Prescott road-rager found guilty

In an incident where a car driver was driving waaaay too close to cyclist Paul Katan. Katan is a certified cycling instructor and works for Prescott Alternative Transportation.

[dailyCourier]

“…a jury convicted the Jaguar driver, Jack Ingebritson, 64, of misdemeanor (criminal) charges of endangerment and reckless driving. On Tuesday, Prescott City Magistrate Arthur Markham fined Ingebritson $1,500, ordered him to perform 32 hours of community service and go to traffic survival school.”

Inquiring minds wonder: how is it that the trial was in some unspecified June date, and the story just made it to the newspaper on July 14,2010? I tried to look up the court records for the rager, but didn’t find anything (Prescott muni, and justice are not online there).

There was a follow up editoral a few days after the news story.

Did the punishment fit the crime? Were the charges appropriate?

The convicted rager “… admitted that he was five to six inches from the bike, according to the police report.” While Ingebritson was clearly guilty of endangerment, and reckless driving, it seems to me that his actions were an assault; he intentionally placed his weapon a few inches from the victim.

Here is a roundup of Arizona’s assault and endangerment statutes.

The news article refers to “endangerment”; if they are referring to 28-1201 a violation of which is a class 1 misdemeanor, I have to wonder about the magistrate’s judgment — a small fine and a few hours of community service for such a (potentially) dangerous crime?

I’m thinking/wondering if a more appropriate charge would have been assault, and potentially aggravated assault.  “Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim” [legal-dictionary]. Note that the act does NOT need to result in any actual contact, or any actual physical harm, just creating the apprehension is enough. The guilty man intended to drive very close to the cyclist, it was not accidental.

On the other hand, violation of 28-1203(A)1 is also a class 1 misdemeanor (the same as endangerment, seems a little odd?). To be guilty of aggravated assault, 28-1204, a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument would have had to been used in committing the assault. Personally, I find that multi-ton, multi hundreds of horsepower automobiles can be dangerous instruments. Anyway, aggravated would bump up the crime to some level of felony.

The other charge which the defendant was found guilty of was reckless driving. That would be 28-693, and is a class  2 misdemeanor. Nothing was mentioned regarding the driver’s license of the culprit. Which leads me to believe the magistrate was letting him off too easy.  “In addition, the judge may require the surrender … of any driver license of the convicted person…  and may order the driving privileges of the person to be suspended for a period of not more than ninety days”. Why no revocation, or suspension?

Hold the horn

Horn honkers take note, hold off on blowing that horn, it’s generally illegal.

§28-954.  Horns and warning devices

B. If reasonably necessary to ensure the safe operation of a motor vehicle, the driver shall give an audible warning with the driver’s horn but shall not otherwise use the horn when on a highway.

…

They Drive among Us

Story and pic from the Ahwatukee Foothill News. Note that this turn the driver inexplicably failed to execute has an enormous radius. I note that police are unsure if any of this is illegal, how about “failure to control”? :

Car lands on Lakewood fountain, Doug Murphy, 2010-04-12

A crash Saturday afternoon stopped traffic when a crane was brought in to remove the vehicle off the fountain at the entrance to the Lakewood area…. Read the rest of this entry »

Arizona sees surge in DUIs tied to medicine

Arizona sees surge in DUIs tied to medicine; AZ Republic, 4/08/2010.The gist of the article is that there is better detection; resulting in more DUI’s for non-alcohol.

One wonders how this ties into crashes involving injuries and death. Is blood routinely drawn, even when the driver passes field sobriety tests, as was the case of the dump truck driver who killed 4 motorcyclists recently?

Apparently blood was drawn from the driver who killed Allen Johnson — the investigation of which dragged on for 5 months culminating in a traffic ticket. Conversely, presumably no blood was drawn from the driver who killed Jerome Featherman. That case wrapped up with a couple of traffic tickets more-or-less immediately. Both cases were handled by the Pima County Sheriff’s Office, and in both cases impairment was not suspected. Was the driver who killed Featherman under any influence of prescription drugs? We’ll never know for sure.

It seems to me that blood should be drawn in any serious injury crash, and most certainly in EVERY crash involving a fatality. What are the rules?

Another problem is what to do with the results; The 21 year-old driver who killed Lance Adams (walking on the SIDEWALK, for cryin’ out loud!) was never charged despite Ambien (sleeping pill) , Darvon (a narcotic pain reliever),  plus some marijuana in his blood. In that case, police recommended charges but the prosecutor wouldn’t bring any. Setting the marijuana aside; the warning for both these medicines has warnings not to drive (as do many, many medicines).

Background Info on drug impairment

Ambien / Zolpidem

Zolpidem (sold under the brand name Ambien) is a short-acting nonbenzodiazepine hypnotic with quick onset, and short (2 – 2.6hrs) half-life. It is well known that it can cause driving impairment, particularly when not taken as directed.

