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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

From that link:

"A nationally known crash expert also testified, supporting the prosecution. He said the BMW's sophisticated data recorder showed Shahid accelerated from 60 to 81 mph and never applied the brakes."

Elsewhere I saw one of the passengers of the BMW said that he thought the driver accelerated before the collision. Was he trying to go around the SUV and missed? Was he trying to brake and hit the wrong pedal? Was he trying to beat the light? This seems the most likely.

Greenspun is a POS.

If the client doesn't want to take a plea, there's not much the attorney can do. This may be Greenspun's fault or it may be the client.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

From that link:

"A nationally known crash expert also testified, supporting the prosecution. He said the BMW's sophisticated data recorder showed Shahid accelerated from 60 to 81 mph and never applied the brakes."

Elsewhere I saw one of the passengers of the BMW said that he thought the driver accelerated before the collision. Was he trying to go around the SUV and missed? Was he trying to brake and hit the wrong pedal? Was he trying to beat the light? This seems the most likely.

Greenspun must be hoping for a very favorably jury instruction. This is very, very bad for the defense.

I wish I were on that jury...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

“The commonwealth attorney’s office is giving [SUV driver] immunity in exchange for his testimony.”

Sounds like they could have charged him.

I think most of the blame goes to the speeding car but the SUV did play a small role by turning before it was clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

“The commonwealth attorney’s office is giving [SUV driver] immunity in exchange for his testimony.”

Sounds like they could have charged him.

I think most of the blame goes to the speeding car but the SUV did play a small role by turning before it was clear.

That's not a violation. There is no ticket or criminal liability from making an imperfect left turn. Is it reckless driving? No. Is it blocking the intersection? Only to speeding BMWs, not to normal traffic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

“The commonwealth attorney’s office is giving [SUV driver] immunity in exchange for his testimony.”


Immunity from what? Driving with expired tags? No insurance?
Sounds like they could have charged him.

I think most of the blame goes to the speeding car but the SUV did play a small role by turning before it was clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

“The commonwealth attorney’s office is giving [SUV driver] immunity in exchange for his testimony.”

Sounds like they could have charged him.

I think most of the blame goes to the speeding car but the SUV did play a small role by turning before it was clear.

Immunity from what? Driving with expired tags? No insurance?

[Anonymous]

It’s so horrifying that the bmw driver accelerated. I hope he goes to jail for several years.

It is not the forerunner driver’s fault and no one would anticipate a car going 81 there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

“The commonwealth attorney’s office is giving [SUV driver] immunity in exchange for his testimony.”

Sounds like they could have charged him.

I think most of the blame goes to the speeding car but the SUV did play a small role by turning before it was clear.

That's not a violation. There is no ticket or criminal liability from making an imperfect left turn. Is it reckless driving? No. Is it blocking the intersection? Only to speeding BMWs, not to normal traffic.

Apparently there were some potential legal consequences of his actions if he was granted immunity.

[Anonymous]

No prosecutor would ever charge the 4 Runner driver. But immunity compels him to testify; without immunity he can refuse.

He is a defendant in a civil lawsuit by the victims. Knowing that in the criminal case he would be crossed by a skilled defense attorney trying to pin the blame on him (as happened yesterday), he probably would have refused to testify if he had the choice. Otherwise he’d risk saying something that could weaken his civil defense.

Just speculation but that is probably what’s going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A person turning left in a 35 mph zone cannot reasonably foresee that a rocket-like-car will be coming at him at 80+ mph. There's no way the 4 Runner driver could or should have expected someone to be coming THAT fast down the road.

The 4 Runner driver looked and saw nothing coming, or whatever was coming was far enough away not to be a problem IF THEY WERE GOING anywhere near the speed limit. If a person was driving 50 mph, you could see that. But, you cannot adapt to someone going 80+ mph coming over a hill. You just can't. And the law doesn't expect you to. The roads and allowable turn lanes do not anticipate someone going 80+ on that road.

If opposing traffic going 80+mph was foreseeable, the road would not have been designed to allow turning left without giving a "protected left turn" (i.e. oncoming traffic would have a red light when left-turning traffic had a green arrow to turn left). That was not how the street was designed. Why? Because it's reasonable to expect a left-turning driver to see oncoming traffic that is moving at some speed greater than the posted limit (designers know that people speed). But they don't design for people to be going more than TWICE the speed limit.

