update on driver / cyclist incident here in Sonoma County - 7 months

[eddief]

This is an update from one of the involved cyclists. The quality of the evidence still blows my mind:

People have been asking me if there has been any progress on this case.
After several weeks of missed phone calls (she was on vacation) the lady
from the Marin County Victim Witness Assistance office finally got hold
of me today. The answer is that the case is still in "Issue Status",
which means the investigating attorney from the District Attorney's
office is reviewing the evidence. So we're still on hold.

For those who weren't tuned in on the original story, here's a synopsis:

At the time of the incident, I had a GoPro video camera mounted on my
handlebars and a Fly 6 (the kind that looks like a tail light) on the
rear of the bike. The GoPro video of the incident is posted here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH4S2pKX9jw

and of the confrontation afterwards here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JL290Pi9FkU

On Saturday Dec 31, 2016, my friend Sue and I were doing the "A" (slow)
version of SRCC's Weekend Warmup ride, a 40-mile out-and-back from
Petaluma Junior High to Tomales. On the way out, not long after turning
from Chileno Valley onto Tomales-Petaluma road, a guy in a pickup truck
pulling a big cattle trailer (full of cattle) decided to pass us right
when a car was coming from the other direction. He was doing about
55-60 mph and was within a few inches of us as he zoomed by, horn
blaring. Sue came within about 4 inches of losing her life.

In my humble opinion, it looks like he committed at least four
moving-traffic violations:

CVC 22350 - Definitely going too fast for conditions.
CVC 22349 - and probably exceeding the 55 mph speed limit.

CVC 21760 - Passing a bicycle closer than 3 feet.

CVC 21460 - Crossing the double yellow line.

CVC 21751 - Failing to yield to the vehicle coming the other way.

He pulled off down the road after turning onto Twin Bridge Road and
walked out to the intersection to give us a piece of his mind. The
video of the confrontation has an excellent image of the driver and his
vehicle. Thanks to that, some list members who were able to decipher
the trailer's license plate from the video, and some people who
recognized him from the video, the CHP was able to ID the driver.

I originally posted the videos to my private web site, but there were
over 30,000 hits in two days, quickly exceeding my 50 Gbyte limit. I
had to shut down my web site until the end of the month. There was also
a huge number of postings to the SRCC and SCBC email lists, it was
reported in the Cycling Today on-line magazine, and there were a string
of social media postings, so this incident has got a lot of attention
from the cycling community.

After a couple months of investigation, the Sonoma County District
Attorney accepted the CHP recommendation and decided to prosecute, but
at the last minute they realized that the incident actually happened a
mile or so over the county line in Marin County. So in March they
transferred the investigation to the Marin County DA.

I talked to the lady at the Victim Witness Assistance office in late May
and again today. The status is still "wait". I'm hoping the Marin
County DA comes to the same conclusion as the Sonoma County DA.

[peanutgallery]

He was concerned enough to at least stop, more than I can say for many more drivers over the years that I've had a close call with

Good luck with this, but I don't see a whole lot coming out of it. There was a stooping to his level (language) you should have avoided...even then.

This is why I am dirt only these days, no confrontations. Life is easier that way

[Peter P.]

Thanks for the update. Keep us apprised of any developments.

[eddief]

my interpretation is he stopped to be more of an irresponsible ahole than he had already been. I don't think the use of language was breaking the law, but the evidence would suggest he broke the law in the ways outlined in the posting.

Originally Posted by peanutgallery

He was concerned enough to at least stop, more than I can say for many more drivers over the years that I've had a close call with

Good luck with this, but I don't see a whole lot coming out of it. There was a stooping to his level (language) you should have avoided...even then.

This is why I am dirt only these days, no confrontations. Life is easier that way

[peanutgallery]

It's all about how you want to be viewed...in a fringe sport

Tighten up, the driver will run down the next cyclist he sees if you keep the potty mouth going. Additionally, those situations can go south in many ways. Not an attorney, but if there was a case it would be done already, these guys are always practical. Unfortunately, this is going to come across more like my neighbor and I yelling drunken threats at each other with a Go-Pro on our heads and then pressing charges 7 months later. We're in a fringe sport and have sell to the common denominator, this is unfortunate. They will see a mountain and a molehill. It sucks

Be safe out there, and don't let the camera affect how you interact with others. Seriously, being right is one thing...being maimed, etc as a result is something else entirely.