In hunting around for quantitative info on Ambien impairment, I ran across work from WSLH, the Wisconsin State Laboratory for Hygiene. Within their perview is the Medical Toxicology Section which performs alcohol and drug analysis for law enforcement agencies in support of Wisconsin law enforcement. Zolpidem Impaired Drivers in Wisconsin A Six Year Retrospective, William R. Johnson, et al. [.ppt of presentation][view online]

A white paper from the IECP :  Zolpidem and Driving – A Dangerous Mix [.pdf][view online] has some useful summaries.

Some interesting info on voluntary vs. involuntary acts with respect to drug DUI from this CA defense attorney firm.

Here are two published papers, with PubMed link (and also, click on either and check out the “related”):

• J Forensic Sci. 2001 Jan;46(1):105-10. Zolpidem and driving impairment. Logan BK, Couper FJ.
• WMJ. 2003;102(6):79-83. Forensic Toxicology Program: alcohol and drug testing in Wisconsin drivers. Harding P, Liddicoat LJ. [full .pdf article]

Ambien/zolpidem prescribing info – warnings (emphasis added): “Patients should be cautioned against engaging in hazardous occupations requiring complete mental alertness or motor coordination such as operating machinery or driving a motor vehicle after ingesting the drug, including potential impairment of the performance of such activities that may occur the day following ingestion of Ambien”

Horrific Crash kills 4 Motorcyclists

The driver of a heavy commercial dump truck piled into a group of motorcyclists who were stopped at a red light; reportedly he was distracted.

Phoenix Public Safety Manager Jack Harris described the scene “I have never seen such a horrific accident involving so many motorcycles,”

The crash 3/25/2010 at Carefree Highway and 27th way, Phoenix, initially killed 3, a fourth died a few days later. Several were seriously injured, including a Phoenix Fire Captain in critical condition.

Today the Arizona Republic is reporting in a 3/25/2010 story that the driver has a string of infractions, many of which sound like technical/equipment-related, and several of them were dismissed. However, the driver has an outstanding citation for failure to control about two weeks ago in Scottsdale, related to an (apparently minor) collision. These cases pop up on a search of the Arizona Supreme Court case lookup. But strangely, the reporter seems to be unaware of additional actions in Maricopa Justice Court, including one just dated just a couple of days before the huge crash. (search on Michael Jakscht)

The investigation is still ongoing, but with no hints of impairment the likely outcome, barring a surprise, will be a traffic ticket and no criminal charges.

The Surprise

Driver in fatal Phoenix motorcycle crash booked on 4 manslaughter counts, 4/06/2010 & Bond for driver in fatal motorcycle crash set at $1 million, 4/07/2010, AZ Republic.

Phoenix police arrested Jakscht on suspicion of driving under the influence of methamphetamine. He was booked on four counts of manslaughter, five counts of aggravated assault and seven counts of endangerment. Apparently the suspect’s circumstances forced a quick arrest, and resulted in a relatively large bond.

The former article had lots of interesting snippets about how or why this investigation proceeded amazingly quickly. It has been only about two weeks since the crash (emphasis added):

Toxicology results take up to six weeks in most criminal investigations, according to police. Jakscht’s blood sample, which police drew after he passed field sobriety tests, was made a priority.

“In this case, to get the result, so he doesn’t drive more or drive impaired, it was the department’s decision to make it a priority,” Phoenix police Sgt. Trent Crump said.

…The Carefree Highway wreck came two weeks after Jakscht was cited by Scottsdale police for failing to control his speed to avoid a collision at Shea Boulevard and Hayden Road. The police accident report detailed how Jakscht, driving a pickup truck in his name, struck a stopped vehicle.

…

Christmas Eve ’07 crash trial, verdict: guilty

This has been a long and arduous journey legal journey.  The human and societal costs are staggering.

For starters, one victim, a motorist, dead. A number of injured motorists. The suspect, locked up since the crash on December 24, 2007.

Christopher Lee Smith, 32 years old, stands accused of DUI and manslaughter in a wrong-way, head-on collision on Pecos Road near 14th Street in Phoenix, AZ.

According to the Ahwatukee Foothills news story; “At the time of the crash, Smith was on probation for a previous misdemeanor DUI…”

Superior Court case number CR2008-102616 or search on supremecourt.az.gov

The “Sleep Driving” defense?

The so-called “sleep driving” defense may be employed, see e.g. this minute entry “Defense expert witness re sleep driving is discussed”

Trial delayed again due to a death in one of the victim’s family. The AFN is reporting (Oct 30, 2009? but i can’t find online) that the defendant has rejected a plea deal (no details given) and trial is scheduled for February 2010. The defendant remains incarcerated.

