My guess is that, if he reports now, the guy will be out by Thanksgiving. He will be endangering another cyclist long before Christmas. Charge those GoPro batteries, folks! //


Yes, but isn't everyone here forgetting the civil trial?? HE is going to have to defend that and most likely will lose, and perhaps a lot of money. More than the 3 or 4 months he serves, it would be great if he lost another $200+k in litigation and awards. Seems like it should be a slam dunk after this verdict, OJ won his criminal trial and still lost the civil.

(Don't tell anyone . . . but I'm a lawyer in the relevant state.) If the cyclist in the video had stayed on the ground, or bled, or writhed in pain, the case would be worth a lot more. But he didn't stay down or moan or appear to be badly injured. He immediately hopped back up. He didn't look injured much at all. I suspect the amount of the restitution awarded at trial covered his medical bills (not much). What is a redneck Tennessee jury going to award for? Hurt feelings? Unless he gets punitive damages . . . which are NOT easy to get in a case like this . . . this plaintiff won't see much money in the civil case. The defendant's lawyer will see more money than the plaintiff will.

Well, it should be in Williamson County so maybe not such a redneck jury. Likely a big ex-California or Chicago transplant jury.

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

I think it's two part.

1. Education as you mention, but not just the rules of the road...people who have never ridden a bike on the open roads need to know what it feels like. Most people have not ridden a bike outside of their childhood days when your parents wouldn't let you ride in high traffic areas. There have been videos as part of an education program where bus drivers have been forced to ride inside a cone line and a bus passes by right on the other side of the cones to give the bus drivers (on bikes) a sense of what it like to get passed inside of 3 feet...and buses really should give 5+ feet given the draft they give off.

2. Infrastructure. I'm not advocating that bikes should only be allowed to ride in areas where there are bike lanes, but as you improve bike infrastructure, you send a message that bikes do have a right to the road. Here on Oahu, our mayor has done great work to build protected bike lanes, add bike lane striping, and add sharrow lane markings in the last 4 years. Bike riding on Oahu in general is still sub par, but commuting through urban Honolulu is 50x better than it was 10 years ago. They were met with heavy resistance at first, but over time you can start to see more people riding. And those people also drive cars. When you create infrastructure where you literally see a hundred bikes on the road while driving 15 minutes through town the drivers start to get a feel that bikes not only belong on the road, but maybe it's something they should try too instead of sitting in traffic and fighting for parking. It's not going to cure everyone, but it does help.

If the cyclist in the video had stayed on the ground, or bled, or writhed in pain, the case would be worth a lot more//

Ok, but what about if the jury believes that the driver did this on purpose, would not punitive damages be hefty?? I mean of the $33 million OJ was ordered to pay, $25 million or so was punitive. Not that he would get anywhere near that, but if the jury is pissed at the guy and his cavalear attitude towards cyclists, might they not hit him with 100's of K's???

Good points Jason. It would be interesting to see if people's attitudes changed much if they experienced a car or truck passing them at the legal limit (3 feet) going 2 or more times faster than they were riding on a bike.

Problem is, the jury also has a cavalier attitude toward cyclists. Cyclists are pests! They hog the road! They hold up traffic! If the guy's got a good lawyer, the jury will practically be taking up a collection to pay him a bounty for taking out this cyclist! If OJ had knifed a cyclist, the jury would have patted him on the back and sent him home!

First, to get punitive damages at all, the jury has to be convinced that the defendant acted intentionally and maliciously. Being drunk and stupid is a perfect defense as far as punitive damages are concerned. His drunkenness will be used by the DEFENSE in this case! If the jury just finds he was negligent in being drunk or in operating his vehicle, resulting in the crash, punitive damages are off the table. Four simple words: "I didn't see him."

Second, even if punitive damages are available, they are absolutely limited to $500,000 in Tennessee. As a practical matter, punitives are usually a 2x or 3x multiplier of actual damages. And it appears, in this case, that actual damages are a couple thousand dollars. So defendant gets what? $6,000 to $8,000 INCLUDING punitive damages? Defendant cashes in his Volvo and, after paying the verdict, has $20,000 left over to buy booze with.

Third, it doesn't matter what verdict is returned . . . this guy hasn't been able to make much money for several months. Before this event, his employer had already moved him to part-time status. When this happened, they fired him. And he's been in rehab. Unless his lawyer is stupid, he obtained a retainer from the guy that stripped out his bank accounts / borrowing capacity. If he's got any money left, the verdict will likely toss him into bankruptcy. When you've got nothing to start with, going bankrupt really is a "Get out of jail free" card. Defendant pays nothing. Plaintiff gets nothing.

Well done.