🚀 go-pugleaf

On 16/11/11 9:16 AM, Jef Poskanzer wrote:
> On Aug 12, 11:37 pm, jcdill<jcdill.li...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> If the accident had been motorist running a red light, the motorist
>> would have been arrested and charged, rather than interviewed and
>> released.
>
> Well it took a while but: charged.
>
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/11/16/BAVR1LVK2F.DTL

I heard the DA discuss this case on the radio yesterday.  He said that 
they only got the Medical Examiner's report on the cause of death a few 
days ago.  They had to wait for the ME's report before they could charge 
the bicyclist.  This is because it was possible that the cause of death 
was not directly due to the accident - e.g. if the woman had a 
pre-existing condition that actually caused her death - and it was 
coincidental rather than cause-and-effect that she died after being hit 
by the bicycle.  (Remotely possible, but possible, so the DA needs the 
ME's report to avoid charging someone improperly.)  On TV we see the ME 
staying up all night to write up a report, in real life it often takes 
months.

Another interesting fact here - running a red light is a criminal 
offense, if you kill someone when running a red light (even when riding 
on a bike) then it's a crime even though you had no intent of hurting 
someone.

I was driving north on Embarcadero about a week after this incident, 
stopped at a red light, and a bike sped past me on the right and ran the 
light - within a few blocks (if not at the same actual intersection) of 
where this incident happened.  Clearly there are a lot of bicyclists who 
haven't realized how dangerous this type of behavior can be.

jc