Odiedogcx

Well it's almost been a year. I bought my bike a year ago May 10th, and wrecked it a year ago June 18th.

I got in contact with my lawyer today, and my lawsuit is looking pretty bad.

First of all, there is a witness saying a ran a red light ... and i was excessively speeding (50-60) in a 35. There is no witness or proof to counter this, and I don't remember too much cause of the head trauma, so i'm kind of screwed .. although the light isn't TOO big of an issue cause it was 300ish feet away, the speeding part could mess it up.


Here are some notes from a diagram from the (their) accident reconstructionist. These will be a little weird without a map, but you should still be able to follow it.

-481 feet from the area of impact, motorcyclist is not visible to Mrs. X due to the configuration of the roadway, the grade of 104th St E both east and west of Canyon Road.
-Calculated area where motocyclist was when Mrs. X began her turn 349 feet from impact / 5.62 seconds from impact
-Motorcyclist was 481 feet from impact when Mrs. X decided it was clear to negotiate the turn.
-Calculated area where cyclist percieved and began to react to the danger 218.8 feet from impact traveling at and estimate 60mph / 4.14 seconds from impact
-Calculated area where brakes were applied 86.8 feet from impact / 2.64 seconds from impact

Their story is .. she had stopped and waited for cars to pass, when it was clear, she negotiated her turn. She was enterting the entrance, and was nearly completely in when i ran into her truck. She says i acted negligents because i "was driving at an excessive rate of speed; failed to maintain a proper lookout; and failed to take proper evasive actions. The Plaintiff's actions are the sole cause of this collision."

My thoughts .. when i ride, I am always scanning the road ahead of me. They claim i saw the truck turn in front of me 218 feet in advance, but i didn't brake for another 140 feet? If that was the case, I would have immediately braked, and my bike takes approx. 125 feet to go 60-0. I dont know how they calculated i braked 86.8 feet from impact, as their was NO skid marks. They are claiming part of her *** with in the road and she had nearly completed her turn ... and i just road straight into the back of her truck. WTF, ya sounds like a good time .. there's nothing better then crashing straight into peoples' vechicles without trying to avoid them, especially at break neck speeds of 50-60 mph!!!

Here is what the scene looked like:


The gren circled area is where my bike came to rest. A foot or so out of the roadway. I'm not sure if i took evasive measures and tried to go to the outside and so did she, or if i fixated on it .. or if it hit and came to rest there, i'm not sure.

Well ****, I dont know where i'm going with this. I'm just pretty pissed off, and the lawyer isn't sure what will happen or if we should continue to pursue it. Turns out i did $5000 damage to her truck though.

Nishant

If there was no stop light or stop sign at that intersection and she was making the turn, its her fault. How is that not clear cut?

Was a police report taken?

Kusai.Nihonjin.Desu

They can't roughly determine the speed by the skid mark you made or the impact you made into her truck?

sup gurl

I don't think a witness can remember how fast a motorcycle was going a year ago, there is NO way that will be permissable in court unless the statement was taken close to the accident...

Best of luck man

Odiedogcx

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Nishant &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If there was no stop light or stop sign at that intersection and she was making the turn, its her fault. How is that not clear cut?

Was a police report taken?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Police report was taken, and it corroborates with her story .. of course while I was unconscious, she probably said exaclty what is on the police report. They claim that she had nearly completed her turn, and that I was speeding so fast I hit her

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Nihonjin &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">They can't roughly determine the speed by the skid mark you made or the impact you made into her truck?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Are you asking if they can, or if that's what they did? Somehow they figured out (or what the think) how fast I was going. There was no skid mark, they "calcuated" were i likely applied my brakes.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sup gurl &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't think a witness can remember how fast a motorcycle was going a year ago, there is NO way that will be permissable in court unless the statement was taken close to the accident...

Best of luck man </TD></TR></TABLE>

The statements were all taken quite a while ago, but it is still hard to determine speeds of motorcycles as they sound loud, have a low profile, and look aggressive. Thanks man

leXpression

sorry to hear this. good thing is your still alive, karma will catch up with that lady when shes on the other end of the stick. but yes, it possible to determine speed from a skid mark. taking into account the friction factor of the road, contents of the rubber tire on the bike and length. best of luck though!

