Posted on 06/17/2006 8:24:49 PM PDT by BlueOneGolf
This is not a reposting of a specific Pittsburgh Tribune-Review article though parts of it and another article will be quoted here and links provided to the originals.
By now most of you know the details of Steelers Quarterback Ben Roethlisberger's motorcycle accident on Monday June 12 2006. However there are some crucial facts about this incident that have been buried in the media's coverage. The bulk of the reporting has dealt with Roethlisberger's decision to (legally, mind you) not wear a helmet while operating his motorcycle. And there has been plenty of mention of his choice of bikes, the Suzuki Hayabusa which is puportedly the fastest motorcycle in the world. You've also read many variations of the phrase "his collision with a car" or "when he struck the car". And I'm certain you've seen the analysis of NFL players' contract stipulations against engaging in so-called "risky" activities. These points are all valid and certainly can and should be discussed. But for all the media blitz about this, one key point is missing...
The motorist who committed a Right-of-Way Violation by turning into Roethlisberger's path and causing the accident.
Oh, the horrors!! "She's a 62 year old woman. Have pity!" I'll surely hear some of you say. But let's delve deep here. To quote a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review article written by Jill King Greenwood on June 13th titled 7-hour Roethlisberger surgery called success , Ms. Greenwood wrote:
"Martha Fleishman, 62, of Squirrel Hill, was driving the car west on Second Avenue and turning left onto the 10th Street Bridge when Roethlisberger's Suzuki Hayabusa, which was heading east on Second Avenue, struck the car. A witness said Roethlisberger didn't appear to be speeding in the 35 mph zone, and Fleishman had slowed to make the turn. Both drivers had a green light, the witness said."
Well not exactly.
According to this PDF Graphic, as Roethlisberger was travelling Eastbound on Second Avenue with the standard green light, Mrs. Fleishman was Westbound with a green light and a sign on her side of the roadway instructing drivers: "Left turn yield on green" (emphasis mine).
Here's another graphic:
The media reports would lead one to believe that Roethlisberger was the one at fault but by all accounts he was riding in a legally prescribed fashion and only struck Mrs. Fleishman's vehicle after she made the decision, for whatever reason to turn left into oncoming traffic. This is clearly what's called a Right-of-Way Violation or ROWV and she should, at the very least be charged with "Failure To Yield Right of Way". There were no charges filed at the time and the police have stated it will take a few weeks to reconstruct the accident scene so there's always the possibility of charges being filed later.
On the subject of charges it should be noted that Roethlisberger does not have a Motorcycle Operator endorsement on his driver's license and was riding on an expired motorcycle learner's permit. Certainly he'll be charged with that but what about Mrs. Fleishman? Some might justify her ROWV as the old "Pittsburgh Left" which is described in this Pittsburgh Tribune-Review article 'Pittsburgh Left' seen by many as a local right written by Mike Wereschagin.
An excerpt:
"They put it so simply. "Drivers turning left must yield to oncoming vehicles going straight ahead," the Pennsylvania Driver's Manual states. Yet the infamous "Pittsburgh Left" remains. The Pittsburgh Left, a bit of local color as unique to the region as a prothonotary or a Primanti's sandwich - and just as baffling to outsiders - is the name given to that vehicular tic that compels Pittsburgh drivers to rocket through left turns heedless of oncoming traffic.
According to the purest definition of this nationally known colloquialism, Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger's wreck Monday likely doesn't qualify. At least one drivers' safety advocate, however, hopes it will prompt people to pay a little more respect to the rules of the road.
"The No. 1 cause of accidents at intersections is people who don't know how to yield," said Gerry Mancini, owner of the Kennedy School of Driving in Coraopolis and a driving instructor for more than 30 years. "Then there are people who demand the right of way."
The Pittsburgh Left is a bit of both. Here's how it goes:
Two lines of cars in opposite lanes on the same road wait at a red light. The lead car in one lane has its left turn signal blinking. The lead car in the opposite lane is going straight. The light turns green and the driver who wants to turn left cuts across the opposing lane of traffic. The driver of the opposing lead car either waits patiently, slams on his brakes or plows into the first car.
In Roethlisberger's crash, witnesses said the car he hit was turning after the lighted arrow giving it the right of way had disappeared. It could take several weeks for police to reconstruct the wreck.
My guess is that no charges will be filed against Mrs. Fleishman and that's the shame in this whole matter. I've heard the argument that this was just an accident and her insurance will take care of Roethlisberger's damages. And I would be inclined to agree if she had somehow lost control of her vehicle due to treacherous road conditions but that was not the case here. At some point after the green arrow switched off she made the decision to turn into oncoming traffic and caused someone to hit her vehicle. She may claim she "just didn't see him". Yet in many States' drivers manuals it's written in so many words that motorists are responsible for observing the traffic conditions around them and to make decisions based on those conditions. As the one making the intrusion into oncoming traffic it was incumbent on her to determine that the opposite roadway was clear before acting. Obviously she did not and proceeded with her turn causing Roethlisberger (who was travelling at a normal rate of speed and otherwise obeying all traffic laws at the time) to strike her vehicle.
Sadly, there are literally dozens of cases just like this across the nation each year in which drivers seriously injure or kill motorcyclists, then get off with little more than a slap on the wrist. Tragedies like these have prompted the American Motorcyclist Association to establish the Justice For All Campaign, which focuses on inadequate sentencing of drivers who seriously injure or kill others on the road. This campaign seeks to get three measures passed in all 50 states. These measures will:
* Impose fines and driver's license suspensions on drivers who commit traffic offenses that injure or kill others.
* Increase penalties, including jail time, for those who commit manslaughter with a motor vehicle.
* Get motorcyclist/bicyclist/pedestrian-awareness instruction included in each state's driver-education program.
