Skip to comments.Witness haunted by tragic bike accident [Further to story of woman suing dead boy's family]
Posted on 04/27/2014 5:22:00 PM PDT by rickmichaels
Original story here
INNISFIL - A woman who held Brandon Majewskis hand in his last dying seconds after he was struck and killed by an SUV says she will never forget that night.
Its not a memory I will ever forget, said Melanie Lachance, 36, a school teacher who works in Vaughan.
Brandon, 17, and his two friends were out riding their bikes on the dark stretch of Innisfil Beach Rd. after 1 a.m Oct. 28, 2012. Brandons friend was seriously injured while another sustained only scratches. Police say they were riding side-by-side on the road.
Lachance remembers pulling over and seeing the red glint of bicycle reflectors from the busted bicycles in the ditch. She spotted one boy moaning in the ditch and her husband rushed to him. Another boy was panicked but unharmed, she said.
Then she spotted Brandon, laying in the middle of the road.
He was right in the line of oncoming traffic I held his hand, but there was nothing I could do, Lachance said. He took some gasping breaths. It hits you even harder later on.
She says she recalls the drivers husband suddenly appeared frantic at the side of the road and asked her their location so he could call police. She told him and he walked back to his wifes vehicle.
Then he was gone, Lachance said. I never saw him again.
Alone, she attempted CPR but someone else with more expertise arrived and took over.
One thing continues to trouble her, she said, is why she and other witnesses were forced to remain at the scene for hours, until 5:30 a.m., as police conducted their investigation, while the driver of the vehicle and her husband were allowed to go home.
That never sat right with us, Lachance said. It was very troubling we always wondered why.
The lawyer representing Brandons family who is now being sued by the driver is also looking for answers.
Some things about the case arent making sense right now, says Barrie lawyer Brian Cameron. We are looking for answers so this family can find some peace.
Brandons family remains confounded over why the woman who struck and killed him believes she is the one who should be financially compensated for killing their son.
Brandons estate, and his two friends, are all being sued by the driver, Sharlene Simon, formerly of Innisfil, for $1.35 million for emotional trauma she says she has suffered.
Even more confusing Cameron said, is the fact that the womans husband, Jules Simon, a York Regional Police officer, is also suing for $100,000 for damages and expenses incurred because of his wifes suffering.
According to the police report and court documents, Jules Simon was following his wife in another vehicle the night of tragedy. But Cameron doesnt know why he was following her, or where they were coming from.
These are questions Im hoping I can find answers to, Cameron said.
The police report also states alcohol is not suspected and that Simon admitted to driving at 90 km/h in an 80 km/h zone. No charges were ever laid.
The point is this family is suffering and no amount of money can bring Brandon back, Cameron said. But shedding some light on these questions will help bring closure for this family.
Not saying that this is a brilliant legal strategy, but what’s not too prominent in the article is this is not a stand-alone suit, but a counter-claim in the negligence suit brought against the woman who hit the kids on their bikes. In the hope, I gather, of increased leverage so as to lessen the amount that the woman would pay in a possible settlement.
Also, why was this woman and her husband (a cop) allowed to leave the scene right away? Were they covering up a DUI?
That's what I got out of this article as well. I'm sorry for the kid but, this kind of reckless behavior by bikeists goes on all the time. I'm surprised there aren't more fatalities than there are.
I believe that the riding of bicycles on major thoroughfares after dark should be prohibited.
There is no way to compensate for the bizarre actions of cyclists in such situations.
There is the old saying that nothing good happens after midnight.
I thought I would get in before the “They were riding bicycles so they deserved what they got” posts showed up, but I see I am already too late.
Common law recognizes a ‘right of way’. On this topic all the Constitution-loving, common-law-referencing he-men get amnesia and demand government action to get the inconvenient out of the way.
“...this is not a stand-alone suit, but a counter-claim in the negligence suit brought against the woman who hit the kids on their bikes.”
Thanks for that detail which hasn’t made it through the “buzz” of the headline on this.
Still, it’s pretty loathsome and no, it makes no sense that the driver(s) were allowed to leave while witnesses were detained.
In 1997, a drunk woman’s little dog got tangled up under her brake pedal and she ran over and killed one of my best biker friends.
She successfully sued his family for her ‘mental anguish’.
