Posted on 04/14/2007 11:09:02 PM PDT by dennisw
ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. -- State Police have declined to charge the 20-year-old driver of a pickup truck for leaving the scene of a crash that critically injured Gov. Jon Corzine this week after the man told investigators he was trying to make room for the governor's motorcade. However, authorities left open the possibility the driver could face other charges in the coming days, saying the investigation is not complete. State Police still want to interview Corzine, who remained on a ventilator Saturday, unable to speak.
Surgery on the governor's injured leg was successful Saturday, and another operation was planned for Monday.
The pickup truck driver, who is blamed for Thursday night's wreck, told investigators he didn't stop because he did not realize he was involved. The man's name was not released by state police because he was not charged.
"He hadn't any inkling that he contributed to it," New Jersey State Police Capt. Al Della Fave said. "That alleviates him of the responsibility of remaining at the accident scene. There's nothing he did here criminally. He did what he felt was the best he could."
Della Fave said the driver saw Corzine's motorcade with its flashing lights traveling in the left lane, and edged his pickup truck further to the right to give the official vehicles a wide berth
In so doing, the red pickup's right wheels went onto the grassy highway shoulder, alarming the driver. He looked up to see a highway mile marker sign directly in front of him, and steered hard to the left to avoid hitting it.
That brought the red pickup back onto the roadway and into the path of a white pickup truck, which also swerved to the left to avoid the red truck. The white vehicle struck Corzine's sport utility vehicle, sending it careening into a guard rail.
The driver of the red truck was found Friday night at an Atlantic City casino where he works and interviewed by police. He was found using information from local police and leads generated from parkway surveillance cameras and toll information, police said.
The driver of the truck picked it up Saturday afternoon at the New Jersey State Police station in Buena Vista, but did not talk to the media.
At his home in Little Egg Harbor Township, a man who answered the door angrily ordered reporters to leave the property, and would not speak with them.
The driver could not be located Saturday night at the casino where he works.
Corzine had been on his way to a meeting at his mansion in Princeton between radio show host Don Imus and the Rutgers women's basketball team.
The 60-year-old governor, who was not wearing his seat belt in the front passenger's seat, broke his leg, 12 ribs, his breastbone and suffered a broken collarbone. He also had a head laceration and a minor fracture on a lower vertebra
“why did the governor have a two-car motorcade going to Imus? was the 2nd car behind or in front?”
Does it mention 2 in the news?
For some reason I though there was 3. Maybe thats because it makes sense?.....A motorcade would be one in front and one in back....
But who’s accusing anyone of SENSE in any of this bizarre event......
“The man, who asked not to be named because State Police told him not to speak to the media, said both his vehicle and the SUV were going 65 mph, the posted speed limit on that part of the Parkway. The governor’s two-car motorcade was traveling with flashing lights on at the time of the crash.”
I disagree with your comment. Remember, the motorcade was in the left lane with its lights flashing. Lights flashing means all cars are supposed to pull to the right. If the Red pickup pulls to the right, the white truck should also pull to the right, NOT speed up to pass the car that pulled over.
By pulling past, the white truck cut off the red truck’s only avenue of escape from an accident, while not appropriately pulling over and slowing down.
I see this all the time. A few cars correctly pull over and slow when they see flashing lights, and other drivers speed up to pass those who pulled over.
Ooooooooo Y’OK
I am catching up on it and going through the threads. Did I miss the names of the drivers of the white pickup and the red pickup? In my area, all names are usually mentioned in news reports.
All I saw reported regarding the pickup drivers was that the red pickup driver was a "special needs" person, which some took to mean illegal alien while others thought more in terms of a personal condition such as being deaf.
If the siren-on vehicle is in the left lane, does that require vehicles in the right lane to pull over? I don’t think it does. Granted, it’s wise to slow down and perhaps even pull over. But I don’t think one is legally required to do so if the “emergency” vehicle already has its own clear path.
The driver of the red truck told investigators he pulled off and then swerved back on because he found a sign in his path on the shoulder. The law does not require one to pull over “immediately”...it generally directs drivers to do so at the first safe opportunity. Apparently, this driver made an unsafe maneuver at the point where he pulled off.Had the white truck followed him onto the obstructed roadside, they could both have ended up in an accident as they avoided the obstacle.