I know this was a long vanity and it might get pulled or shifted to someplace else here on FR, but I thank you for taking the time to read it. The most dangerous time for riders is at intersections and most vehicle vs. motorcycle accidents are caused by left-turning drivers committing ROWV from the left front of motorcyclists. In closing I'd like to ask each of you to just please take a couple of extra seconds at intersections to slow down and look twice before making a turn. The life you save might be a fellow FReeper.
Ride Safe. Ride FRee
Fire up the PING lists on this one guys! Thanks.
Look! A grassy knoll!
Maybe there won't be charges, but I'll bet her insurance and not Roethlisberger's will be paying for all that expensive hospital care.
I've heard that 'The Fly' Roethlisberger is involved in a sport with mandatory helmet use. If a Dallas Cowboy takes his head off, can we chalk it up to a 'Right-of-Way Violation'?
Dear Mrs. Fleishman,
It worked like buttuh!
Although we really enjoyed Ben when he was here at Oxford tossing for the RedHawks(Skins), he has become a bit of a pain the last 2 years.
Thank you so much for suggesting to us the Pittsburgh Left.
Being a conservative town, we don't have much to do with the left, but this time around, the liberal road might be the road to the Super Bowl.
Get the popcorn ready. Heat up the Buttuh!
Sincerely,
Carson Palmer
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RZluAhQXfVw&search=motorcycle%20crash
Kinda like this one?
I think this is a pretty interesting post and I thank the author for going to the trouble to write it.
Unfortunately, I doubt that the lady's insurance will be sufficient to pay for the surgery. I haven't looked at my policy lately but I would think this surgery is likely to be in the six figure plus range and few liability policies have limits that high.
As a practical matter, I'm sure Ben's medical insurance is going to pay for this and then they will subrogate the claim (i.e. try to collect from the lady's insurance).
He was certainly not lacking for top-flight medical care. Unfortunately the motorcyclists among us are highly unlikely to be that lucky if they get in a similar accident.
D
I was ironed out and pretty seriously injured in 1981 by a driver turning left in front of me (we both had greens). While the good folks from a nearby house were getting me untangled from the crushed beer can my Harley FXS had become, the idiot was standing by yelling at me that "four-wheelers always have the right-of-way over two-wheelers."
He didn't shut up until the responding LEO informed him that I was an ex-cop, now a prosecuting attorney, and might already have some passing familiarity with the traffic laws...
I hope you're still riding. I'm going to get a copy of my state driver's manual and read what it says about being mindful of your surroundings and rights-of way etc.
You know I burn my high beam, wear a bright yellow armor jacket and a yellow graphic helmet and people STILL act like they don't see me. What's next...get that bright safety-lime green riding jacket from Aerostich? Sheesh...
Ride like everyone's out to kill you.
I do.
Please forgive my use of the PGR list -- I just wanted to aloert you to BlueOneGolf's new Motorcycle Rights pinglist, in case you are interested!
B1G -- will you add me? Thanks!!
WILCO. Articles will primarily come from the AMA if that's okay with you.
Works for me. We're big time into dirt biking too, so I am interested in both off road and street stuff!! (she types as she watches her tivo'd Super Motard race!)
I try to do that inside a car - and, on some days, barely make it...
(Were you that perp doing 55 in a 35?)
I will be, real soon, now! On April 18, 2008, we'll be taking delivery on a new Harley (or a used one, if I find one I like better than the new ones) -- on our youngest's 18th birthday. We've been saving (the first $4K came from the guy's sizeable liability insurance payoff on the wreck), and we're ready!
Our first child was born not long after the wreck. I'd "done everything right," but was still nearly killed in a wreck I couldn't have avoided, so Mrs. U. and I agreed to wait on the new bike until we'd raised our children.
My FXS (a "1978 1/2" before I replaced the fixed-jet carb) had the "always on" headlight, but the yo-yo that hit me was looking me in the eye and giving me the finger as he pulled in front of me. He even wrote a nasty letter to the newspaper later that year when I was elected to office, saying that "xxxx County's entire criminal justice system prostituted itself" over his FYROW ticket (two jury trials, he lost them both), because I was "an inner circler," whatever that is.
A couple guys came down from Cleveland to watch the Browns play the Steelers. They came to a sign and it said, "Pittsburgh Left." So they turned around and went home.
The problem here is that you have worked backwards to justify a pre-determined outcome. Although the driver did violate the right of way (in the scariest type of motorcycle accident - YIKES!) it only reinforces the need to wear a helmet. Nobody is saying that the accident was caused because he didn't wear a helmet. Just that the injuries sustained would probably have been less severe if he had been wearing a helmet.
The problem here is that you have worked backwards to justify a pre-determined outcome.
Not at all. He mentioned the lack of a helmet and other issues at the outset, and said, "These points are all valid and certainly can and should be discussed."
He then went on to highlight one issue -- the cause of the accident -- in detail. That shouldn't be a "problem." He didn't diminish the other factors at all, and affirmed elsewhere on the thread that he always wears a full-face helmet.
Good on you for emphasizing helmets, though; they're important, too. Roethlisberger's probably would have made a big difference. Mine neither helped nor hurt in my accident, and was stolen at the scene even before I was put in the ambulance. I don't ride without one.
Yeah, the lack of a helmet should be discussed. But even if he had been wearing a helmet and proper riding gear, the twit would STILL have turned left in front of him, and there would still be an accident.
The difference is the rider may not have had to pay so high a price for the cagers stupidity/blindness.
I am opposed to mandatory helmet laws, but i will be darned if i will ride without a good helmet (currently an Arai RX7 Corsair) and the right gear.
Take the cagers license away for oh...five years for a first offense, and permanantly on the second.
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.