Odiedogcx

Ya I know they can do it .. but I'm not sure how they calculated when I started to break and all that, considering they DIDN'T have a skid mark to base anything off of.

Thanks for the kind words.

marmaladedad

Nothing to contribute from me. Just good luck to ya.

thesilverbullet

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by marmaladeboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Nothing to contribute from me. Just good luck to ya.</TD></TR></TABLE>

+ 2 ... keep us posted as always. It's a roller coaster.

CaptainMorgan

They should ask them what color your t shirt was that day. If they can remember the speed they can sure remember your shirt color (YA RIGHT)

Nishant

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Odiedogcx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ya I know they can do it .. but I'm not sure how they calculated when I started to break and all that, considering they DIDN'T have a skid mark to base anything off of.

Thanks for the kind words.</TD></TR></TABLE>

A good lawyer can get all of the stuff you posted about distances and times dismissed easily. All it requires is a second opinion from an engineer/expert to show the info is invalid and that it is based on assumptions, not facts.

Odiedogcx

I definitely have a good lawyer, so i guess we'll see how he decides to play it out. He's a good lawyer, but he's getting worried about the case as it's all pretty one sided.

EGlovr

man that sucks. its like it went from looking very good on your part, to exactly the opposite. is there any way at all that things could turn in your favor again?

Odiedogcx

Maybe. Not too long ago, it all looked really good. My lawyer was friends with the other parties lawyer, and he was optimistic because of some other things.

It could turn around, or maybe even put partial fault on both of us. Who knows .. but either way, i was really needing the money to pay back my parents from all of it and some other things

So we'll see. Either way, i leave July 5 for the Army .. so there will definately be some things happening before then.

big pete

That sucks..... hope you get some $ you deserve.

I'm still waiting for some progress on my accident from a year ago where I crashed trying to avoid someone going the wrong way down a one way street. I need them to settle the case so I can get knee surgery

evil vapor

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Odiedogcx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I definitely have a good lawyer, so i guess we'll see how he decides to play it out. He's a good lawyer, but he's getting worried about the case as it's all pretty one sided.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Are you sure? I've had experience with lawyers that unless they are your family, or know 100% they can win a case, they'll either lollygag helping you out or say the case isn't strong enough to pursue.

Odiedogcx

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by evil vapor &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Are you sure? I've had experience with lawyers that unless they are your family, or know 100% they can win a case, they'll either lollygag helping you out or say the case isn't strong enough to pursue. </TD></TR></TABLE>

My lawyer has had some well known cases, and he got my friend a million dollars (injuries were obviously more significant) on a pretty tough case where my friend was partly in the wrong.

So i guess we'll see what happens, i have a deposition coming up and when have to look it over and make sure we still have a strong case. One thing he mentioned these days are how juries are pretty hard to convince, especially when you have the cards stacked against ya.

Pete, good luck with your endeavors. Lawsuits are just a big pain in the ***.

A little off topic, but does anyone know what happened to that guy that got hit by a CHP, and the CHP denied it? I never heard back about what happened with his case.

Anyways, ride safe guys! Don't let what happened to me, happen to you!!

The_Head

Have your injuries concerned the Army any?

RaceCity_USA

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Odiedogcx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
-481 feet from the area of impact, motorcyclist is not visible to Mrs. X due to the configuration of the roadway, the grade of 104th St E both east and west of Canyon Road.
-Calculated area where motocyclist was when Mrs. X began her turn 349 feet from impact / 5.62 seconds from impact
</TD></TR></TABLE>

349 ft. in 5.62 seconds is averaging 42.3 mph. If you were visible for 481 - 349 = 132 ft. traveling 42.3 mph, you were visible for 2.13 seconds.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Odiedogcx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
-Motorcyclist was 481 feet from impact when Mrs. X decided it was clear to negotiate the turn.
-Calculated area where cyclist percieved and began to react to the danger 218.8 feet from impact traveling at and estimate 60mph / 4.14 seconds from impact
</TD></TR></TABLE>

218.8 ft. in 4.14 seconds is averaging 36.03 mph.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Odiedogcx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
-Calculated area where brakes were applied 86.8 feet from impact / 2.64 seconds from impact
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Maybe you and your attourney can figure out some holes in their testimony. Good luck!

