Venus Williams accident, I don't understand the legality of this

[bcla]

I don't think from that video there that one can determine whether the other car was already rolling and in the process of turning left in front of her when she stopped or not. It wasn't completely in front of her that much is clear. But that doesn't mean it was stationary and he wasn't trying to bluff her out of her right of way as so often happens these days. I don't think it obvious whether this was a chicken situation and she flinched or whether she just stopped and let them through. It really doesn't appear to me however, that she was stopped long enough that he wasn't already in motion. I was trained in California. And there they taught me in a chicken situation, to give up the right of way even though it's yours if someone insists on coming.
Further, after the left turn in front of her, I really can't make out from the video whether she can still see the light from her vantage point or not. In any case, it would be legal for her to continue through having entered on the green.
The car that hit her looked to be timing a light and came through maybe a second or so after that other light turned green. In my driver's training in California, I was taught you don't do that either for this very reason. I doubt they even saw Venus beyond that line of cars before it was too late.

Absolutely. I was always taught to drive defensively and to not challenge a driver who may not stop. It's just not worth the chance that they won't stop.

I've been stuck in an intersection before and fortunately drivers from cross-traffic were paying attention. Once I was trying to run quickly across an intersection with my kid. I slipped and we both fell. There were no serious injuries (I had scrapes) but we were stuck there for a few seconds trying to peel ourselves off the ground while all the drivers on all sides of the intersection waited even though they had green lights in two directions. That's always what I was taught to do when there's a vehicle or pedestrian remaining in the intersection even if the light turns green. If it was Linda Barson driving the same way, we probably would have been run over.

Here's a diagram that sort of sets the scene:

I won't link the article because the website itself has some interesting links to articles that may not be appropriate for DIS. 1 (yellow) is the path of Venus Williams's Sequoia. 2 (purple) is the path of the Altima that turned in front of her. 3 is Linda Barson's Accent.

 

[bcla]

I think that Venus' insurance company will settle but for significantly less than they would have last week.

If anything they'll just pay to make it go away. Sure they could win in court, but the legal costs would outweigh the settlement costs as long as it's the replacement cost of the car and maybe hospital/funeral bills.

However, there's the chance that the Barsons' attorney is going after the deep pockets of Williams. I'm not sure how that works if they're suing for more than the insurance coverage. If they even tried, I'd think they know that with this video and the law they have zero chance in court. She's going way too fast and Williams had every right to complete her way through the intersection.

I did notice something odd about the original collision report - especially the narrative. In it, the reporting officer claims that Williams said that she was turning left (says going westbound on Northlake). However, the video clearly shows her going straight. Usually two cars making left turns from opposite directions can safely do so simultaneously. Most of that narrative can be tossed now that the video is available. It was also reported that the police had it but the Barsons' attorney was trying to get it from the police, or alternatively were requesting it from the Steeplechase (gated community) board. It was ultimately released publicly by the police, but I suppose they wanted to look at it carefully before making a public statement.

 

[bcla]

Sounds like we have an employee of a shyster law firm posting.

I could imagine someone so passionate about his position that he'd come on a message board he's never posted to, sign up, and try to make an argument. There's nobody buying his arguments though. It's kind of hard to defend that given what most people have learned in drivers ed, what the video shows, and what the law says.

The other thing that surprised me about this case was how modest a vehicle Venus Williams was driving. Over the years tennis stars have been known for driving flashy cars, but she's driving something most of us can relate to.

 

[indimom]

BACK UP? Over three lanes of traffic into the intersection and someone thinks Venus' best option is to back up??
That's such a dangerous suggestion, I can't even give it a laughing emoji.

 

[roger howard]

BACK UP? Over three lanes of traffic into the intersection and someone thinks Venus' best option is to back up??
That's such a dangerous suggestion, I can't even give it a laughing emoji.

Her back wheels were ten feet (OR LESS) into the intersection. The light turned red before she starting across the final time. The only safe and sane thing to do was back up.

