Oakton crash

[Anonymous]

FCPD notice:

https://fcpdnews.wordpress.com/2022/06/23/driver-charged-in-oakton-fatal-pedestrian-crash/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the BMW driver was just charged with 2 counts of involuntary manslaughter. Looking at 20+ years.

Here is a link: https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/driver-18-indicted-in-crash-that-killed-2-oakton-high-school-students/3083850/

Good!

[Anonymous]

Finally! It's about damn time!

[Anonymous]

wow

[Anonymous]

Did he turn himself in yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like 4Runner supporters are trying to deflect the responsibility

Agreed.

Who Is At Fault In A Left-Turn Collision?

Drivers making left-hand turns must yield to oncoming traffic. Before making a left-hand turn, drivers must ensure that all roads they will cross are free and clear of traffic or other obstacles that could result in a collision. This absolutely and especially includes pedestrian traffic in a crosswalk. The Toyota turned left in front of oncoming traffic, violating the right-of-way of both the pedestrians and the driver of the BMW.

If there is oncoming traffic, the driver making the left-hand turn must wait until the traffic has passed before completing the turn. Failing to do so would essentially put the left-hand turning driver at fault for a collision. If you make a left-hand turn and are in a car accident as a result, you will likely be considered responsible for the accident and deemed at fault by the law.

But, of course, we live in the very progressive and woke County of Fairfax, so surely the driver of the BMW will be persecuted and found guilty based solely on his affiliation with a group (i.e., teenage BMW drivers) instead of on his individual attributes and traits. This is the same jurisdiction where FCPS made masks a school uniform requirement to circumvent an executive order and squandered millions in legal fees to further their despotic policies in support of pointless mask wearing, TJ admissions discrimination, and misgendering nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Agree with you. Hopefully the family of driver hires good lawyers...Harvey Specter kind

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like 4Runner supporters are trying to deflect the responsibility

Agreed.

Who Is At Fault In A Left-Turn Collision?

Drivers making left-hand turns must yield to oncoming traffic. Before making a left-hand turn, drivers must ensure that all roads they will cross are free and clear of traffic or other obstacles that could result in a collision. This absolutely and especially includes pedestrian traffic in a crosswalk. The Toyota turned left in front of oncoming traffic, violating the right-of-way of both the pedestrians and the driver of the BMW.

If there is oncoming traffic, the driver making the left-hand turn must wait until the traffic has passed before completing the turn. Failing to do so would essentially put the left-hand turning driver at fault for a collision. If you make a left-hand turn and are in a car accident as a result, you will likely be considered responsible for the accident and deemed at fault by the law.

But, of course, we live in the very progressive and woke County of Fairfax, so surely the driver of the BMW will be persecuted and found guilty based solely on his affiliation with a group (i.e., teenage BMW drivers) instead of on his individual attributes and traits. This is the same jurisdiction where FCPS made masks a school uniform requirement to circumvent an executive order and squandered millions in legal fees to further their despotic policies in support of pointless mask wearing, TJ admissions discrimination, and misgendering nonsense.

I think all of you aggressive drivers out to defend your brethren get it, you just don't care. It is likely the intersection was "clear" by any logical standard, meaning the Toyota driver either did not yet have view of the BMW, or that based on a speed relatively close to the speed limit, the Toyota would have had time. Just because you're blasting down the road doesn't mean it's not your fault if someone crosses that road in a way that would have been safe if you were.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like 4Runner supporters are trying to deflect the responsibility

Agreed.

Who Is At Fault In A Left-Turn Collision?

Drivers making left-hand turns must yield to oncoming traffic. Before making a left-hand turn, drivers must ensure that all roads they will cross are free and clear of traffic or other obstacles that could result in a collision. This absolutely and especially includes pedestrian traffic in a crosswalk. The Toyota turned left in front of oncoming traffic, violating the right-of-way of both the pedestrians and the driver of the BMW.

If there is oncoming traffic, the driver making the left-hand turn must wait until the traffic has passed before completing the turn. Failing to do so would essentially put the left-hand turning driver at fault for a collision. If you make a left-hand turn and are in a car accident as a result, you will likely be considered responsible for the accident and deemed at fault by the law.

But, of course, we live in the very progressive and woke County of Fairfax, so surely the driver of the BMW will be persecuted and found guilty based solely on his affiliation with a group (i.e., teenage BMW drivers) instead of on his individual attributes and traits. This is the same jurisdiction where FCPS made masks a school uniform requirement to circumvent an executive order and squandered millions in legal fees to further their despotic policies in support of pointless mask wearing, TJ admissions discrimination, and misgendering nonsense.