“Even more confusing Cameron said, is the fact that the womans husband, Jules Simon, a York Regional Police officer, is also suing for $100,000 for damages and expenses incurred because of his wifes suffering.”
This I do believe is lawyer code for “Not getting any sex.”.
how is that even possible?
I read the story and thought, ‘there must be some important relevant details missing here. You just explained it. Sleazy reporting here.
BTW, where the husband and wife were going is not relevant.
Where does it say in the article that the woman (who hit the kid) is being sued by his family?
They were riding bicycles so they deserved what they got
Where do you live that cyclists ride in the rain after midnight “all the time”?
cops let the cop and his wife go...
then the cops say “riding side by side”... cops are not witnesses.. there were no witnesses other than those involved. so the cops take the cop’S wife’s story.. BAD ODOR WAFTING FROM THIS STORY....
the husband and wife left the scene..cops covering for a cop’s wife. she hit 3, and killed one of them.. now that’s a FACT.
The lawyers will get rich.
I have *no* idea how.
She totally beggared the guy’s widow who wound up losing her home.
Ironically, I ended up with nasty PTSD, having watched it all, even though I can’t consciously remember it.
[but when I sleep....]
Maybe I should’ve sued her and the widower of the *other* biker the woman hit, too.
It’s a twisted world.
But if he was wearing a helmet, you know, he wouldn’t have been killed./sarc
Poorly written article, BTW. I felt like the story changed 3 times here.
“According to the statement of claim, the lawsuit seeks $1.35 million in damages for the “great pain and suffering” Simon has endured since the incident. Simon’s suit is a countersuit to one levelled against her by Majewski’s family.”
1:30 in the morning? No lights on the bikes? Sorry, the kids should be inbed at 1:30.
The kid's dead...the driver's "traumatized".Unless the kid did something so stupid that the driver couldn't reasonably be expected to have avoided him I say the driver pays *and* does time.And that she does *additional* time for filing a fraudulent lawsuit.
Reread my post and look at what I highlighted in bold.
This is a counter to a suit from the boys parents (or a counterclaim inside the original suit) , the bike the kid is pictured with in the original article has a gasoline engine attached and is likely capable of 35-50mph , has no front brake (rear not visible) and likely only a rear coaster brake on the rear wheel , and NO LIGHTS or reflectors visible from the front and likely not much visible from the rear .. at high speed you can bet he was not on the side of the road ... I’m calling it as I see it ,, stupid kid doing stupid kid stuff ,, the woman who hit him might have been slightly to blame but this is mostly on the kid(s).
Well put. I bet we see some comments to confirm your (and my) beliefs.
How very sad. That IS twisted. I would hate to be her when her judgement day comes.
Oh yeah,he said his arm still hurt a month later.
We wrote him back and said NO to the car, sorry about the arm and our son was still dead.
The really crazy thing is that I gave her my dog’s leash that I had in my car because her little dog that got tangled in her brakes was running loose at the accident scene.
Never said thanks.
Never gave it back.
It was as if she viewed us all as pesky trash who owed her for denting her van.
It’s been 17 years and I can remember every bit of it like it was 10 minutes ago...except for the actual impacts.
The guy was a young Mexican who worked as a yardman,I suspect an illegal. For years I hated Mexico and everyone from there but I eventually got over that with God’s help.
Because her husband was a cop; next question!
Some people just have black hearts.
Wrong country on the legal rights link , this story is from Canada.
Canada, eh? Okay ... Seems they rescinded the two abreast prohibition long ago -
But also according to Canada law, they should have had lights on their bikes in order to ride after dark.
...cyclists may ride two up only if they are not impeding traffic. Three statesMassachusetts, New York and Virginiaspecifically require cyclists to roll single file when being overtaken by a passing vehicle.
Makes my point. Bikeists are for the most part irresponsible and act like the roads are for bikes with autos being the trespassers. They ride two, three even four abreast and dare autos to pass. The only bikeists for whom I have even the slightest respect are the ones who ride single file at the side of the road and yield the right of way to autos.
No ... cyclists for the most part obey the laws. Yes, there are some that don’t and they give the rest of us a bad name. But for the most part ...at least around my neck of the woods ... we obey the traffic laws.
His bike had a gasoline engine also ,, is it a bike or a motorcycle?
I’ve seen those things. Modern day mopeds? They’re weird whatever they are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.