 

[mom2rtk]

She didn't have to pause. Once she did the light turned red. She continued to drive through a red light instead of simply backing up. It is simple and factual that Venus Williams did something stupid and crazy.

Are you involved in this case somehow? You're really coming across as too invested in this.

You know it doesn't matter what any of us thinks, right?

 

[RedAngie]

Venus Williams declined to sign an autograph for somebody 10 years ago, probably with good reason.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

This morning, I was driving to work. I had to stop at the intersection right before my building for a read light. My light turned green, but then two women started crossing the intersection on foot. After my light was green. Their walk signal (there was an actual walk signal, and a button to activate it) was clearly red and I had a green light.

If I started to drive and hit them, are they at fault? I mean, I see them right in front of me, even though they aren't supposed to be there. Even if they are legally at fault, I hit them on purpose.

 

[CarolAnn856]

So, out of curosity, I plugged "roger howard's" second post into Google, and sure enough, someone (different user name) posted the exact same thing on another board last night, for which it looks like he received a temporary ban.

This person is either just stirring the pot for his own amusement or is one of those crazy conspiracy theorists who believes he is smarter than the all police, all lawyers, and, of course, all of us.

 

[bcla]

I guess following the law is crazy, the driver who hit her is the crazy one, she failed to do what was legally required, which was the ensure the intersection was clear before entering.

The driver should be cited and her insurance should pay for Williams vehicle.

As a simple matter, usually a citation won't be issued unless an officer witnesses a violation firsthand. Heck, I made a mistake right in front of a cop and he took the collision report right there. I didn't get cited. The strange thing was right as he was finishing up, traffic getting around us included one driver clipping another car right in front of the cop. He motioned them to just pull over ahead and he'd get to them.

 

[bcla]

So, out of curosity, I plugged "roger howard's" second post into Google, and sure enough, someone (different user name) posted the exact same thing on another board last night, for which it looks like he received a temporary ban.

This person is either just stirring the pot for his own amusement or is one of those crazy conspiracy theorists who believes he is smarter than the all police, all lawyers, and, of course, all of us.

I got curious. More than one. Including all the same formatting, so it looks like the BBCode and all was cut and pasted. This is the only forum where it's continued though.

 

[bcla]

I got curious. More than one. Including all the same formatting, so it looks like the BBCode and all was cut and pasted. This is the only forum where it's continued though.

Had another look and it did continue. A few of the comments were recycled verbatim.

 

[robinb]

This morning, I was driving to work. I had to stop at the intersection right before my building for a read light. My light turned green, but then two women started crossing the intersection on foot. After my light was green. Their walk signal (there was an actual walk signal, and a button to activate it) was clearly red and I had a green light.

If I started to drive and hit them, are they at fault? I mean, I see them right in front of me, even though they aren't supposed to be there. Even if they are legally at fault, I hit them on purpose.

I don't know what would happen if you actually stopped and then hit them, but according to @roger howard, you would only be 20% at fault if you were timing the light to blow through it at full speed the instant it turned green and plowed into them.

 

[robinb]

So, out of curosity, I plugged "roger howard's" second post into Google, and sure enough, someone (different user name) posted the exact same thing on another board last night, for which it looks like he received a temporary ban.

This person is either just stirring the pot for his own amusement or is one of those crazy conspiracy theorists who believes he is smarter than the all police, all lawyers, and, of course, all of us.

Thanks! I was going to do the same thing. Interesting enough his posts on the same subject are the only ones on that board too.

Maybe he's been hired by the Barsons' attorney to probe the gaming and Disney communities to see if their lame arguments are going to fly in court .

 

[bcla]

Thanks! I was going to do the same thing. Interesting enough his posts on the same subject are the only ones on that board too.

Maybe he's been hired by the Barsons' attorney to probe the gaming and Disney communities to see if their lame arguments are going to fly in court .

Depends on which one. Registration goes back to 2014.

 

[robinb]

Depends on which one. Registration goes back to 2014.

You're right. I missed a post from 2014 when "George" posted once on a JFK Conspiracy theory thread.