Deuce crash in Winston-Salem, NC, 11/2017

[Katahdin]

Prolly had gotten away with it for awhile, (fairly recent/clean paint job) or had purchased it recently and was just holding off on insuring it

The deuce driver had been charged with No Insurance, No Registration, No Plate, and No License before in 2014 and 15. I'd say he's a repeat offender.

https://bustednewspaper.com/cases-criminal-2895995-239698

 

[simp5782]

The deuce driver had been charged with No Insurance, No Registration, No Plate, and No License before in 2014 and 15. I'd say he's a repeat offender.

https://bustednewspaper.com/cases-criminal-2895995-239698

Not a repeat offender since they were all dismissed.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

[Recovry4x4]

Despite the fact that they were dismissed, they still offer weight in traffic magistrates sentencing within the sentencing guidelines. We don't know the circumstances of their dismissal. Conviction or not, it does show a pattern of non conformancy.

 

[Katahdin]

Not a repeat offender since they were all dismissed.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

From this link I infer they stuck him with speeding and driving to endanger, but dropped the lesser charges. He's probably not going to be as lucky this time since someone was killed.

https://bustednewspaper.com/cases-criminal-2895995-3211543

 

[simp5782]

Unfortunately they will just max him out on the tickets he received for the moving violations. Which is probably 5yrs suspended license like it has stopped him before from driving. They may take past history in account but they generally just take the severity of the given incident.

The DA will push for involuntary manslaughter on behalf of the family since more than likely since he didn't mean to kill anyone but his actions put him in that situation but it is still involuntary being that the other driver was at fault. But technically they look at it as though the driver of the deuce should have never been there. It might convict but would be one of those things. He only has to convince one person that he's not guilty. Second degree murder would be hard but what he did falls under an "inherently dangerous act" even though driving is dangerous by nature. his actions can be considered reckless by some knowing he didn't have insurance and all the other good things.

He will get nailed in civil court by the other drivers insurance company and family for all kinda things that will cost him more to get out of than he will ever make in 5 lifetimes.

 

[dmetalmiki]

The situation he has placed himself in does not bode thinking about. And if he has family they must be (and will be) devastated. If only this totally avoidable incident acts as a deterrent.

 

[Jericho]

All three of his infractions are traffic infractions, the crux will be was he at fault , the answer appears to be NO, State to state the laws and traffic rules differ, I would conject he will not be charged in the death, nor should he be, As much as some decry the law none of his offences rise to the level of Homicide , intentional or not, SAD. for all involved, Interesting though, Some of us work very hard to stay legal and serviceable, ie good brakes, safe operating conditions , and some choose to ignore all ! I tend to shy away from the lone wolf fly by night types , and that's why I generally tour alone . Condolences to the families , of both , it is never a one sided trauma, all will suffer

 

[TechnoWeenie]

Not a repeat offender since they were all dismissed.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

I dunno about NC, but I've seen enough cases in the few times I've had to be in court, that if you show up in court with reg/insurance/etc they usually look at it as 'lesson learned' and toss it.

If this is the case, it does nothing to discourage the behavior. They have nothing to lose, because if they get caught, THEN they go and get everything...

 

[simp5782]

State of TN and alot of others are following suit. No insurance is a misdemeanor and you go to jail. Vehicle impounded and i think registration is suspended

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

[TechnoWeenie]

Despite the fact that they were dismissed, they still offer weight in traffic magistrates sentencing within the sentencing guidelines. We don't know the circumstances of their dismissal. Conviction or not, it does show a pattern of non conformancy.

Previous tickets, especially dismissed ones, cannot, per law, be used against someone to determine fault or guilt on a current matter. This is called prejudice.

if I flip a quarter 4 times, and 3 times it comes up heads, what's the probability of the next flip being heads? If you know statistics, you'll know the answer is 50%.. The previous outcome doesn't change the fact that when you flip the coin, it's still a 50/50 chance to get heads or tails.... You can't say 'well, he got charged 3x before, so he must have done this one too'...