The Trial and Guilty Verdict

Trial coverage. Verdict, guilty. 2nd Degree Murder, and 3x aggravated assault.

Sleep driving. Sleep driving? SLEEP DRIVING!? What will the defense lawyers think of next? Does this ever really work? “…But defense attorney Charles Shell told the same jury that the tragedy was not his client’s fault because Smith was driving in his sleep and was unaware of what he was doing”, “An expert witness hired by the defense, Dr. Dave Gaither of Illinois, testified that if Smith had gone to sleep first, then he was probably sleep driving and unaware of what he was doing.” Hmm, what kind of doctor? apparently not a physician.

Sentencing

Wrong-way Christmas Eve driver sentenced to 23.5 years in prison. The print edition, which strangely varied from the online version, and was much longer.

“he asked for the minimum 16 years, base upon the fact that Smith was on probation at the time for endangerment stemming from a Tempe incident where he reused to pull over of a police officer, then drove toward the officer requiring him to jump out of the way and later attempted to flee on foot…” “smith also had an extensive juvenile court record and a previous DUI”. “In sentencing Smith, Myers gave him 16 years for the second-degree murder of Vo, and 7.5 years for each of the three aggravated assaults…Myers ordered that the murder time be served first and that the three aggravated  assault terms could run concurrently. Smith plans to appeal the jury’s verdict”. [court minute entry on sentencing]

Stop Sign Compliance

In conjunction with the “Bikes Safe at Stop Sign” bill recently introduced in the Arizona legislature, I began to wonder more generally about stop signs in general (all traffic, not just bicycles). Read the rest of this entry »

Nevada High Court Says Pharmacies Can’t Be Sued for Death

This story about who can and can’t be sued in the case of wrongful death is interesting to those who follow such matters; Nevada High Court Says Pharmacies Can’t Be Sued for Death, WSJ 12/26/2009.

I was more interested in a habitual prescription drug abuser who killed this guy and served a whopping 9-months. 9-months!  She killed one guy and seriously injured another according to the article.

“…Ms. Copening was driving a Dodge Durango when she hit two delivery men who were standing on the shoulder of a highway, killing one and severely injuring the other. In Ms. Copening’s car, police found prescription bottles and loose pills. Police reports said she appeared confused, and a blood test detected the painkiller hydrocodone. Ms. Copening pleaded guilty to two counts of reckless driving and served nine months in jail”

Driver cited in death of baby in stroller

There was a particularly horrifying crash in September  where a 7-month old baby was killed instantly while being pushed in a stroller ON THE SIDEWALK passing in front of a private driveway. The infant’s mother and brother escaped serious harm by leaping out of the way. Phoenix police announced almost immediately (My, that was a fast investigation! the crash occurred 9/14/2009, the media reported that outcome 9/16/2009) that there would be no criminal charges recommended. “Police said, Macias (the driver) did not see Clayda Lozoya, 27, walking down the sidewalk with her 4-year-old and 7-month-old children in a stroller. The SUV ran over the stroller and killed the baby instantly” [kpho]. “The investigation reveals Ms. Macias may have looked left before entering Northern Avenue to go east and not see the family approaching from the east,” Holmes’ news release indicated. ” [abc15]

In any event, the Arizona Republic reports (I guess the final police report?) in a Valley and State brief (not online? see below), that the driver was cited for two traffic infractions: failure to yield, and too-dark window tints. In the report, police (strangely) fault the mother of the victim for walking in front of the vehicle without making “eye contact” with the driver — now, remember police have also said the driver’s windows were illegally dark. hmmm. And remember, the victim was on a sidewalk, passing in front of a private driveway. It sounds to me like the Phoenix Police have invented a new duty — now it is the victim’s duty to ensure eye contact has been made, before making any sort of movement, regardless of right-of-way (the pedestrian has complete right-of-way at a driveway)? This is nonsense. This report is sounding like a tort lawyer. And, with all due respect to tort lawyers, is this really the sort of thing that should be in a police report? In my opinion, police reports should stick to application of THE LAW. Such “creative” interpretations in police reports frequently cause problems for cyclists.

On the other hand, the Police’s press release (reproduced below) was quite strong, admonishing drivers to look both ways — but of course, talk is cheap.

In case there is any confusion about what a driver is supposed to do at a driveway:  §28-856 “The driver shall… Yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian as necessary to avoid collision”. (nothing about “eye contact” here).

For the curious, the window tinting statute is  §28-959.01. I get the impression that this is one of those laws that generally only ever gets invoked after-the-fact.

The driver is, understandably, devastated over the incident. But from a punishment perspective, if the driver pleads or if found responsible for these infractions, she is facing a few hundred dollars in fines, and a couple of points on her license.

