Anybody jogging that close to traffic with their back to traffic is partly responsible for something like that. The idea of a homicide charge in a case like that is ludicrous.
The word "homicide" just means somebody died. The charge, "negligent homicide" is like manslaughter. FWIW, Florida law has a statutory entry of "excusable homicide," defining a homicide that is not a crime.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but what charge do you think would not be ludicrous?
Yes, that was perhaps dumb of him, but she was on a cellphone. Her car drifted across the line and struck him. How is it not negligent homicide?
I agree the jogger is partly responsible, but driving on a cellphone can be as bad as driving drunk. Until they get serious about dealing with this (as they did with DWI), these “accidents” will increase.
Pedestrians should ALWAYS travel FACING traffic. Whether I am walking or riding a motorcycle, I always assume everyone behind the wheel is trying to kill me.
I don’t get from the article that the man’s back was to traffic; a jogger facing traffic could get just as killed if a car up to speed just veers in front of him within 5 to 10 feet. Such a jogger might not be able to jump away in time.
According to other articles, she’s being charged as a juvenile. The max penalty is $1,000 and/or six months in jail. Since this is the first person she’s killed, she’ll probably get a fine along with a stern warning if she kills two more people, she’s in big trouble.
> Anybody jogging that close to traffic with their back to traffic is partly responsible for something like that. The idea of a homicide charge in a case like that is ludicrous.
This is the NANNIE STATE.
It is our job to ruin the lives of the young. /s
I didn’t see where it said he had his back to traffic. I certainly would not jog on a busy thoroughfare, I’d find a back road or go to a park. In Massachusetts cell phone use by teen drivers is illegal, and with good reason. Teens lack experience and judgment, in case you didn’t already know that.
There's nothing in the article that indicates he was jogging with his back to the traffic.......you're just making a blind guess in an effort to help blame the victim.
I don’t know about other states but in Connecticut roadways other than interstates are considered pedestrian ways meaning pedestrians have a right to use them and drivers are expected to control their vehicles.
Not saying it’s wise to run in traffic but the law is on the pedestrians side especially if, as it is indicated in the story, the jogger was on his side if the white line.
Trusting your life to the concept that drivers will stay on the road is a bit nuts, but losing control of a perfectly good car and killing someone due to negligence of the responsibility of piloting said car is in fact a crime. Most folks who lose control and hit the shoulder are most fortunate that they don't impact someone or something. Many of us will slow down and even stop to prevent getting too close to a pedestrian or biker because we value the other person's life even if they don't value their own life. Perhaps it's just old age talking, but life is precious and I try to ensure I don't endanger or take it due to "minor distractions".
There are court decisions that have held a can be a dangerous weapon. Being such the driver has an added burden of using it with care. I don’t think using a cell phone while driving meets the standard required. Don’t make the victim a defendant. The young lady deserves time in prison to grow up and learn to respect the rights of those around her.