In an update to this July 2010 story, as the City of Tempe prepares to turn off its photo-enforcement effective July 19, 2011, police mention that those very photos were instrumental in capturing the suspect, Cody Davis, who fled the scene. See Police: Photo enforcement’s impact goes well beyond traffic infractions from the EVtrib.
UPDATE: Police arrest suspect 7/17/2010 [abc15] “Tempe police say Cody Ryan Davis has been charged with leaving the scene of a fatal accident in the death of Bradley Jason Scott, 32, who was struck and killed at Southern Avenue and Rural Road around midnight last Saturday. Police say video shows Scott was legally riding a bicycle with the flow of traffic at the time he was struck and killed… police say he made admissions related to the incident”
Over on the TBAG blog, the question was raised about lights. I am *guessing* that since police went out of their way to say things like “Police say video shows Scott was LEGALLY riding a bicycle… “, that the cyclist had a light.
There was also some discussion of motorized bikes in general; for a lot of minutia about motorized bicycles; see this entry. The short answer is that the motorized bicycle law wasn’t really thought through, and has a bunch of holes and gray areas.
Police are seeking the driver who killed a motorized bicyclist around 11:45pm Saturday, July 10, 2010.
The cyclist was killed as he rode eastbound on Southern Avenue near the intersection of Rural Road. The vehicle was described as newer model gold or champagne-colored Ford Taurus or Mercury Sable.
Police released traffic camera footage in the hopes that will lead to locating the driver, you can view the footage at [fox10news][abc15]. The driver made a bad left and really plowed into the cyclist who was proceeding straight ahead.
For more about left-cross crashes and motorcyclists, see cyclist-killed-in-carefree which discusses the NHTSA report Fatal Two-Vehicle Motorcycle Crashes.
The Criminal Case
Maricopa County Superior Court. CR2010137585 / case minutes.
The plea to a reduced charge business apparently refers to his being charged with an F2, versus pleading to an F3 (one step less serious felony). The former refers to “causing” the collision –which is the way the incident is described by police versus not causing the collision.
The sentencing minute is 4/27/2011; as is usual, “sentence suspended — probation granted” and 3 year probation plus 12 month incarceration in jail with work furlough, all beginning that same day. There is a subsequent flurry of activity in Oct-December 2011 about probation violation hearings and ultimately it looks like he admitted a violation (of work furlough?) but it seems like there were no negative consequences; probation was completed 4/9/2014. (at the time, the driver license revocation was ??? nowadays it’s 5/10 years revocation).
There’s a newer marijuana possession case Feb 2015 came up after his probation on the hit-and-run was completed, not sure why it’s in Superior Court? CR2015118264 / case minutes. He received 12 months unsupervised probation.
There’s a traffic ticket CT2014203658000 in Kyrene Justice Court from 11/22/2014, indicating he apparently had a valid license at that moment; the outcome was failure to appear, and ordering his license suspended.