The 4Runner driver had no way of anticipating a rocket coming at him.

But did he check for pedestrians before he started turning? He started turning before it was clear.

Check for pedestrians on the sidewalk? What?

He was waiting in the lane of oncoming traffic while the pedestrians crossed the road he was turning into. He should have looked for pedestrians before starting the turn.

I do that all the time in DC. Cars drive slow there, and there are gobs of pedestrians at all times.

The problem was not the 4Runner making a poor decision, if the speeding BMW came over the hill unforeseeably.

It was mostly the BMW, but partially the 4Runner for being stopped in the lane of oncoming traffic.

NP. Nauseatong to see the attempts on this thread to deflect even partial blame away from the selfish idiot doing 80 mph.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No prosecutor would ever charge the 4 Runner driver. But immunity compels him to testify; without immunity he can refuse.

He is a defendant in a civil lawsuit by the victims. Knowing that in the criminal case he would be crossed by a skilled defense attorney trying to pin the blame on him (as happened yesterday), he probably would have refused to testify if he had the choice. Otherwise he’d risk saying something that could weaken his civil defense.

Just speculation but that is probably what’s going on.

For the non-lawyers here, can you tell us more about how criminal and civil cases work? Can your testimony in a criminal case be used against you in a civil case? And immunity in the criminal case doesn’t translate to immunity in civil

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No prosecutor would ever charge the 4 Runner driver. But immunity compels him to testify; without immunity he can refuse.

He is a defendant in a civil lawsuit by the victims. Knowing that in the criminal case he would be crossed by a skilled defense attorney trying to pin the blame on him (as happened yesterday), he probably would have refused to testify if he had the choice. Otherwise he’d risk saying something that could weaken his civil defense.

Just speculation but that is probably what’s going on.

For the non-lawyers here, can you tell us more about how criminal and civil cases work? Can your testimony in a criminal case be used against you in a civil case? And immunity in the criminal case doesn’t translate to immunity in civil

That is generally correct. All of the 4 Runner driver's testimony under oath in the criminal case can be used against him in the civil case. And the immunity grant only makes him immune from criminal prosecution, not civil damages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

From that link:

"A nationally known crash expert also testified, supporting the prosecution. He said the BMW's sophisticated data recorder showed Shahid accelerated from 60 to 81 mph and never applied the brakes."

Elsewhere I saw one of the passengers of the BMW said that he thought the driver accelerated before the collision. Was he trying to go around the SUV and missed? Was he trying to brake and hit the wrong pedal? Was he trying to beat the light? This seems the most likely.

Did he accidentally hit the gas instead of the brake?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

From that link:

"A nationally known crash expert also testified, supporting the prosecution. He said the BMW's sophisticated data recorder showed Shahid accelerated from 60 to 81 mph and never applied the brakes."

Elsewhere I saw one of the passengers of the BMW said that he thought the driver accelerated before the collision. Was he trying to go around the SUV and missed? Was he trying to brake and hit the wrong pedal? Was he trying to beat the light? This seems the most likely.

Greenspun is a POS.

Greenspun is doing his job. That's all.

I think people who speed like Shahid did should go to jail, even if nobody gets hurt. You're turning your car into a weapon that you can't control. I very sincerely hope he goes to jail and pays lots of money in a civil suit.

Having said that, the question seems to be what circumstances caused those kids to be killed. Was it 'but for' Shahid speeding or 'but for' the SUV in the lane? And I think Shahid panicked and hit the gas instead of the brake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An update from today’s proceedings. I really feel for the 4Runner driver.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/defense-tries-to-shift-blame-in-crash-that-killed-two-oakton-high-students/3596155/

From that link:

"A nationally known crash expert also testified, supporting the prosecution. He said the BMW's sophisticated data recorder showed Shahid accelerated from 60 to 81 mph and never applied the brakes."

Elsewhere I saw one of the passengers of the BMW said that he thought the driver accelerated before the collision. Was he trying to go around the SUV and missed? Was he trying to brake and hit the wrong pedal? Was he trying to beat the light? This seems the most likely.

Did he accidentally hit the gas instead of the brake?

Seems plausible. No way of knowing if Shahid doesn’t take the stand, and there are no reports that he did. Not a good sign for him.