Oakton crash

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

It’s not deflecting. It’s acknowledging that *two* mistakes were made.


Why fight so vigorously to deny that?

Maybe 2 mistakes were made. If the BMW driver was speeding, the Toyota driver's mistake does not count. Can you stop pushing that line to save your friend?
If your friend was not unlawfully speeding (and that is for the accident investigators to determine) then your buddy may share responsibility with the Toyota driver. Otherwise he is out of luck.


§ 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.

Code 1950, § 46-238; 1952, c. 666; 1956, c. 533; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-221; 1985, c. 218; 1989, c. 727.

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodefull/title46.2/chapter8/article2/#:~:text=%C2%A7%2046.2%2D823.&text=The%20driver%20of%20any%20vehicle%20traveling%20at%20an%20unlawful%20speed,otherwise%20have%20under%20this%20article.

§

I don’t know either driver. Other people can have opinions, brainiac.

I think the BMW driver should be held accountable. But so should the Toyota driver. At least a ticket.

The only reason the Toyota driver won’t be held accountable for his error was this wacky VA law.

It was an error and it does “count”. He just got lucky because of this law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

It’s not deflecting. It’s acknowledging that *two* mistakes were made.


Why fight so vigorously to deny that?

Maybe 2 mistakes were made. If the BMW driver was speeding, the Toyota driver's mistake does not count. Can you stop pushing that line to save your friend?
If your friend was not unlawfully speeding (and that is for the accident investigators to determine) then your buddy may share responsibility with the Toyota driver. Otherwise he is out of luck.


§ 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.

Code 1950, § 46-238; 1952, c. 666; 1956, c. 533; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-221; 1985, c. 218; 1989, c. 727.

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodefull/title46.2/chapter8/article2/#:~:text=%C2%A7%2046.2%2D823.&text=The%20driver%20of%20any%20vehicle%20traveling%20at%20an%20unlawful%20speed,otherwise%20have%20under%20this%20article.

§

I don’t know either driver. Other people can have opinions, brainiac.

I think the BMW driver should be held accountable. But so should the Toyota driver. At least a ticket.

The only reason the Toyota driver won’t be held accountable for his error was this wacky VA law.

It was an error and it does “count”. He just got lucky because of this law.

DP. You have nothing, nada to base your theory that the Toyota driver was at fault, and you're making stuff up. Wait until the actual accident report, prepared by actual experts, comes out and then pass judgment. Yes we live in an era where people like you think that facts don't matter and they're entitled to their own facts and opinions based on their own interpretation, but that is not how the world works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

It’s not deflecting. It’s acknowledging that *two* mistakes were made.

Why fight so vigorously to deny that?

I pointed out there is a law that negates certain rights of way when excessive speed is involved. That law may come into play here, as several other PPs have noted earlier.

Why do you opine with such certainty when you do not yet have any information from the official investigation being done by professional investigators? The "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" nonsense is the real problem with this thread. No, nothing is obvious except that people on this site love to play armchair expert.

It is entirely plausible that the Toyota had a clear lane, and started to make the turn, before a speeding car was visible. That is what the above line of thought is intentionally ignoring.

Yes, this. My cousin was in an accident like this. She was turning left and it was clear, guy going 80 ran into her. Because he was going 80, she couldn't see him when she started her turn. Had he been going anywhere close to the speed limit, she would have had plenty of time to complete her turn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

It’s not deflecting. It’s acknowledging that *two* mistakes were made.


Why fight so vigorously to deny that?

Maybe 2 mistakes were made. If the BMW driver was speeding, the Toyota driver's mistake does not count. Can you stop pushing that line to save your friend?
If your friend was not unlawfully speeding (and that is for the accident investigators to determine) then your buddy may share responsibility with the Toyota driver. Otherwise he is out of luck.


§ 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.

Code 1950, § 46-238; 1952, c. 666; 1956, c. 533; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-221; 1985, c. 218; 1989, c. 727.

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodefull/title46.2/chapter8/article2/#:~:text=%C2%A7%2046.2%2D823.&text=The%20driver%20of%20any%20vehicle%20traveling%20at%20an%20unlawful%20speed,otherwise%20have%20under%20this%20article.

§

I don’t know either driver. Other people can have opinions, brainiac.

I think the BMW driver should be held accountable. But so should the Toyota driver. At least a ticket.

