• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Jim Boeheim (HC Syracuse Orange)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
DZ83CK said:
He clearly failed to stop his car where he should have. Even if he was driving the speed limit, that may well have been too fast in the conditions. He should have been able to completely stop without having to swerve to avoid a stopped car in front of him. He did not maintain control of his car appropriately. He is at fault, it may very well not be 100%, but he deserves to pay for killing Jorge.
Click to expand...
You sure are making quite an assumption there. It doesnt sound to me like it was possible to stop his car. If he was driving within the speed limit then he cannot be found to have been negligent.
 
Upvote 0
DZ83CK said:
If you can't stop your car to avoid hitting another car in front of you and instead swerve and hit and kill a person, I don't care what other circumstances exist, in the world of civil liability you are at fault for that death to some extent. The mitigating circumstances just reduce the percentage of responsibility.
Click to expand...
Not correct.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
You sure are making quite an assumption there. It doesnt sound to me like it was possible to stop his car. If he was driving within the speed limit then he cannot be found to have been negligent.
Click to expand...
Listen to yourself, you literally said it wasnt possible for him to stop his car. Come on, man. You have to be able to stop your car to avoid hitting the car in front of you, or else you deserve consequences from not doing so. You absolutely can be guilty of negligent driving, even at the speed limit, if the conditions are too bad for you to stop in time to avoid a collision.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Jake said:
Whether he's at fault or not he's going to get sued. It'll be settled out of court and the guy will still be dead.
Click to expand...

This seems highly likely whether there's any fault on the part of Boeheim or not. I'm sure that some attorneys who have vicious animal or otherwise vaguely threatening self-given nicknames will be or already are offering the family representation.
 
Upvote 0
DZ83CK said:
Listen to yourself, you literally said it wasnt possible for him to stop his car. Come on, man. You have to be able to stop your car to avoid hitting the car in front of you, or else you deserve consequences from not doing so. You absolutely can be guilty of negligent driving, even at the speed limit, if the conditions are too bad for you to stop in time to avoid a collision.
Click to expand...

Of course you should be able to not hit the car in front of you. But the car in front of you is moving at a comparable speed and has brake lights. How is the comparison relevant? You seem to think that you should be able to stop on a dime, in a split second, going 65-75 on the interstate.

tenor.gif
 
Upvote 0
DZ83CK said:
Listen to yourself, you literally said it wasnt possible for him to stop his car. Come on, man. You have to be able to stop your car to avoid hitting the car in front of you, or else you deserve consequences from not doing so. You absolutely can be guilty of negligent driving, even at the speed limit, if the conditions are too bad for you to stop in time to avoid a collision.
Click to expand...
You realize that assured cleared distance is calculated when the car in front of you is moving. The car Boeheim avoided was stopped.

Where is your evidence of conditions rendering the speed limit unsafe. Likewise, even if there were such conditions where is your evidence that Boeheim was driving with a disregard of them?
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
You realize that assured cleared distance is calculated when the car in front of you is moving. The car Boeheim avoided was stopped.

Where is your evidence of conditions rendering the speed limit unsafe. Likewise, even if there were such conditions where is your evidence that Boeheim was driving with a disregard of them?
Click to expand...
You 100% can get cited for not maintaining assured clear distance when a car is stopped on the highway. I have had personal experience with this. Boeheim was in the wrong because he didnt stop and caused a collision. I am going to stop arguing with you now because obviously you seem to think if you're going the speed limit, you can plow over any stopped cars or people on the side of the road who shouldn't be there without having any responsibility for your actions, and I am never going to agree with you.
 
Upvote 0
DZ83CK said:
You 100% can get cited for not maintaining assured clear distance when a car is stopped on the highway. I have had personal experience with this. Boeheim was in the wrong because he didnt stop and caused a collision. I am going to stop arguing with you now because obviously you seem to think if you're going the speed limit, you can plow over any stopped cars or people on the side of the road who shouldn't be there without having any responsibility for your actions, and I am never going to agree with you.
Click to expand...
You're a fucking dumbass.
 
Upvote 0
DZ83CK said:
You 100% can get cited for not maintaining assured clear distance when a car is stopped on the highway. I have had personal experience with this. Boeheim was in the wrong because he didnt stop and caused a collision. I am going to stop arguing with you now because obviously you seem to think if you're going the speed limit, you can plow over any stopped cars or people on the side of the road who shouldn't be there without having any responsibility for your actions, and I am never going to agree with you.
Click to expand...
Wait... I thought we were talking about civil liability. Now you want to talk about traffic citations and some bullshit that I never even remotely argued. Look... I get that you have great passion for your position, but you're talking about legal concepts you've demonstrated you dont actually understand. I'm not going to apologize for holding your hand to the fire on those concepts
 
Upvote 0
Anyone operating a vehicle, a bike or walking in a pathway (highway or even a road) is responsible for ensuring they are clearly visible for 500 ft. And visible means head lights, rear lights, reflectors or very bright colors. Failure to do so makes it no-fault.
 
Upvote 0
DZ83CK said:
Listen to yourself, you literally said it wasnt possible for him to stop his car. Come on, man. You have to be able to stop your car to avoid hitting the car in front of you, or else you deserve consequences from not doing so. You absolutely can be guilty of negligent driving, even at the speed limit, if the conditions are too bad for you to stop in time to avoid a collision.
Click to expand...
Physics will tell you that is is mathematically impossible to stop a car within a certain time frame in certain circumstances. That’s why every accident is different.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top