Once the red pickup was on the shoulder he was obligated to check approaching traffic before re-entering. He can’t just assume all following vehicles pulled over too. (Also, I’ve seen no report that the white pickup “sped up”.)
Speed and other variables may have contributed to the seriousness of the crash. But the red pickup driver caused the accident (given what we know now). I’m not saying he should be cited. His situation is probably akin to the driver who swerves to avoid a child running into the road. He may cause an accident, but his action was understandable. That’s why we call them “accidents”.
If I am driving down a highway, and I see flashing lights to the left of me, and then see a car in front of me swerve onto a shoulder that apparently was not a real shoulder but a grass shoulder, and see they have a sign in front of them, I don’t speed up to pass them, I slow down knowing that they are likely to swerve back onto the road to avoid running into a sign.
You appear to be correct that, as a legal matter, the white truck did “nothing wrong”. But a guy was nearly killed, and two cars were damaged, one seriously, because he did not practice safe, defensive driving techniques.
I’ve been in an accident or two that were unavoidable, but I’ve had a LOT more accidents that never happened because I paid attention to what other cars were doing, and anticipated them doing stupid things.
When I was back in high school (a long time ago) there was a film they showed us to scare us into safe driving. In the film, the father has his family out for a sunday drive. However, they get stuck behind a really slow car with a couple of “aunt-looking” women chatting away and driving erratically.
To his credit, the father, stuck directly behind, follows a safe distance and doesn’t honk or pass (there is no passing). However, lots of people behind him DO pass {note: At this point I would fault him, in that if I were him today I would have pulled over for a minute to let cars behind me catch up to the women’s car rather than having to pass both of us unsafely}.
BUT, after following them for a while while people pass and honk, the women turn off into a side street. As they turn, he punches the gas to pass them. Except they turned in the wrong place, and realising it they simply swerve back onto the road.
The guy of course has to swerve away, gets hit by a car coming the other direction, and is killed.
Then we saw his family all sad. Either that, or he survived, but his family all died — I can’t remember, I just remember that it was very sad, and all because he didn’t give himself that extra few seconds to make sure the crazy drivers were really out of his harm’s way.
As a big fan of defensive driving (I used to teach it), I agree with you. It may be that the white truck could have done more. But, again, I’ve seen nothing that says he “sped up”. All this happened in an instant. I would like to think I would have observed that the red truck was getting himself into trouble. But there was a lot going on to both the right and left of the white truck driver.
I think we only disagree on the extent of culpability to assign to the red truck driver. In my mind, he caused the accident because he didn’t perform a safe maneuver when he pulled onto the shoulder. Whatever other drivers did, his action caused the accident.
Who’s that, then?
I don’t know. Must be a king.
Why?
He hasn’t got sh!t all over him...
Love it. Just between me, you and the lamppost...
Failure to break to avoid collision or accident. Once the red truck hits the shoulder or grass, he's kicking up stuff, break lights glaring as the truck is slowing, the following pick up needs to let off the gas and prep for the worst. For some yet-to-be-explained reason he was trying to keep pace with the governor, and did not break to avoid the hazard the red truck unintentionally created.
Geez. We all agree the white truck driver could have possibly done more to avoid the danger. We really don’t have ANY details about what he observed. And you’re just speculating about flying gravel and screaming brake lights.
The ONE thing we DO know is that the red truck left the highway. The white truck was not LEGALLY required to stop, slow, veer, follow him or do anything else. He could have done any of those, but we don’t know what he saw in those few seconds. He may have been focusing on the approaching “emergency” vehicle. As best we can tell, he simply maintained his course. When the red truck veered back onto the hightway, HE-—not the white truck driver-—was in the wrong. That is not disputable. That’s all I’m saying.
Right here is where I think you are wrong, along with all of the press accounts.
The white pickup was clearly traveling much slower than the motorcade. If this traffic accident involved two commoners, the report would be that the higher-speed vehicle ran into the lower speed vehicle.
Everyone involved has covered for the governor's driver by saying the low-speed vehicle ran into the high-speed one, but this is just plain not the truth.
BTW, isn't the troopper driving the gov sworn to uphold the law, which includes stopping & citing both drivers and passengers not wearing seatbelts?
Seems like some very special treatment going on here.
Hmmm
Maybe the red truck just heard the siren coming up behind him and pulled over He may not have known that the Gov was in the left lane, or anticipated cars on the left pulling over to the right suddenly It may have been an instintive defensive move....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.