 

[Recovry4x4]

Previous tickets, especially dismissed ones, cannot, per law, be used against someone to determine fault or guilt on a current matter. This is called prejudice.

if I flip a quarter 4 times, and 3 times it comes up heads, what's the probability of the next flip being heads? If you know statistics, you'll know the answer is 50%.. The previous outcome doesn't change the fact that when you flip the coin, it's still a 50/50 chance to get heads or tails.... You can't say 'well, he got charged 3x before, so he must have done this one too'...

Correct, however, as I said, It can be used in sentencing. Been there, done that hundreds of times.

 

[ranchhopper]

Problem is and wont end here the car driver was at fault period I drive a semi truck and a good part of my day constitutes avoiding dumb a$$e$ who cannot leave their phone alone. They will go after the deuce driver and now that someone has died because of his own fault life for him will never be the same a good lawyer will see that every dime he makes will go to someone else. I don't feel sorry for the guy driving the deuce he shirked his responsibilities as well but he didn't cause the wreck either. We as hobby truck collectors will always be targets for some lawyer trolling for business for mishaps like this I own two restored mack trucks I use to do parades I'm even leary of letting people ride in the cargo bed I have on the one for fear of being sued for their own stupidity when they fall or god forbid a kid falls through the gap between the troop seat bench seat and back rest and falls onto the road. Eventually the cost of liability insurance will force me to sell my trucks as law suits get more and more frequent and that's the cost of people who wont take responsibility for their own stupidity or ignorance or both but the ongoing thing now days is SOMEBODYS GOT TO PAY a sad testament of the times our kids will be forced to sit in the house and play video games for their own protection.

 

[cucvmule]

Very SAD and Very Unfortunate. A roll of the dice and both lose.

Free Travel is a Right. Traveling in a motor vehicle on a motorway is a PRIVALIDGE.

"If" and I mean if the man had been cited before for motoring the vehicle on a public thoroughfare then by current statutes he has committed an offence. Although as intended he may have been on a joyride, the man I assume was just having some harmless fun, and by "worlds colliding" another person, while he may not had seen a big, heavy, truck while commuting, has died for not being attentive to what he was doing.

The unrestrained child, well again now a current statute, now for a good reason to save a young persons life who maybe can not choose for him, herself.

As a young kid I used to ride in all vehicles where ever I chose. The 1960s I rode in rear windshields, back of pickups, trailers of all types, cling on and hang on fire trucks. Now that was fun, Dangerous.

So I would, could not judge anybody for what they may have or had done in the past. But now I do TRY to take the necessary precautions to minimize any potential hazard. Do I still do stupid hold my beer stuff.........Not on the roadway.

 

[russojap]

When I was going home on my first night time drive in the deuce out in the county with no street lights, I pulled into the turn lane to go left into a gas station. Then a couple of guys came barreling down the road in front of me and also moved into the turn lane. I was still rolling at a good clip and laid on the horn, which thankfully I had got working with a new switch from Saturn.

You should have seen those guys swerve out of the turn lane! I realized then how hard these vehicles can be to see at night with the anti reflective paint, plus the headlights are rather high and narrow ,unlike most vehicles usually seen. You definitely wouldn't think such a massive vehicle was the source of the headlights. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not blaming the deuce, those guys were probably drunk or crazy the way they were driving.


I'm sure all of you have identified a vehicle by it's headlights before, not that it's an excuse to pull in front of somebody, but I think deuce headlights might be unusual enough that they don't register in the brain correctly. That's why I put those dileneators on the back of the M1009, without them it's invisible at night with those weak taillights. I stopped driving it altogether because I'm afraid somebody will destroy it. I only carry liability on it and I'm certain even if the other driver was at fault the insurance wouldn't pay enough to replace it.

Bottom line, be extra careful at night is my advice.