Originally Posted by eddief

my interpretation is he stopped to be more of an irresponsible ahole than he had already been. I don't think the use of language was breaking the law, but the evidence would suggest he broke the law in the ways outlined in the posting.

[merlinmurph]

Originally Posted by peanutgallery

He was concerned enough to at least stop, more than I can say for many more drivers over the years that I've had a close call with

Good luck with this, but I don't see a whole lot coming out of it. There was a stooping to his level (language) you should have avoided...even then.

This is why I am dirt only these days, no confrontations. Life is easier that way

Concerned, huh?

Maybe it's just me, but when someone tell you to get the f*** off the road, I'm not seeing a whole lot of concern.

Unfortunately, this will not be a priority item for the law enforcement folks. I hope they do something.

[kevinvc]

I remember when the OP first published the video. There were people in that thread who immediately chastised him for cussing and for even stopping to talk to the guy at all. There were also folks making excuses for the driver and critiquing how the rider positioned himself in the lane, etc. All the typical blame the victim type of stuff.

While the language didn't de-escalate the situation, I think it's completely understandable considering he just saw his wife come inches away from being killed due to the stupid and illegal actions of the driver.

[eddief]

but a member of my local bike club:

The Marin County District Attorney has decided to charge the driver with
four infractions. They are:

1: CVC 21760B - Passing a bicycle at an unsafe distance.

2: CVC 21760C - Passing a bicycle at a distance of less than 3 feet.

3: CVC 21460A - Crossing the double yellow line.

4: CVC 21751 - Failing to yield to the vehicle coming the other way.

I'm disappointed that the Marin County DA didn't come to the same
conclusion as the Sonoma County DA and charge him with misdemeanor
reckless driving (CVC 23103). It seems to me that the incident
definitely qualifies as "willful or wanton disregard for the safety of
persons or property". But I'm not a lawyer - perhaps it is more
difficult to prove than it appears.

A driver can have his license suspended if he gets 4 points on his
driving record in one year, 6 points in two years, or 8 points in three
years. I believe each of the four above infractions is one point, while
reckless driving is only two points. However reckless driving is a
misdemeanor and can result in up to 90 days jail time and/or up to a
$1000 fine, so it is a more serious violation than an infraction.

I'm just hoping that the penalty is serious enough that this driver
finally is made to realize that he did something wrong and will
hopefully drive more carefully in the future.

I will be communicating with Kevin O'Hara, the Deputy DA who is handling
the case, to get an idea of where we go from here. I assume they will
negotiate with the driver and if they can't reach an agreement they will
take him to court.

[eddief]

For those who don't know the original story, a brief synopsis:

Over a year ago, the day before New Years, Dec 31, 2016, my friend Sue
and I had a near-death experience. We were doing the "A" (slow) version
of the Santa Rosa Cycling Club's Weekend Warmup ride, a 40-mile
out-and-back from Petaluma Junior High to Tomales. On the way out, not
long after turning from Chileno Valley onto Tomales-Petaluma road, a guy
pulling a big cattle trailer decided to pass us in a no-passing zone
just as a car was coming in the other direction. His fender missed Sue
by about 6 inches as he zoomed by at 55-60 mph with horn blaring. She
literally came within inches of losing her life.

We were both riding single-file, close to the right edge of the lane.
There is only a very narrow shoulder on that portion of the road.

For some reason, he pulled off at the next intersection (Twin Bridges
Road) and walked to the intersection to have a "conversation" with me.
I must confess I was not very polite, but I did get a good image of him
on my handlebar-mounted GoPro camera, which also had a good recording of
the incident itself.

When the CHP office opened on Jan 3 I went down to file a report. By
chance the officer on desk duty that day was Officer Jonathan Sloat, who
is the CHP Public Information Officer. I took along a CD with the
videos and some still photos made from the videos.

To make a very long story short, the CHP was able to ID the driver and
the case finally went to trial in Marin County Superior Court today.
Officer Sloat had recommended a misdemeanor reckless driving charge, but
the Marin Co. DA decided to charge the driver with four infractions instead.

Although not required, Sue and I went down to attend the trial. The
courthouse is located at the Marin Civic Center. Since there is a train
station right at the Civic Center, we took the SMART train, a first for
us, which turned out to be pleasant and convenient.

As we sat waiting for our case to come up, I was initially favorably
impressed with the way the judge was handling cases. For example, on
the first case he postponed his judgment until he had a chance to go out
and look at the intersection himself. He was businesslike but polite
and courteous with the defendants.

