Who caused the Wreck on 85-N?

[stillaneon]

While I understand your post, there is one main, VERY IMPORTANT factor that's being overlooked for this particular discussion. We don't know how far/close the Acura was in relation to the SUV. That would make a big difference in the reaction of the SUV driver.

But the driver should be charged manslaughter because if he hadn't cut off the SUV period (no matter his reaction), it's "100% probable" that the SUV wouldn't have just lost control on it's own.

I'm bowing out of this until more facts come to light. Later, QD.

[ISAtlanta300]

Sorry. What I meant was, If you were driving the SUV and you lost control, that's not my fault as the driver of the RSX. Although I may have weaved in front of you, the fact that you over reacted and lost control of your own vehicle is not something I should be punished for. ....

So in other words, brake-checking is ok..... next time i'm on the freeway, i'm going to slam on my brakes for fun, so the other driver can swerve and miss me... what do i have to lose, right? I mean he should be keeping control of his vehicle at all times... me posing a hazard shouldn't matter... shame on him !!!!

[quickdodge®]

The implication is clearly there. You said, "And not involuntary [manslaughter] because he was intending on driving recklessly." You're applying his intent to drive recklessly to his intent to kill.

Actually, you are implying that that's what I said. You're reading more into this than I am. I guess to make you not look wrong? I don't think you're wrong in this. Just wrong about you THINK that I actually am saying.

But anyway.....

I'd have a lot more faith in the human spirit if this kid would just man up instead of trying to dodge the consequences.

You and me both, homey. Later, QD.

[chunky]

Actually, you are implying that that's what I said. You're reading more into this than I am. I guess to make you not look wrong? I don't think you're wrong in this. Just wrong about you THINK that I actually am saying.

But anyway.....



You and me both, homey. Later, QD.

I said:

"You are trying to implicate that he intentionally killed these people. "

You said:

"In a sense he did. He drove like this knowingly and willingly. He knew the dangers of his driving habit."

http://www.importatlanta.com/forums/...&postcount=105

Just thought I'd throw that out there. Anyhow, that point of contention is of no real consequnce anymore. :p

[BTLFED]

Sidenote: Chunky posting on IA? What is this world coming to?

Not many posts doesn't equal a "n00b" in Chunky's case.

[quickdodge®]

I said:

"You are trying to implicate that he intentionally killed these people. "

You said:

"In a sense he did. He drove like this knowingly and willingly. He knew the dangers of his driving habit."

And it's true. In a sense he did. In a sense are the key words. We both know that that wasn't his intent.

Anyhow, that point of contention is of no real consequnce anymore.

Yessir. Later, QD.

[quickdodge®]

Not many posts doesn't equal a "n00b" in Chunky's case.

Huh? Lolol. Later, QD.

[chunky]

Sidenote: Chunky posting on IA? What is this world coming to?

Not many posts doesn't equal a "n00b" in Chunky's case.

haha. no kidding. I guess with the semester being almost over, I feel more at liberty to post.

http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/ajc/pdf/wreck0331.pdf

That's a link to the accident report in PDF format. Note the three sketched bodies indicated the passengers that were ejected. I'm not too familiar with accident reports, so I can't see where they indicate seatbelt usage, but it's probably indicated by the numerical code under "safety equip." Anyone have an accident report with the meanings of the codes listed?

[DieselNuts]

Yeah, those are only for the warrants. His charges aren't THAT many in number...

4 vehicular homicide...
1 reckless with injury
4 hit-n-run

Sometime like that...

This is what he is actually charged with:

4 counts of “Vehicular homicide in the 1st degree”
1 count of “Reckless driving”
1 count of “Serious injury by motor vehicle”
1 county of “Felony hit and Run”
3 counts of “Misdemeanor Hit and Run”

My sister works @ the Sheriff's dept. and told me.

[Ruiner]

This is what he is actually charged with:

4 counts of “Vehicular homicide in the 1st degree”
1 count of “Reckless driving”
1 count of “Serious injury by motor vehicle”
1 county of “Felony hit and Run”
3 counts of “Misdemeanor Hit and Run”

My sister works @ the Sheriff's dept. and told me.

It's listed on the webpage, I just didn't feel like formatting the words from the table...

[DieselNuts]

its all good. My sis emailed it to me. Copy & Paste is a beautiful thing.

