How long does it take a truck to stop & is it criminal if he doesn't?

Page 2 of 7  
On 7/12/2014 2:27 PM, deadrat wrote:

--
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/12/2014 2:05 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:

That sounds scary as hell.

I love driving in Italy. I've driven most of it but the coastal roads are a lot of fun.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/12/14 3:08 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Tell us more. How about the DMZ between Italy and Austria?
Ever drive with guiding ropes strung on the side of the hill? What the locals would call funi di guida infilate sul fianco della collina.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tony Hwang wrote:

None of which matters because the brakes worked. "witnesses saw smoke coming from the brakes"
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tony Hwang wrote:

Wrong. The driver said he had too much speed and weight to stop in the available distance. That doesn't mean he was speeding.
What it means is that for the amount of room he did have the truck couldn't have been stopped.
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/13/2014 6:58 PM, Steve W. wrote:

That is called "Too fast for conditions" Driver is required to be in control at all times.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

So if you are driving along at 55 mph, come around a curve and discover that the road is blocked in 50 feet for whatever reason. You were driving "too fast for conditions" ?
ALL drivers are required to be in control, regardless of vehicle. Still have thousands of accidents every day. That will change when the "fully autonomous vehicles" are on the road... (SURE it will, just like the computer made paperwork obsolete)
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/14/2014 11:27 PM, Steve W. wrote:

Ah, yes, pretty much the case.
The following, taken from the web promo of an attorney, details the law in Illinois. Many may not agree with it, but it's the law and the way it works in Illinois and most other states. This is a very basic concept in traffic law.
I apologize for the length but given the way this thread has run on forever, it's not that bad.<g>
Failure to Reduce Speed to Avoid an Accident (625 ILCS 5/11-601(a)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Driving Too Fast for Conditions (625 ILCS 5/11-601(a)
If you are ticketed for Failure to Reduce Speed to Avoid an Accident or Driving Too Fast for Conditions, you may need legal representation. Both offenses are petty offenses punishable by a fine of up to $1000. Convictions for these offenses could have serious consequences for both your driver’s license and your insurance.
Failure to Reduce Speed to Avoid an Accident is the most common ticket issued when a traffic accident has occurred. Usually, they are issued by a police officer who arrives on the scene of the accident after it has already occurred and then makes a determination of fault with in minutes of arrival. Very seldom are traffic accidents actually witnessed by a police officer. Sometimes, an officer will, in addition to speaking with the people involved in the accident, talk to other witnesses who were not involved in the accident, but saw it occur. However, this is not always the case, and often the officer will not obtain information that identifies who these third party witnesses are so they may be called to testify in court.
To prove a charge of failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident the State must prove: 1. That you were driving a vehicle on a public highway; 2. That you collided with a person or a vehicle on that highway, and; 3. That you did so in violation of your duty to use “due care”. With the most typical failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident ticket, the first two requirements are usually easy for the State to establish. It is the third requirement that is the most difficult. Was the accident unavoidable? Was the other party to the accident the person who was not exercising due care? Were there road conditions or unusual obstacles that caused the accident? Were there equipment issues with your vehicle that caused the accident? The duty of due care is a nebulous concept, and an experienced traffic attorney can use this subjective standard to your advantage.
Driving Too Fast for Conditions is a less common violation than failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident and is often issued in the case of a one vehicle accident in which a car slides off the road due to snow, ice, rain, fog, road surface or other environmental condition. It is not limited to this situation, however. Just like a failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident ticket, these are seldom witnessed by a police officer. In fact, there are often no other witnesses to the accident other than the driver who went off the road. The officer just sees the accident, looks at the road conditions, and concludes that the driver was going to fast, and that is why he/she went off the road.
To prove a charge of driving too fast for conditions the State must prove: 1. That you were driving a vehicle on a public highway; 2. That you did so at a speed that was greater than what was “reasonable and proper” when accounting for highway conditions such as traffic, weather, and road surface, or: 3. you endangered the safety of any person or property. Much like the “due care” standard, “reasonable and proper” is a broad definition that can vary widely depending on the subjective opinion of the officer issuing the ticket. In many ways, it is even more subjective, and, therefore, even more difficult for the State to prove. A traffic attorney with years of experience can ensure that the State meets their burden to prove every element of the ticket against you beyond a reasonable doubt.
For both offenses, the fact that you did not exceed the posted speed limit at the time of the accident is generally not a valid defense. This is a very common misconception about accident tickets. Not exceeding the speed limit can be a factor to be explored when cross examining the state’s witnesses about whether or not you used “due care” or were traveling at a speed that was “reasonable and proper”, but this is a very complex argument to make, and is best accomplished by an attorney with the experience to ask the right questions.
Both tickets are also eligible for Court Supervision, which is sometimes referred to as earned dismissal. This means that as long as certain requirements are followed (usually a payment of fines and no tickets for 3 to 6 months after the term of supervision begins) the ticket will not be placed on your driving record as conviction by the Secretary of State, and will not place any points against your license. A common misconception about Court Supervision is that the record of the ticket just “goes away”. It does not mean that the record of the ticket disappears entirely, it can still be seen by law enforcement and the court system, but it is not accessible to other parties. Even if you don’t want to challenge the ticket in court by making the State prove all the elements against you, an attorney can negotiate a disposition of Court Supervision with the prosecutor, and, in some counties, do so without you ever having to go to court. This can be very advantageous to those with busy schedules.
Below is the precise statute published in the Illinois Compiled Statutes.
(625 ILCS 5/11-601) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-601)
Sec. 11-601. General speed restrictions.
(a) No vehicle may be driven upon any highway of this State at a speed which is greater than is reasonable and proper with regard to traffic conditions and the use of the highway, or endangers the safety of any person or property. The fact that the speed of a vehicle does not exceed the applicable maximum speed limit does not relieve the driver from the duty to decrease speed when approaching and crossing an intersection, approaching and going around a curve, when approaching a hill crest, when traveling upon any narrow or winding roadway, or when special hazard exists with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather or highway conditions. Speed must be decreased as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person or vehicle on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care.
(Source: P.A. 97-202, eff. 1-1-12; 98-511, eff. 1-1-14.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 7:41:00 AM UTC-4, Unquestionably Confused wrote:

And the law aside, it's pretty dumb to be driving so fast that your stopping distance is greater than your visibility. Do people still do it? Sure. But I can't believe someone doesn't understand that it is indeed driving too safe for the conditions. If you come around a limited visibility turn so fast that you can't stop if there is a disabled vehicle there, then yeah, it's your fault.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/15/2014 12:27 AM, Steve W. wrote:

Yes. Recently a driver on the highway near me wrecked his car trying to avoid a deer. Car was totaled, driver sustained some injury and was cited for "too fast for conditions"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 7:52:07 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Now that sounds not only dumb, but unlikely to prevail in court. unless there were witnesses. I can easily see a car totalled trying to avoid a deer on a highway.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/16/2014 10:41 AM, trader_4 wrote:

From what I hear on the local news, it is very common in one car accidents to cite the driver with a too fast ticket. I imagine they often prevail or they'd not be doing it.
I also wonder what the real story is. There are a lot of deer caused accidents, but when a drunk goes off the road he may also use the "avoiding a deer" story.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/16/14, 11:17 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I believe the lawyer industry and the insurance industry influence police policy. If a cop issues a ticket, either the insurance company can raise his rates or a lawyer is going to charge to get it dismissed.
A man arranged to ride to and from a company Christmas party with a friend who didn't drink. On the way home, the friend stopped at a convenience store. He turned the motor off but left the key in the ignition so the passenger could listen to the radio.
A cop stopped at the convenience store, gave the passenger a breathalyzer, and arrested him for DUI. Clearly, he had not been driving, and the owner was the driver. The law was written so that if a person alone in a car had the keys and had been drinking, that was DUI, even parked on private property.
The ticket meant the victim had to pay a lawyer $1,000 to get it dismissed because his higher insurance premiums would have been much more.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Friday, July 11, 2014 1:25:56 PM UTC-7, deadrat wrote:

<snip>

Sorta. The scene is a crime scene until the investigation is completed.
Harry K
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ann Marie Brest wrote:

No way to tell how long it would take without much better data. Weight of the trailers, how many axles, condition of the pavement, condition of the vehicle, speed, angle of momentum (straight travel, curved) angle of the roadway and much more.
Even then you would come up with the best possible braking distance assuming nothing interfered.
The figure most drivers are told is that a fully loaded twin screw tractor trailer (80,000 pounds) with one two axle trailer, on level dry pavement at 55 mph takes approximately 100 yards (one football field) to stop under ideal conditions.
From the video and the articles it looks like he came around a slight curve downhill and cars were slowing/stopping in front of him. It looks like he had a single screw tractor and pulling two trailers. Couldn't tell how many axles total. It looks like he got on the brakes as soon as he could, then the trailers started to jackknife and slide down the pavement. Once that happens the driver has no control over the outcome. It strictly becomes a physics question then.
The drivers quotes will likely come back to haunt him because there will be people looking to sue or like you assign the blame solely to the driver.
What was basically said was he had too much speed for the weight he was carrying to stop in the distance that was left when he saw the cars slowing/stopped.
However they are the same things you would say if you came around a curve and found a deer standing in the road. "It was too close and I couldn't slow down enough to avoid hitting it"
The police will investigate and probably agree with the drivers statement. BUT it will then be up to them to determine if the driver actually is at fault.
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ann Marie:
Stopping distance is a function of many variables, so there isn't going to be a simple answer to your question. It depends primarily on how fast the truck was going when the driver applied the brakes, how hard he stepped on the brake pedal, how much the weight of the sand added to the momentum the truck, and so on.
But, any driver is obligated to provide sufficient distance between his car and the car ahead of him so that he can stop in time to avoid an accident. If the car in front slams on his breaks to avoid hitting a dog that runs out on the road, the driver behind has provide enough room between him and the car in front to prevent to stop before hitting that car.
I believe an analagous argument could be made for the truck in your case. The driver of the truck has to limit his speed so as to be able to stop at stop signs, red lights or traffic hazards even if there's a steep grade in the road.
If the truck can't stop on a steep grade so as to avoid hitting another car, then you can at least call it careless driving. But, if the reason for the trucks inability to stop is because he was going too fast to begin with, then that's negligence. And, if the truck was going too fast to begin with because the driver was drunk, then now we have a criminal case. If anyone was hurt because of the drunken driver's inability to stop the truck, then you should be talking to a lawyer right now.
--
nestork

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Friday, July 11, 2014 5:17:00 PM UTC-4, nestork wrote:

You can have a criminal case without the driver being drunk. It's largely at the discretion of the prosecutor. For example, just a few weeks ago, comedian Tracy Morgan was seriously injured in a crash on the turnpike here, with another occupant killed. Traffic had slowed for construction and a truck driver apparently fell asleep and did not stop, hitting their shuttle van from behind.
Another case was in the news related to all the GM cars that had been recalled. Some woman in I think TX has been in jail for years, convicted of killing her friend who was a passenger, by driving off the road into a tree. She hadn't been drinking, no drugs, etc. Now they found out that the car was one of the GMs recalled for the steering wheel defect.
A lot of this just depends on the prosecutor and your luck.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

and if some nitwit in a puddle jumper pulled in front of the truck which was previously keeping a safe distance to the traffic in front of him, all bets are off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pico Rico:
Where I'm from a puddle jumper = an amphibious 6-12 passenger prop plane.
In what context are you using the term?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 12:33:01 -0700, Ann Marie Brest wrote:

You ask, is it criminal? Of course it is. The driver will most likely be charged with manslaughter of some degree. He can forget about driving trucks now.
You ask, how long does it take to stop a truck? Too many factors to say for that situation. From a personal experience, hauling a single trailer, I was going down a similar hill on an interstate. At the bottom, the road turns left. I noticed the traffic had stooped and hit the brakes. I stopped within inches of the rear car. That was well over 500 feet easily.
The driver said he knew what to do and turned his rig right and aimed for the guard rail. Actually, that's a bad move, for long arm doubles. As that sets up one hell of a whip lash reaction.
For those who may not know, the driver's inexperience shows. Knowing there is a long steep grade, the first thing you do is back off the pedal and begin down shifting. There is one hill on an interstate where I will go down in a lower gear. About midway, I will stop and park it for a few minutes.
On I-17 in Arizona, I will go through the mountains at 45mph downhill.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.