The only reason the Toyota driver won’t be held accountable for his error was this wacky VA law.

It was an error and it does “count”. He just got lucky because of this law.

DP. You have nothing, nada to base your theory that the Toyota driver was at fault, and you're making stuff up. Wait until the actual accident report, prepared by actual experts, comes out and then pass judgment. Yes we live in an era where people like you think that facts don't matter and they're entitled to their own facts and opinions based on their own interpretation, but that is not how the world works.

The cops already said he was turning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

It’s not deflecting. It’s acknowledging that *two* mistakes were made.

Why fight so vigorously to deny that?

I pointed out there is a law that negates certain rights of way when excessive speed is involved. That law may come into play here, as several other PPs have noted earlier.

Why do you opine with such certainty when you do not yet have any information from the official investigation being done by professional investigators? The "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" nonsense is the real problem with this thread. No, nothing is obvious except that people on this site love to play armchair expert.

We don’t have all details, but based on the location of the damage and cars it’s clear he was in the southbound lane. The police even said he had started turning after the pedestrians cleared.

Yes, the kid was speeding and should be held accountable for that. And, yes, the Toyota entered the lane prematurely.

Two errors resulting in the accident. Maybe he won’t be legally charged because of this bizarre VA law, but he was also at fault.

The Virginia law is not bizarre at all. Speeding is a scourge because it is so dangerous.

If you have forgotten your. driver's ed, look up what an additional 5mph does to your reaction time and braking distance. in a residential areas with a 35 mph limit you can expect to have a stalled vehicle or pet running loose and things like that. Driving at 35MPH allows you to make allowance for all of the above without a fatal outcome. If you speed, your ability to make such allowance reduces exponentially.

You might think that driving 45mph in a 35 mph zone is just going over a few but your chances of causing a fatality have gone up many times over.

That is the logic of what you call a "bizarre VA law."

Here is one safety video. Educate yourself and save lives.

https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/road-safety/driving-safely/stopping-distances

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

+100. Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

It’s not deflecting. It’s acknowledging that *two* mistakes were made.


Why fight so vigorously to deny that?

Maybe 2 mistakes were made. If the BMW driver was speeding, the Toyota driver's mistake does not count. Can you stop pushing that line to save your friend?
If your friend was not unlawfully speeding (and that is for the accident investigators to determine) then your buddy may share responsibility with the Toyota driver. Otherwise he is out of luck.


§ 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.

Code 1950, § 46-238; 1952, c. 666; 1956, c. 533; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-221; 1985, c. 218; 1989, c. 727.

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodefull/title46.2/chapter8/article2/#:~:text=%C2%A7%2046.2%2D823.&text=The%20driver%20of%20any%20vehicle%20traveling%20at%20an%20unlawful%20speed,otherwise%20have%20under%20this%20article.

§

I don’t know either driver. Other people can have opinions, brainiac.

I think the BMW driver should be held accountable. But so should the Toyota driver. At least a ticket.

The only reason the Toyota driver won’t be held accountable for his error was this wacky VA law.

It was an error and it does “count”. He just got lucky because of this law.

DP. You have nothing, nada to base your theory that the Toyota driver was at fault, and you're making stuff up. Wait until the actual accident report, prepared by actual experts, comes out and then pass judgment. Yes we live in an era where people like you think that facts don't matter and they're entitled to their own facts and opinions based on their own interpretation, but that is not how the world works.

The cops already said he was turning.

One cop said the driver was starting to turn and that was right after the crash. Since then the Crash Reconstruction Unit has been on site more than once and they are clearly collecting more data to prepare an informed report. Why do you think it's taking them this long if all is so obvious according to armchair experts on DCUM??

JFC, seeing how dense some people are on this thread is making me lose all hope for humanity. Supposedly this is a more educated part of the country, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

It’s not deflecting. It’s acknowledging that *two* mistakes were made.

Why fight so vigorously to deny that?

I pointed out there is a law that negates certain rights of way when excessive speed is involved. That law may come into play here, as several other PPs have noted earlier.

Why do you opine with such certainty when you do not yet have any information from the official investigation being done by professional investigators? The "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" nonsense is the real problem with this thread. No, nothing is obvious except that people on this site love to play armchair expert.

We don’t have all details, but based on the location of the damage and cars it’s clear he was in the southbound lane. The police even said he had started turning after the pedestrians cleared.

