the side of the road and finally came to rest down the street,” he said.



The three girls were walking along Blake and had just crossed Five Oaks before the 4Runner’s driver tried to make the turn, Cory said.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The article does continue after that but that's the gist of it. So sad about the students killed--we have dear friends with an Oakton grad this year and this is sickening.

Everyone harping on the BMW driver, sounds like 4Runner misjudged the timing needed for the left hand turn directly in front of the BMW. BMW had no time to stop - even if they weren't speeding.

I was wondering the same thing. I am unfamiliar with the intersection, so I did not know if the 4Runner misjudged the turn, or was waiting for the turn as the girls crossed the road, all looked clear and then the BMW came up really fast. Regardless, tragic for all involved.

I live near the area and I've used that intersection a lot (from the direction of the BMW) b/c my kid went to Mosby Woods (which is on Five Oaks). I drove on Blake today to get back home. I was in the traffic direction that the Toyota 4 Runner would have travelled (going north on Blake). I made a mental note of what the sight line is like for the Toyota as it prepared to turn left.

Basically, there is one block of visual sight line in the lane that the Toyota had to cross. So, the Toyota driver would have been able to see a block worth of traffic coming at him. And anyone coming south (such as the BMW) would have a full block view ahead toward the intersection of Black and Five Oaks. (prior to that, there is a bit of a dip/hill). Anyone driving south (such as the BMW) would have had one full block of driving time to slow down if a car was in the process of turning across its lane. If the BMW/south bound car was going 55 mph, there would be plenty of time to slow down significantly -- even if it made some impact.

The fact that the crash was SOOO forceful that the BMW ricocheted off, hit the girls and still had enough force to take out a wooden pole, suggests that the BMW had quite a bit of velocity heading into the crash. We know that the Toyota could not have been going very fast because it just started moving after a full stop. I would think the Toyota couldn't have been going more than 15 mph.

Accident reconstruction experts will determine how much speed the BMW had. But, if they had been speeding only 20 mph over the limit, there was enough time (based on the sightline) to slow down or stop.

[Anonymous]

It's kind of a mircale the toyota driver was apparenty unharmed. If the BMW had been another SUV, likely a different story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Delivery vans and UHaul trucks regularly go 45 MPH on Blake Lane. Cops know this too and have motorcycle speed traps all along Blake pulling people over (or at least they use to). I expect they will be coming back now for sure.

If you were going 45 on Blake, you would have had time to see a turning vehicle and significantly reduce your speed before impact, or completely stop (avoiding impact). The BMW driver apparently wasn't paying attention to what was happening in the intersection A FULL BLOCK AHEAD of him, AND ALSO was speeding FAR above the speed limit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As of its 5:22 p.m. update, the Post is identifying the teen pedestrians as Oakton HS students. Here is part of that article:

Two Oakton High School students were killed and another was critically injured Tuesday when two vehicles collided and spun out of control at an intersection where the youths were walking, Fairfax County police said.

The victims, all teenage girls, were a block from their school, police said. This is the final week of the school year at Oakton and Tuesday was an early-release day, with classes ending at 11:30 a.m., shortly before the fatal accident.

The crash occurred about 11:46 a.m. at Blake Lane and Five Oaks Road in the Oakton area, on the opposite side of Route 66 from the school, according to Maj. Eli Cory, a police spokesman. He said the three girls, whom he did not identify, were taken to a hospital, where authorities later said two of them were pronounced dead. He said the third student’s injuries were “life-threatening."


The driver and a passenger from one of the vehicles, who also are juveniles, were injured but not seriously, he said. It was unclear if they also went to Oakton.

Cory said a BMW was traveling south on Blake “at a very high rate of speed” while the driver of a Toyota 4Runner, headed north on Blake, was attempting to turn left onto Five Oaks. The BMW stuck the 4Runner, then “ricocheted off the side of the road, hit the three pedestrians, hit a pole on the side of the road and finally came to rest down the street,” he said.

The three girls were walking along Blake and had just crossed Five Oaks before the 4Runner’s driver tried to make the turn, Cory said.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The article does continue after that but that's the gist of it. So sad about the students killed--we have dear friends with an Oakton grad this year and this is sickening.

Everyone harping on the BMW driver, sounds like 4Runner misjudged the timing needed for the left hand turn directly in front of the BMW. BMW had no time to stop - even if they weren't speeding.

It doesn't matter who caused the accident, if the BMW hadn't been speeding, they may still have hit the Toyota but they wouldn't have hit and killed the girls. Full stop.

