Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You can search his name here if you want to see all the past traffic incidents.
http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/
One incident for speeding on 495 and one incident that was dismissed... Really that is it... Sorry but he was the victim.
You're looking at the wrong record:
In April 2015 at 6:45 pm, going 85 in a 55 mph zone.
Also charged with changing lanes when unsafe and reckless driving (wanton and willful disregard for safety of persons and property
In Sept. 2015, negligent driving, failure to drive vehicle on right half of roadway when required, failure to obey properly placed traffic control device, and following vehicle closer than reasonable and prudent.
In Oct. 2013, driver spinning wheels,
In Aug. 2013, negligent driving.
In June 2014, possession of marijuana.
Just to clarify, the first in your list should actually say "April 2013". The Sept. 2015 tickets were dismissed. The Aug. 2013 is the same as the April 2013 violation. He appeared in both traffic and criminal courts. So, a more accurate list would be:
In April 2013 at 6:45 pm, going 85 in a 55 mph zone.
Also charged with changing lanes when unsafe and reckless driving (wanton and willful disregard for safety of persons and property
In Sept. 2015, negligent driving, failure to drive vehicle on right half of roadway when required, failure to obey properly placed traffic control device, and following vehicle closer than reasonable and prudent. All dismissed in court.
In Oct. 2013, driver spinning wheels,
In June 2014, possession of marijuana.
How old is this person?
Reports indicate that he is 20
He is 20, driving for 4 years... 1 speeding ticket, 1 spinning wheels.
I guess you think negligent driving is not a big deal. I've been driving for nearly 30 years and have never plead guilty to negligent driving. He likely needed the lawyer to get the charges knocked down to keep his license.
Can't believe an insurance company would cover him and if they did I can't imagine it would be cheap.
You also forgot the speeding ticket in Arlington.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Even though the BMW driver has a bad record, it still does not mean that he or she was in the wrong. The simple fact is that the Volt driver did NOT have the right of way. The witnesses have said that he paused when he should have gone, and bolted out when he should have yeilded.
I drove a volt for a while. Not a fan. Sounds like the driver could have hit the gas, and the car took too long to respond.
Anonymous wrote:My daughter knows this family and is incredibly distraught.
She says that this is very much like the plot of her favorite book/movie, "If I Stay".
Anonymous wrote:Even though the BMW driver has a bad record, it still does not mean that he or she was in the wrong. The simple fact is that the Volt driver did NOT have the right of way. The witnesses have said that he paused when he should have gone, and bolted out when he should have yeilded.
Anonymous wrote:Even though the BMW driver has a bad record, it still does not mean that he or she was in the wrong. The simple fact is that the Volt driver did NOT have the right of way. The witnesses have said that he paused when he should have gone, and bolted out when he should have yeilded.
Anonymous wrote:My daughter knows this family and is incredibly distraught.
She says that this is very much like the plot of her favorite book/movie, "If I Stay".
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What do you guys make of the eye witness account listed under Washington Post Comments about this incidence. It's not really eye witness but more hearsay because it is repeated from the person behind the car stopped at intersection. It was one of the first comments made and it goes into great detail over the supposed order of events. Do you think it's real? It puts all blame on the victims.
Unless the family had a left turn arrow, and the BMW driver ran a red light, how would the family not be at fault? Without a green arrow to turn, the person crossing the intersection must always yield to oncoming traffic. No matter the speed of oncoming traffic.
I'm not a cop or a lawyer but no way can this be correct. If you're breaking traffic law (speeding, texting, whatever), and there's a crash, it's at least partly your fault.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What do you guys make of the eye witness account listed under Washington Post Comments about this incidence. It's not really eye witness but more hearsay because it is repeated from the person behind the car stopped at intersection. It was one of the first comments made and it goes into great detail over the supposed order of events. Do you think it's real? It puts all blame on the victims.
Unless the family had a left turn arrow, and the BMW driver ran a red light, how would the family not be at fault? Without a green arrow to turn, the person crossing the intersection must always yield to oncoming traffic. No matter the speed of oncoming traffic.