Yes, the kid was speeding and should be held accountable for that. And, yes, the Toyota entered the lane prematurely.

Two errors resulting in the accident. Maybe he won’t be legally charged because of this bizarre VA law, but he was also at fault.

The Virginia law is not bizarre at all. Speeding is a scourge because it is so dangerous.

If you have forgotten your. driver's ed, look up what an additional 5mph does to your reaction time and braking distance. in a residential areas with a 35 mph limit you can expect to have a stalled vehicle or pet running loose and things like that. Driving at 35MPH allows you to make allowance for all of the above without a fatal outcome. If you speed, your ability to make such allowance reduces exponentially.

You might think that driving 45mph in a 35 mph zone is just going over a few but your chances of causing a fatality have gone up many times over.

That is the logic of what you call a "bizarre VA law."

Here is one safety video. Educate yourself and save lives.

https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/road-safety/driving-safely/stopping-distances

What would have happened if the girls were crossing against the light. There would have been no way the driver would have been able to stop - end of story.
When you are behind the wheel, it is your responsibility to follow traffic laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

It’s not deflecting. It’s acknowledging that *two* mistakes were made.


Why fight so vigorously to deny that?

Maybe 2 mistakes were made. If the BMW driver was speeding, the Toyota driver's mistake does not count. Can you stop pushing that line to save your friend?
If your friend was not unlawfully speeding (and that is for the accident investigators to determine) then your buddy may share responsibility with the Toyota driver. Otherwise he is out of luck.


§ 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.

Code 1950, § 46-238; 1952, c. 666; 1956, c. 533; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-221; 1985, c. 218; 1989, c. 727.

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodefull/title46.2/chapter8/article2/#:~:text=%C2%A7%2046.2%2D823.&text=The%20driver%20of%20any%20vehicle%20traveling%20at%20an%20unlawful%20speed,otherwise%20have%20under%20this%20article.

§

I don’t know either driver. Other people can have opinions, brainiac.

I think the BMW driver should be held accountable. But so should the Toyota driver. At least a ticket.

The only reason the Toyota driver won’t be held accountable for his error was this wacky VA law.

It was an error and it does “count”. He just got lucky because of this law.

Kinda thinkin' that the Toyota driver isn't feeling lucky lately...

And I'm really not sure how a law that accounts for excessive speed in a residential zone as the PRIMARY contributor to a deadly vehicle crash is "wacky." If the BMW driver were going the speed limit, he would have had time to either avoid a turning vehicle (whether at fault or not) or end up in an accident that didn't cause his vehicle to ricochet off a curb, through pedestrians and then over a telephone pole.

[Anonymous]

44 pages (and counting) of armchair forensic analysis without facts. Until the police complete their analysis, you're all talking out of your b***s. Seriously, do the people on this thread have nothing better to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The kid but not the Toyota driver? Both were at fault.


Exactly right. It's obvious from the accident description and pictures.

The repeated attempts here to deflect blame away from the teen driver and onto the Toyota driver are disgusting. And yammering that "it's obvious from the accident description and pictures" means less than nothing unless you are an accident investigator who has had access to ALL the images and data and the scene itself. Are you? Nope. Wait for the real investigators to do their jobs.

And you both want to ignore the fact, brought up repeatedly earlier in the thread with the specific law cited, that excessive speed negates certain rights of way. The teen driver's excessive speed (exact speed still be be proven but witnesses clearly said it was extreme) is very possibly going to negate any right of way violation the Toyota driver might have committed. But the investigation, not your speculation or mine, will determine that.

+100. Disgusting.

+1 One can be open-minded and believe in witholding judgement, yet still be able to rule out "4runner driver shares fault" as a legitimate opinion.

[Anonymous]

I take it that with all the arm chair forensic analysis and accident re-creation efforts being made on this forum that the investigation results have not led to any conclusion - even a preliminary one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I take it that with all the arm chair forensic analysis and accident re-creation efforts being made on this forum that the investigation results have not led to any conclusion - even a preliminary one?

It seems to take at least two weeks, based on other recent cases.

[Anonymous]

The people accusing the Toyota driver are probably people who speed excessively and don’t want to change their ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people accusing the Toyota driver are probably people who speed excessively and don’t want to change their ways.

This.
The energy of impact at 100 mph is more than 8 times what it would be at 35 mph. If that was in fact the BMW's speed, it turned what could have been just property damage into killing two teens and injuring four others, one critically.