Negligent Homicide
 

I wonder how Mr. Moir will make out on this one?
http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...855/-1/CITIZEN

After I read this article I can not think of a more difficult job as the one Mr. Moir has. Maybe he can be featured on the show "Worlds Dirtiest jobs!".

another
 

Which will air right after his appearance on "World's Highest Paying Jobs"

Now this is where I feel this country is out of control..... Now I understood the Blizzard trial... there was presumption of alcohol, and poor judgment etc. etc.

In this case, this was an accident, unless proven other wise at 10:30 in the morning.... there is no mention of alcohol. Only bad weather conditions which as we all know can change in an instant and go from bad to worse. With speeds that where probably no more then what is consistently exercised on that stretch of road.

What is my point here. Well it is this, we need to stop always needing to point the finger and blame at someone. Accidents happen, occasionally people die as a result. In the end what this all comes down to is that some lawyer is waiting in the wings to file a wrongful death lawsuit and make some money. Mostly for himself but he will give some to the grieving family at well. But of course before he can attempt to do that he has to be able to prove that there was negligent behavior.

Wrong this is all Wrong and stinks of Rotten Eggs......

So which "theory" is it ? Was Mr. Thompson not keeping a proper lookout, or was he speeding ? Seems like the state is throwing pasta against the wall here to see if it sticks ! I've read a little bit about this case. There was no alcohol involved, and from what I can tell Mr. Thompson is a responsible businessman & airline pilot. Heavy rain & fog......seems like an accident to me unless the state has some facts, and not some "theory".

In any case following the Blizzard trial I don't envy Mr. Thompson. With the public outraged over her sentence the courts might be looking to make an example of someone.

LIforrelaxin - I totally agree with you!!! I may add that with the number of lawyers in our country there is no way to curb the waste of money in non-productive litigation and legislation that we endure. There is one lawyer for every 265 people.

When needed a good lawyer is worth their weight.

The number of lawyers in the US is more than 1.1 million while the number of physicians is listed as 730 thousand.

Among the Top 8 "lawyerly countries" listed below, the US has about 50% of the lawyers, with 37 percent of the population of this group.


US: Lawyers: 1,143,358 Pop: 303MM P/L:265
Brazil: Lawyers: 571,360 Pop: 186MM P/L: 326
New Zealand: Lawyers: 10,523 Pop: 4MM P/L 391
Spain Lawyers:114,143 Pop: 45MM P/L:395
Italy Lawyers:121,380 Pop: 59MM P/L:488
UK Lawyers:151,043 Pop: 61MM P/L401
Germany Lawyers:138,679 Pop: 82MM P/L: 593
France Lawyers:45,686 Pop: 64MM P/L: 1,403

This is like deja vu all over again. :rolleye1:

As my daughter always tells me......"Everybody hates lawyers.......unless they're helping you"

Not really enough facts to form an opinion yet. Two cars heading southbound on an interstate, in heavy rain, some fog. One car hit another, presumably from behind? No other facts from there on.

You would think the state has enough evidence of negligence else why bring this individual to trial ? The state police recostruction team must have figured out at what speed Mr. Thompson was traveling, and perhaps there are witnesses to what happened. The state has not released much information, so it's difficult to form much of an opinion.

If you hit another car from behind, then it's your fault, unless it's night time and the 1st car was driving with no lights, or some extenuating circumstance like that. The speed limit was 65-mph, CONDITIONS PERMITTING, and rain & fog call for a slowdown in speed. Rain due to less traction, and fog due to less visibility. Slowing down 10-mph to 55-mph would have been much safer and the responsible thing to do.

Huh?
 

Seriously, is there really language in the NH Motor Vehicle statutes that mandates "A proper lookout"?

From the Laconia Citizen article:

manslauter
 

I recall another recent local case were a man crashed his motorcycle and alcohole was involved. His fiancee/passenger eventualy died from the injuries, he was also in intensive care for months.
He got 7-15 years
The law should be the law that the rest of us live bye

There was no alcohol involved with the Thompson accident, if that's what you are getting at ? If not, my mistake.

Ligatious society
 

The reason why other countries are doing better than us. We spend to much time sueing each other. Japan and Germany has more Engineers than they have lawyers. They can build better cars!

Lee Iaccoca predited this decades ago. He may be an Engineer and businessman, but he sure knows what the heck is going on far better than all the politicians and Lawyers.

Depends, I got rear ended at a stop light by an off duty cop. Somehow, I was 50% to blame and it went on my record and jacked up my premium. :(

Well, somehow, I think part of the story is missing here.

IM,I guess BAL of .15 means no alcohol involved.

I see the problem.......I was talking about Mr. Thompson, not the biker in that post. I thought that poster was saying Mr. Thompson might have been drinking.

Sounds like a no-fault state where everyone involved is to blame, unlike NH.

"Bad driving not always criminal"
 

I came across the following NH article - it's a pertinent and interesting read.

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/...-criminal.html

As much as I do NOT sympathize with this attorney's two clients, they do have a right to both council (even competent council) and a fair trial. With all the corruption in our legal system, this can be harder to get right than one thinks. A good lawyer can help curb that injustice at least a little bit (BoardHopper, are you listening?)

Having said that, and on a completely different topic, yes, there needs to be a cap on tort litigation awards--the whole system needs to be reformed. But that will NEVER happen when the Democrats control Congress (and the Supreme Court would never touch the issue). Why? Because tort attorneys fund the Democrats campaigns. :devil:

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summ...?id=D000000065

Just to give an idea. Dig deeper if you have time. It's really interesting.