[Ruiner]

i dont beleive that he should charged with killing anyone that wasn't wearing their seatbelt! we don't even know for sure that he caused the wreck because no one actually witnessed it. they saw a loud import driving "fast" on 85 and automatically put him to blame. i feel real bad for the family but you should always wear your seatbelts!

I do not believe that there is a state law for passengers of a limo-type vehicle to wear seatbelts, unfortunately.

[Ruiner]

The only thing they have on him is hit and run.

I agree, he was driving recklessly and it sucks but it happens. Changing lanes without a blinker is a reckless behavior but 45% or more of the people in Atlanta do it.

The fact that the driver of the SUV couldn't control the vehicle is the drivers fault. not the kid in the Acura (or whatever he was driving).

He may have been drunk, but there is no way to prove it, and the witness can say all day that he was to blame but, like the forums, without pics, it's bull****.

And most shuttles dont require you to wear seatbelts (although they should) so maybe the finger should be pointed towards the shuttle company or the dumbass people in the shuttle for not buckling up. If I die because I wasnt wearing my seatbelt, its not someone else fault. Its mine.

And the Expedition ran into the back of the Acura if I'm not mistaken. That would have been a ticket for the expedition driver if they adnt have died. Driving too fast for conditions or following too closely

I disagree. There was apparently a 911 call minutes before the wreck that reported a red RSX weaving in and out of traffic at a high rate of speed. Also, witnesses will be able to testify that the Acura passed the SUV on the shoulder of the HOV lane as well (highly illegal).

[stillaneon]

I disagree. There was apparently a 911 call minutes before the wreck that reported a red RSX weaving in and out of traffic at a high rate of speed. Also, witnesses will be able to testify that the Acura passed the SUV on the shoulder of the HOV lane as well (highly illegal).

Talking to some people at the Varsity, they Said the Acura sideswiped the SUV. I dont know what the truth is because the news doesn't disclose everything and the threads on here get things blown out of proportion....

[Ruiner]

Talking to some people at the Varsity, they Said the Acura sideswiped the SUV. I dont know what the truth is because the news doesn't disclose everything and the threads on here get things blown out of proportion....

Yes, the Acura hit and cut-off the SUV. The Acura also spun out and then left the scene.

I don't know about you, but if I was hit by an SUV or any other car on the interstate (as the 20yr old is claiming), I wouldn't flee the scene.

His story just doesn't make any sense. He claims that it was the SUV that hit him, but yet he didn't stick around to exchange insurance info and whatnot. It's all just rather fishy given his story. However, the story from all of the witnesses adds up rather easily.

[IDCoconut]

If he would have stayed, he obviously wouldn't have gotten the hit and run charges and the vehicular homicide could be made arguable. Actually, if he gets a good enough lawyer, he can possibly get out of the vehicular homicide. The reason being it was a large SUV, the driver did lose control, and the possibility that the passengers weren't wearing seatbelts.

We know it sucks, but ALL the blame cannot be put on the Acura driver. But I do hope he gets prosecuted for all his charges to prove a point for all the other morons that go way too fast on 85, and it's not just the japanese car drivers, I've seen BMW's and other cars go in excess of 100mph weaving in and out on I-85 and I-75.

[Ruiner]

If he would have stayed, he obviously wouldn't have gotten the hit and run charges and the vehicular homicide could be made arguable. Actually, if he gets a good enough lawyer, he can possibly get out of the vehicular homicide. The reason being it was a large SUV, the driver did lose control, and the possibility that the passengers weren't wearing seatbelts.

We know it sucks, but ALL the blame cannot be put on the Acura driver. But I do hope he gets prosecuted for all his charges to prove a point for all the other morons that go way too fast on 85, and it's not just the japanese car drivers, I've seen BMW's and other cars go in excess of 100mph weaving in and out on I-85 and I-75.

That bolded part, while correct, is not an argument. All that needs to be proven is that he acted in a reckless manner. Multiple independent witness statements plus the police investigation should prove this beyond a reasonable doubt.

I do not believe that it is state law to wear seatbelts in a limo-type vehicle, either.

I believe that the evidence will show that the SUV lost control because it was side-swiped by the RSX...time will tell on that one.

[DieselNuts]

Actually, if he gets a good enough lawyer, he can possibly get out of the vehicular homicide. The reason being it was a large SUV, the driver did lose control, and the possibility that the passengers weren't wearing seatbelts.