As noted above, police almost immediately dismissed any notion of criminal charges (e.g. Negligent Homicide). There is another far less serious law which makes it a crime (albeit a very minor crime) to kill a pedestrian, but it only applies when in a crosswalk. This seems to be yet another shortcoming of 28-672 see Crime and Punishment.

Driver in fatal crash was cited

The Arizona Republic, Dec 11, 2009, p. B2

PHOENIX — A woman whose SUV rolled over and crushed a 7-month-old boy outside a school in September was cited for two misdemeanor [ed's note: this is incorrect -- these infractions are strictly civil] traffic citations, records show.

Leticia Macias, 41, received the citations for failure to yield and for having improperly tinted windows on her 2007 GMC Yukon the day she struck and killed the baby at a busy parking lot at Westwind Middle School Academy near 20th and Northern Avenues.

The baby’s mother “never made eye contact with the driver prior to walking in front of the the vehicle” of the baby as she prepared to pull onto Northern Avenue on Sept. 16 after dropping her own child at school, according to a police report release this week. (ed’s note: there’s something wrong with the wording, e.g. “of the baby” makes no sense, and “as she prepared” obviously must mean the driver, who isn’t “the baby’s mother”).

A Phoenix police spokesman said Macias was never criminally charged. The baby’s mother, Clayda Lozoya, 26, was pushing the stroller and walking with her 3-year-old son at the time of the accident. The baby, Roman Mata, was pronounced dead at the scene as parents and children arrived at the campus around 8 a.m.

Infant in stroller killed by SUV leaving school parking lot

Information Provided by the Police Department

officers at scene in front of a school Tragedy struck at a private school near 19th Avenue and Northern this morning when a 7-month-old infant was struck and killed by an SUV. The infant, a boy, was being pushed in a stroller by his mother who was also walking with her 4-year-old son.

An SUV being driven by a 41-year-old woman who had just dropped off her child was pulling out of the Westwind Preparatory Academy parking lot and struck the stroller. The infant’s mother and brother were able to get out of the way, but were taken to a nearby hospital to be checked. The driver of the SUV remained at the scene; police were investigating and it was not known if she would face charges. “This is one of the calls you never get used to,” said Phoenix Fire Captain Hugh Chase. “We all have kids.”

PIO James Holmes at scenePhoenix police Public Information Officer James Holmes stated from the scene, “It is imperative that motor vehicle operators remember they are required to yield to not only vehicular traffic when exiting a private drive, but pedestrian traffic as well. Way too often a driver who intends to make a right turn will look left to ensure the way is clear, but not right. This endangers all pedestrian traffic which may be approaching from the right. We have to be careful.”

Motorist Doctor Convicted on all counts

In a highly unusual incident, Physician Christopher Thomas Thompson was convicted on all charges in a Los Angeles court, including multiple felonies of intentionally causing a crash that seriously injured two bicyclist.

The story received, understandably, an enourmous amount of press, both in the industry and in the mass-media. Velonews ran extensive articles, as did the LA Times. It’s of course also been widely covered in the blogosphere but it is so unusual; I just had to write about it.

“Thompson was convicted of six felonies: two counts each of assault with a deadly weapon and battery with serious bodily injury as well as reckless driving causing specified injury and mayhem. He was also convicted of misdemeanor reckless driving.”

Somehow, this only tallies to a theoretical maximum of 10 years, which as the story points out, he is unlikely to receive.

Sentencing is Dec 3. (later delayed until Jan 18 according to velonews). I’d hate to see the taxpayers be saddled with the cost of a lengthy prison sentence; I would prefer to see him on house arrest with no possibility of ever driving again.

He apparently has completely ruined his own life: his lawyer in requesting that he be let out until sentencing, but the prosecutor objected saying  “he no longer lives or works in Los Angeles and was likely to lose his medical license soon”.

Sentancing

He got 5 years in prison. Something about facing a max of 8 years. see velonews here and here. I was glad to hear about the lifetime driver’s license revocation; this guy is obviously a dangerous kook when he gets behind the wheel. This revocation leaves me wondering what the deal is with judge’s discretion in sentancing.

“After sentencing Thompson to five years in California state prison, Millington issued a lifetime revocation of the defendant’s drivers license and ordered him to pay restitution to the victims as well.”

more funny things that defense lawyers say: “Thompson claimed that he had merely come to a stop in order to take a photograph of the riders as part of his effort to document what he believed to be a violation of local traffic rules. Thompson’s lawyer had argued that the cyclists were belligerent and may have fallen because of the inherent instability of bicycles”

Prior Bad Acts

Pelkey “the Explainer” had a very enlightening column about the rules of evidence involving admissability of  so-called “prior bad acts”, federal rule 404(B), and so forth.

The Aftermath

In a bit of encouraging news, the LA Times reports In a first, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck vows to better protect cyclists, train officers on biker rights.