Odiedogcx

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by The_Head &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Have your injuries concerned the Army any?</TD></TR></TABLE>

At first I couldn't enlist .. I had to go through another surgery to get the plate and screws I had in my ankle taken out. After that, I didn't even need a waiver to get in.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RaceCity_USA &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

349 ft. in 5.62 seconds is averaging 42.3 mph. If you were visible for 481 - 349 = 132 ft. traveling 42.3 mph, you were visible for 2.13 seconds.

218.8 ft. in 4.14 seconds is averaging 36.03 mph.

Maybe you and your attourney can figure out some holes in their testimony. Good luck!</TD></TR></TABLE>

Whoa. Are your figures correct, or close to? Only reason i ask is i'm not smart enough to be able to verify them lol.

The first figure, "349 ft. in 5.62 seconds is averaging 42.3 mph. If you were visible for 481 - 349 = 132 ft. traveling 42.3 mph, you were visible for 2.13 seconds." ... i thought i understood it, then i think i misinterpreted it, and now i'm confused (i just woke up). Why did you subtract 481-349?

Sorry, I'm horrible at math and confused myself. I really appreciate the time you spent to figure those out, have a great day

evil vapor

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RaceCity_USA &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

349 ft. in 5.62 seconds is averaging 42.3 mph. If you were visible for 481 - 349 = 132 ft. traveling 42.3 mph, you were visible for 2.13 seconds.

218.8 ft. in 4.14 seconds is averaging 36.03 mph.

Maybe you and your attourney can figure out some holes in their testimony. Good luck!

</TD></TR></TABLE>

are you taking into account acceleration/deceleration? I think the original distance/times were based off of estimated witness travel speeds.

RaceCity_USA

Acceleration and deceleration were not taken into account. These are average speeds over the given distances. The truck driver has a 481 ft. sight distance. She can see 481 ft. up the road. The testimony states that you were 349 ft. up the road when she began her turn. That is a distance of 481 - 349 = 132 ft. that you were, or should have been visible to her. At an average 42.3 mph, you were visible to her for 2.13 seconds, which is a pretty long time, if she was really looking. Her testimony states that you were 5.62 seconds from hitting her when she began her turn. This also means that she was still in your way 5.62 seconds after beginning her turn. Does it take 5.6 seconds to turn left across a lane of traffic? I doubt it, unless you are going very very slowly. Hope this helps.

jagged4698

wow... race that is some pretty in depth thinking you gave this whole thing.... and it all makes a lot of sense.....

Odie- Would there be any benefit to the fact that a police report was taken only by the other party while you were unconcious? or is that somewhat irrelevant? (sp?)

Odiedogcx

There may be a benefit, but right now it's the complete opposite.

While i was laying there unable to say my side of the story .. she probably told the cop she had turned when it was safe to do so, and a crazy teenager on a black street bike flew thru the intersection at break neck speeds [60 as they say ] and crashed into her truck!!

I really need to sit down with my lawyer and talk everything out and see whats bad .. whats good. .. where we stand, etc.

thanks for the support.

ACTEG

Another question, what portion of her car was impacted? Front fender? middle? or rear fender? I know sometimes if it is the front or middle of the car they assume liability is on the car making the turn, because they are turning into traffic and most of their vehicle is in the lane. However, if only a small portion of the vehicle (ie: the rear) is in the lane then they sometimes give liability to the car going with traffic, because the person crossing has already exited most of the lane.

It says at 481 feet, the driver could not see you. At what distance is it possible for the driver to see you? It says you percieved the threat 281 feet away, but that doesn't mean that she could see you at this point. Do you know at what distance she should of been able to see you?

Like Race was saying.

She decided she was clear, when you were 481 feet away..and out of sight, but she did not begin her turn until you were 349 feet away. Even at 60mph the time to close that gap of 132ft is 1.5 seconds. What was she doing during that period of time?

From when she began her turn(she claims you were 349 ft away), even if you didn't slow down at all, she had 4 seconds to negotiate her turn and clear the lane. That seems like an offly long time(remember this is without you braking at all).

I think you should be able to use the location on the car of impact + their own testimony here to win. When you look at the numbers their story just doesn't add up.