We know it sucks, but ALL the blame cannot be put on the Acura driver.

Why not? If he were driving like he was suppose to and obaying the laws, 4 people wouldnt have lost their life. End of discussion.

[chunky]

After reading the police report, a couple of things become clear.

1) The guy was driving way beyond his ability to control his car. An RSX-s, in stock form even, is a pretty capable car provided you don't do something stupid. It also shows that the SUV Limo was in the far left, but not HOV, lane. The kid had, presumably, both the HOV and emergency lane. The drawing does not show that the RSX made any contact with the median wall either. Wonder why the kid swerved. Maybe the flat tire happened before the impact with the SUV and is what caused him to swerve? Or maybe he was drunk?

2) From the bodies drawn on the road, indicating ejection, seat belts were probably not in use. The driver of the SUV was not ejected.

Anyone know what "safety equip" indicates? I see 0, 3, and 8 marked. I'm wondering if that's the field where they indicate seat belt usage.

At any rate, if the guy had STAYED, he'd possibly get through the legal proceedings without a jail sentence. He's definitely going to jail. His best option at this point would be to fess up and appear remorseful. Otherwise he's going to get locked up for a long time.

[chunky]

That bolded part, while correct, is not an argument. All that needs to be proven is that he acted in a reckless manner. Multiple independent witness statements plus the police investigation should prove this beyond a reasonable doubt.

I do not believe that it is state law to wear seatbelts in a limo-type vehicle, either.

I believe that the evidence will show that the SUV lost control because it was side-swiped by the RSX...time will tell on that one.

I think states should reconsider laws regarding seatbelts, and especially the use of child safety seats, in limos.

From the way the police sketch is drawn, there doesn't seem to be any way that the RSX caused the Limo to flip. That Limo outweighed the RSX by 3x, easily. Physics says, Limo wins, no matter where or how fast the RSX hit it. If the Limo was going 60mph, the RSX would have to be moving at 180mph to have an equal amount of momentum. Driver of the limo appears to have cranked the wheel to the right to try and avoid a collision. Although it's a natural instinct, it's probably the primary trigger for the rollover. So there is a degree of separation between the RSX hitting the Limo and the cause for rollover. Like you said, only time will tell how it is interpreted by the court.

[BTLFED]

After reading the police report, a couple of things become clear.

1) The guy was driving way beyond his ability to control his car. An RSX-s, in stock form even, is a pretty capable car provided you don't do something stupid. It also shows that the SUV Limo was in the far left, but not HOV, lane. The kid had, presumably, both the HOV and emergency lane. The drawing does not show that the RSX made any contact with the median wall either. Wonder why the kid swerved. Maybe the flat tire happened before the impact with the SUV and is what caused him to swerve? Or maybe he was drunk?

2) From the bodies drawn on the road, indicating ejection, seat belts were probably not in use. The driver of the SUV was not ejected.

Anyone know what "safety equip" indicates? I see 0, 3, and 8 marked. I'm wondering if that's the field where they indicate seat belt usage.

At any rate, if the guy had STAYED, he'd possibly get through the legal proceedings without a jail sentence. He's definitely going to jail. His best option at this point would be to fess up and appear remorseful. Otherwise he's going to get locked up for a long time.

NAIZBST would know. He's a Cobb County Police officer.

[chunky]

NAIZBST would know. He's a Cobb County Police officer.

hopefully, he'll chime in.

[BTLFED]

I'll PM him this thread

[MistaCee]

The bottom line is, would this accident have happen without this sh!t tard doing 100+mph on a busy highway? I think not, also the fact that he fled the scene puts him in the right of guilt, he knew he was doing something wrong, crashed and didn't want to get caught. Even though the passengers in the other vehicles were not wearing and safety restraints, he still is the cause of the wreck which resulted in peoples death. He is of full account for this and cannot blame anyone.

[NAIZBST]

After reading the police report, a couple of things become clear.

1) The guy was driving way beyond his ability to control his car. An RSX-s, in stock form even, is a pretty capable car provided you don't do something stupid. It also shows that the SUV Limo was in the far left, but not HOV, lane. The kid had, presumably, both the HOV and emergency lane. The drawing does not show that the RSX made any contact with the median wall either. Wonder why the kid swerved. Maybe the flat tire happened before the impact with the SUV and is what caused him to swerve? Or maybe he was drunk?