His individual attributes and traits don't have a thing to do with it. The question is whether he was recklessly driving at an excessive speed which resulted in two deaths and additional serious injury. He might be a nice, smart kid, but that doesn't matter.

I get that some of you probably know and care deeply about this young man, and this must be terribly painful for everyone in his life. I am truly sorry for that. But his actions on that day have consequences. And if the other driver shares some blame, he needs to be held accountable as well.

But what we are NOT going to do is paint this driver as some kind of victim of the woke mob, or whatever it is you're trying to do. He is not the victim here. He made some bad choices with deadly consequences, the end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did he turn himself in yet?

They aren’t looking for him. Read the article. Stop with posts like this. It’s not helpful to anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree with you. Hopefully the family of driver hires good lawyers...Harvey Specter kind

of course.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Correction so that you don’t selectively quote - But police said the white BMW, which was traveling at a high rate of speed, collided with the SUV.

I agree that the ignorant envious armchair quarterback has ignored the aforementioned definitive fact.

You are welcome.

Again, thank you! Your jejune point is well taken. You are so puerile that you don’t even realize you’re inadvertently solidifying a case against the driver of the Toyota and in favor of the BMW. By a pedestrian’s vantage point, the BMW was indeed traveling at a high rate of speed: namely in the vicinity of 35 MPH. At no point in time did the Police provide evidence to prove that the BMW was driving in excess of the posted speed limit. You’re outside your cerebral depth on this one, my sophomoric friend.

Well, apparently law enforcement with actual evidence disagree with your assessment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Correction so that you don’t selectively quote - But police said the white BMW, which was traveling at a high rate of speed, collided with the SUV.

I agree that the ignorant envious armchair quarterback has ignored the aforementioned definitive fact.

You are welcome.

Again, thank you! Your jejune point is well taken. You are so puerile that you don’t even realize you’re inadvertently solidifying a case against the driver of the Toyota and in favor of the BMW. By a pedestrian’s vantage point, the BMW was indeed traveling at a high rate of speed: namely in the vicinity of 35 MPH. At no point in time did the Police provide evidence to prove that the BMW was driving in excess of the posted speed limit. You’re outside your cerebral depth on this one, my sophomoric friend.

Well, apparently law enforcement with actual evidence disagree with your assessment.

And a grand jury agreed with the evidence. Mandatory minimum of 1 year with up to 10 for each count.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like 4Runner supporters are trying to deflect the responsibility

Agreed.

Who Is At Fault In A Left-Turn Collision?

Drivers making left-hand turns must yield to oncoming traffic. Before making a left-hand turn, drivers must ensure that all roads they will cross are free and clear of traffic or other obstacles that could result in a collision. This absolutely and especially includes pedestrian traffic in a crosswalk. The Toyota turned left in front of oncoming traffic, violating the right-of-way of both the pedestrians and the driver of the BMW.

If there is oncoming traffic, the driver making the left-hand turn must wait until the traffic has passed before completing the turn. Failing to do so would essentially put the left-hand turning driver at fault for a collision. If you make a left-hand turn and are in a car accident as a result, you will likely be considered responsible for the accident and deemed at fault by the law.

But, of course, we live in the very progressive and woke County of Fairfax, so surely the driver of the BMW will be persecuted and found guilty based solely on his affiliation with a group (i.e., teenage BMW drivers) instead of on his individual attributes and traits. This is the same jurisdiction where FCPS made masks a school uniform requirement to circumvent an executive order and squandered millions in legal fees to further their despotic policies in support of pointless mask wearing, TJ admissions discrimination, and misgendering nonsense.

His individual attributes and traits don't have a thing to do with it. The question is whether he was recklessly driving at an excessive speed which resulted in two deaths and additional serious injury. He might be a nice, smart kid, but that doesn't matter.

I get that some of you probably know and care deeply about this young man, and this must be terribly painful for everyone in his life. I am truly sorry for that. But his actions on that day have consequences. And if the other driver shares some blame, he needs to be held accountable as well.

But what we are NOT going to do is paint this driver as some kind of victim of the woke mob, or whatever it is you're trying to do. He is not the victim here. He made some bad choices with deadly consequences, the end.

+1

Sad all the way around.

But the driver at least has an opportunity to turn his life around - an opportunity that was denied to the two young women.

[Anonymous]

Are the charges based on speed or toxicology report and or both?