So let's not bash defense attorneys. They defend our civil rights when most have already passed prejudgment.

But it's okay to bash tort lawyers. :laugh:

Call it..."Too Fast for Conditions"
 

Now that I've read it, and the news article isn't very forthcoming, but my take on it (in accord with FLL) is based on this key sentence:

That she "lost control of her car" should tell us that her car was in motion (and not stopped on the highway).

What likely happened is that Thompson was traveling faster—perhaps "way" much faster—than Howard, and struck her car from behind under conditions too fast for the allowed speed. (In agreement with FLL).

Under "rear-ender" conditions, it's possible to lose control even at slow speeds, but it's conceivable that the impact threw Howard from the driver's position. Adding: Without seatbelts, it's not easy to steer from the passenger footwell. :rolleye1:

In automobile racing, this can be used to a racer's advantage.

It's seen often-enough in NASCAR, but "punting another car into the bushes" is frowned upon in road racing. "Punting" accelerates the leading car (the "puntee") into loss of control. The advantage goes to the "punter", whose car is automatically slowed adequately to make the corner.

Recently in Formula 1, a team manager advised a driver to "take out" another driver using this technique— :eek: —over a radio monitored by race officials :eek2: .

Very "ungentlemanly", but automobile racing championships—worth million$—have been won in this way.

Of course, the State is too cheap to pay for an expert with knowledge of the dynamics of auto crashes :rolleye2: but Attorney Moir needs only to shake out one "expert" who can tell the best story for the defense.

"The Truth" in our legal system does not appear "in the middle"—some have been fooled into that belief. Our system was designed for profit. :mad:

Driving down Route 93 tonight at about 8:05-pm, which was about sunset or so, and still light out, a large black, young adult moose was walking fast down the middle of the highway for a hundred yards before exiting. Heading south, just south of Exit 27, I was alone on the road with no other vehicles nearby so I slowed to a crawl and turned on my 4-way flashers and kept an eye on the moose just up ahead and the rear view mirror as well, watching for drivers unaware and a possible rear ender into me. A Chevy Suburban slows to a stop in the left hand lane just next to me, gets very close like 20' from the moose, and someone on the passenger side sticks his head out the window and starts yelling at the big moose. By the way, he looked a lot like former Governor John Sununu. Moose soon runs off into the woods, probably annoyed or scared of the person yelling at it to move along or whatever. Traffic resumes....no problems...end of story.

My question: Had someone hit me from behind while I am moving forward at about 5-mph following the moose for one hundred yards, w/ 4-way flashers on and waiting for it to be safe to pass the moose, would that be covered by my comprehensive coverage, or by the car striking me from behind? Is a moose an extenuating circumstance?

Fll
 

Yes! (And I'm also curious about John Sunumoose):laugh:

comprehensive coverage
 

is also know as OTC coverage, Other Than Collision. Collision coverage would be your vehicle colliding with another vehicle or object (such as a tree, rock, wall, bridge, etc). If you do have collision coverage, you can put a claim in for your damage through your insurance company, and they will subrogate (go after) the other guy's insurance company to recover the money. If there is a question as to comparative negligence (you are partly to blame), your company may withhold your deductible until they get reimbursement.
If you do not have collision, you may go directly after the other insurance company.
In either case, you most likely will not be charged any points on your license. However, too many not at fault accidents, and your company may take a really close look at continuing coverage for you (whole different thread, not appropriate for this forum).

Additional pertinent information
 

Today's article sheds much more light on this collision. Apparently the defendant's on board vehicle computer shows a speed of 83 MPH at time of impact, and that the vehicle travelled an additional 1/10 th of a mile after the collision and air bag deployment.

Obviously a speed of 83 MPH at anytime, but particularly when heavy weather and limited visibility was present, is damning evidence against the defendant.

Using data from on board vehicular computers is an interesting and rapidly growing means of obtaining evidence in cases like these.

And as can be expected, the attorney representing the defendant will attack the data that was collected.

The full story can be read HERE.

Moir stated no evidence of speed other than the download. But the 83 mph vehicle came to a stop some 500 plus feet from the scene of the accident, after making contact with the car. Skidmarks and witnesses should add to the scene a bit.

(my Garmin unit in my boat shows a top speed of 254 mph this year). :laugh::laugh:

No decimal point either :rolleye2:

Not GPS based
 

Just so folks don't get confused, these computers obtain their data from onboard sensors, including the sensors that control air bag deployment. They are notGPS based.

And I am sure that the State will introduce physical and possibly witness accounts that, according to their investigastion, corroborate the evidence obtained by the computer download.

Point?

There is usually much more to the story then the brief synopsis presented, especially in the initial coverage, of many news media accounts of interesting events.

ABS Erases Skidmarks...
 

Witnesses can give contradictory and unreliable testimony.

With the relatively-new automobile braking "ABS" pulsing-systems, skidmarks are history. :(

Runaway
 

Lets assume for the sake of speculation, that the car had a Runaway Gas Pedal like the Toyota Prious recently in the news. ...AND a couple of other makes from Detroit not nearly as publicized as the Toyota's.

Would this case still be a crime..? NB

Haven't heard much of that lately. Nor the gazillions of other make's recalls either. I guess most people have found the brake, except in this case.