IF ONLY! (re: the bold).

(nice pun!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know what possible benefit comes from any of us passing judgement on the driver. None of us knows anyone's heart or motivation.

Oh come on. His reckless driving killed 2 girls and left a 3rd fighting for her life.

His initial concerns were that his Dad was going to be upset. He sat in someone's yard as his young victims lay dying and lamented that his Dad was going to be upset.

His friends saw the girls dying and fled the scene.

I think we know these kids' heart.

+1

[Anonymous]

Question about parental liability for parents of an 18 yr old:

If you (parents) have an adult driver on your insurance (i.e. the 18 yr old), can someone sue YOU the parent for the 18 yr old's negligence?

I would expect that the parents can be sued for a minor's negligence. Does it change the culpability if the negligent party is an adult? Is it enough to go after the parents if they provide the insurance policy for the adult (18 yr old)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Question about parental liability for parents of an 18 yr old:

If you (parents) have an adult driver on your insurance (i.e. the 18 yr old), can someone sue YOU the parent for the 18 yr old's negligence?

I would expect that the parents can be sued for a minor's negligence. Does it change the culpability if the negligent party is an adult? Is it enough to go after the parents if they provide the insurance policy for the adult (18 yr old)?

It's not enough for them just to be the owners of the policy, but depending on the facts, they could be on the hook via a theory of negligent entrustment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Question about parental liability for parents of an 18 yr old:

If you (parents) have an adult driver on your insurance (i.e. the 18 yr old), can someone sue YOU the parent for the 18 yr old's negligence?

I would expect that the parents can be sued for a minor's negligence. Does it change the culpability if the negligent party is an adult? Is it enough to go after the parents if they provide the insurance policy for the adult (18 yr old)?

Don't some car insurance policies have a lawsuit liability coverage option? I think ours covers us up to $250K if the other driver or bystander sues me or DH....of course the insurance companies duke it out and try to settle.

[Anonymous]

According to what I read, the BMW took out a bunch of mailboxes too. So it ricocheted off the 4 Runner, hit the curb, ran through 3 girls with full backpacks and laptops, hit a bunch of mailboxes and still had enough force to take down a utility pull.

The BMW crash deformation was also horrible. Its crumble zones didn’t crumble and the BMW pedestrian protection (the hood is suppose to pop up high to make the pedestrian go over the car, not under) didn’t work at all. The 4Runner (a far older body on frame design) actually deformed properly and protected the Toyota driver completely. And the Toyota deformed enough to save the BMW driver’s life. BMW is pure garbage. Always was and always will be. The Toyota actually worked as design (no surprise there).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question about parental liability for parents of an 18 yr old:

If you (parents) have an adult driver on your insurance (i.e. the 18 yr old), can someone sue YOU the parent for the 18 yr old's negligence?

I would expect that the parents can be sued for a minor's negligence. Does it change the culpability if the negligent party is an adult? Is it enough to go after the parents if they provide the insurance policy for the adult (18 yr old)?

Don't some car insurance policies have a lawsuit liability coverage option? I think ours covers us up to $250K if the other driver or bystander sues me or DH....of course the insurance companies duke it out and try to settle.

Well, of course a car insurance policy has liability coverage. But the young driver is insured. The question is who can be sued. With people dead, the carrier is going to offer up policy limits, full stop. The question becomes who has assets and who can the families pursue. Odds are, the parents have assets. So, what's the theory under which they can be sued. There are a couple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question about parental liability for parents of an 18 yr old:

If you (parents) have an adult driver on your insurance (i.e. the 18 yr old), can someone sue YOU the parent for the 18 yr old's negligence?

I would expect that the parents can be sued for a minor's negligence. Does it change the culpability if the negligent party is an adult? Is it enough to go after the parents if they provide the insurance policy for the adult (18 yr old)?

Don't some car insurance policies have a lawsuit liability coverage option? I think ours covers us up to $250K if the other driver or bystander sues me or DH....of course the insurance companies duke it out and try to settle.

Well, of course a car insurance policy has liability coverage. But the young driver is insured. The question is who can be sued. With people dead, the carrier is going to offer up policy limits, full stop. The question becomes who has assets and who can the families pursue. Odds are, the parents have assets. So, what's the theory under which they can be sued. There are a couple.

Wanted to add--the issue is the policy limits are almost certainly insufficient for the claims involved. Unless the parents had a very large umbrella policy. I personally have a $2 million umbrella policy on top of a 500K auto liability policy, but 2 dead plus hospital bills--with young people--the damages involved are HIGH.