2) From the bodies drawn on the road, indicating ejection, seat belts were probably not in use. The driver of the SUV was not ejected.

Anyone know what "safety equip" indicates? I see 0, 3, and 8 marked. I'm wondering if that's the field where they indicate seat belt usage.

At any rate, if the guy had STAYED, he'd possibly get through the legal proceedings without a jail sentence. He's definitely going to jail. His best option at this point would be to fess up and appear remorseful. Otherwise he's going to get locked up for a long time.

safety equipment can mean seatbelts, airbags,(if deployed or not), things like that. I think if I remember correctly that those numbers mean seatbelts and airbags deployed. also could indicate unknown on wearing seatbelts cuz of those ejected.

[chunky]

safety equipment can mean seatbelts, airbags,(if deployed or not), things like that. I think if I remember correctly that those numbers mean seatbelts and airbags deployed. also could indicate unknown on wearing seatbelts cuz of those ejected.

That's what I suspected. There's a separate field for airbags though. Both passengers in the RSX and the Limo Driver have 2 in that field. Thanks for the input.

[sanchez2000]

i think i found out who it was... i went to the link that puregroove has n then on the side of the video as other news so click on the one where it says "MAN CHARGED IN I-85 WRECK APPEARS TO COURT" it shows the guy and everything... his name is codey rodent...

[Ruiner]

i think i found out who it was... i went to the link that puregroove has n then on the side of the video as other news so click on the one where it says "MAN CHARGED IN I-85 WRECK APPEARS TO COURT" it shows the guy and everything... his name is codey rodent...

Cody Rhoden, actually...we've known his name for a few days now.

[Ruiner]

I think states should reconsider laws regarding seatbelts, and especially the use of child safety seats, in limos.

From the way the police sketch is drawn, there doesn't seem to be any way that the RSX caused the Limo to flip. That Limo outweighed the RSX by 3x, easily. Physics says, Limo wins, no matter where or how fast the RSX hit it. If the Limo was going 60mph, the RSX would have to be moving at 180mph to have an equal amount of momentum. Driver of the limo appears to have cranked the wheel to the right to try and avoid a collision. Although it's a natural instinct, it's probably the primary trigger for the rollover. So there is a degree of separation between the RSX hitting the Limo and the cause for rollover. Like you said, only time will tell how it is interpreted by the court.

IF the RSX hit the SUV, it could cause the SUV to swerve and then flip very easily.

[chunky]

IF the RSX hit the SUV, it could cause the SUV to swerve and then flip very easily.

I wouldn't say very easily. The SUV limo, even a regular expedition, has a relatively long wheelbase and a lot of momentum. Even if the RSX clipped it on the front corner going 120mph, the SUV would run it over, but not flip. A rollover is almost always the result of a driver cranking the wheel and slamming on the brakes, causing the front tire to give way and the rim of the wheel to dig into the pavement initiating the rollover.

The only way the impact could have initiated the rollover would be if the rsx hit the SUV directly on the front suspension and broke something causing the front of the SUV to dig in initiating a roll over. That doesn't appear to have been the case though.

[stillaneon]

I'm suprised I didnt see this earlier....

So in other words, brake-checking is ok..... next time i'm on the freeway, i'm going to slam on my brakes for fun, so the other driver can swerve and miss me... what do i have to lose, right? I mean he should be keeping control of his vehicle at all times... me posing a hazard shouldn't matter... shame on him !!!!

Brake check all you want to. The issue is the person behind you should not be so close to you that if you had to slam on the brakes, they couldnt react. And if your doing 100 plus, you should be able to get far enough ahead where this wouldnt be an issue

[PSINXS]

So in other words, brake-checking is ok..... next time i'm on the freeway, i'm going to slam on my brakes for fun, so the other driver can swerve and miss me... what do i have to lose, right? I mean he should be keeping control of his vehicle at all times... me posing a hazard shouldn't matter... shame on him !!!!

and if you hit someone that brake checks you, you get the ticket for following too close. stay off ppls bumpers. rule is their should be a 2 light pole interval between u nand the car in front. gives you plenty of time to react.

[sanchez2000]

oh didn't know ya'll know that ya'll knew the name already i just read it yesterday so yea im a lil slow hahaha

[BKgen®]

his name is codey rodent...

i just lol'd

[sanchez2000]

thats wats up