When our case came up, Officer Sloat presented the evidence. They had
Sue and me come up to explain the video. When the video came to the
place where the vehicle almost hit Sue you could hear the judge go
"Whoa!", or something like that, in shock at how close the trailer came
to Sue.

He ended up severely reprimanding the driver, convicting him on all four
infractions resulting in fines of over $900, and suspending his driving
license for 30 days.

He mentioned that the last time the driver was before him in court he
said that he needed to drive for his occupation as farmer, so the judge
changed the license suspension to a restriction that he only use the
license for work-related purposes for 30 days. (So apparently the
driver has at least one other recent conviction.)

In the hallway outside the courtroom Sue, I and Officer Sloat had a
further conversation with the driver. He still feels he did nothing
wrong. He claims it takes too long to slow down when pulling a trailer
full of cattle at 55 mph. The judge, Officer Sloat and I all pointed
out to him that a 55 mph speed limit is a maximum - in many cases you
need to go slower than that for safety. But I don't think he got the
message.

The driver said that the only reason he got caught is that he stopped,
which allowed me to get the video. He said next time he won't stop.
Apparently that is the only lesson he learned from all this.

Actually, I'm hoping that he will eventually reflect on this and realize
that putting people's lives in danger to save a few seconds is just not
worth it.

I would like especially to thank Officer Sloat for shepherding this case
through for over a year. Normally the DA doesn't like to prosecute a
violation that was not witnessed by an officer, so this case was very
unusual.

[tuscanyswe]

Great outcome.

I think he may have learned a thing or 2 wether he admits it or not.

[daker13]

Good for you for pursuing it and congratulations on the result. It's incredible that with all that input he still felt he was innocent; I guess some people are never going to admit they're wrong. In spite of what he says, though, you have to think the $900 ticket is going to make him think twice the next time he sees a cyclist.

[eddief]

someone my local bike club.

Originally Posted by daker13

Good for you for pursuing it and congratulations on the result. It's incredible that with all that input he still felt he was innocent; I guess some people are never going to admit they're wrong. In spite of what he says, though, you have to think the $900 ticket is going to make him think twice the next time he sees a cyclist.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by eddief

He mentioned that the last time the driver was before him in court he
said that he needed to drive for his occupation as farmer, so the judge
changed the license suspension to a restriction that he only use the
license for work-related purposes for 30 days. (So apparently the
driver has at least one other recent conviction.)

The above makes no logical sense, and demonstrates the prevailing attitude in the US that automobile use is right rather than a privilege.

There are many activities that carry some responsibility to the public, and for which people who engage in them must be licensed. A few examples are: Pilot licenses for aircraft operators; medical licenses for doctors and nurses; electrical and plumbing licenses for those in the building trades; liquor licenses for bars and other establishments that server alcohol; real estate agent licenses; etc. When a holder of one of these licenses has been found to be negligent in the practice for which the license is held, the license can be suspended or revoked. But have you ever heard of a doctor with a suspended medical license still being able to practice medicine for work related purposes, or bar with suspended liquor license still being able to serve alcohol for business purposes? Of course that - that's ludicrous.

[bking]

I always feel these confrontations just amp up these drivers for the "next" time they're confronted with a cyclist. It'll never happen, but justice would put them on a bike, let them commute to work etc by bike for three months. The walk a mile in the moccasins thing, if you will.

[stackie]

Mark,

I agree with you 100%.

Sadly suspending a driving license here is the US is a symbolic gesture at best. I’d bet $100 that the defendant got in his truck and drove home from the court room. In fact, that experiment has been accomplished already. Set up a police officer outside of courtroom and radio out to him which drivers had their licenses taken. Most of them left the court driving their vehicle.

Funny story. I loaned a car to a friend of my wife’s years ago. She drive it a few weeks then called one day to have us pick her and the car up. She had been pulled over and did not have a license! We had to retrieve her and car. Lucky the car wasn’t impounded.

My proposal is that if you are caught driving without valid license the car is impounded and sold at auction. State keeps the money. Driver goes to jail for 30 days. Maybe that will convey the importance of the law. And yes, I would have been ok with my car before being taken in the above situation. Sad about the loss, but my fault for being so foolish.

Jon

PS. I’m going to remember this case in case me medical license is ever suspended or revoked. I think we have a legal precedent set here.