This is from an article in Velonews about a homicide in Crewe, VA. Kevin Flock was riding on a four-lane divided highway as far right as practical. Though there was no one in the left lane, the driver attempted to pass in the same lane. The driver of that van reported seeing Kevin but misjudged the distance between his vehicle and the cyclist. After he hit the cyclist, he drove on for 1.5 miles before turning around to come back. When he arrived back on the scene he asked "What happened?" despite having a broken windshield. The driver is a National Guardsman and was driving a government vehicle at the time.
The line of damage suggests that he was turning towards Kevin at the time. The Commonwealth attorney filed for and got an indictment for involuntary manslaughter but there is talk of a plea bargain down to reckless driving (a misdemeanor).
The upshot of this is that the defense lawyer has filed a motion to dismiss based on a Virginia statute that says military personnel cannot be prosecuted in the performance of their duties. The next hearing is next Monday and we will find out the result of the pretrial motions.
That would be this upcoming Monday.
I can understand the driver's behavior immediately after the crash. He might very well have been in a state of shock and it took him awhile to snap out of it. I don't condone it, but I understand. And I don't begrudge the defense attorney for trying to use the military code to get his client off. That's what defense attorneys do. But there is no way that he should get off with a misdemeanor. He saw the cyclist and hit him anyway? what the F&^% is that?
Oh come on, he just hit and killed a cyclist. Maybe a fine will be sufficient? (So says the person who was hit by taxi and then was ticketed by the DC police while in the ER with a concussion).
Posted by: tdonline | October 16, 2009 at 01:41 PM
I was thinking local VA bicyclists should consider some sort of bike protest. But it sounds like the prosecuter was actually trying. Then it occurred to me that last week's St. Mary's fatal incident absolutely deserves a protest. The police pre-judged the bicyclist, wrongly interpreted the law and made no mention of driver culpability. How do we do it? Bike procession? Meet at police HQ? Rally at city or county hall? Count me in.
Posted by: Jack | October 16, 2009 at 02:18 PM
Is there any evidence that this admitted travesty of justice is a cycling issue, as opposed to a the-military-is-above-the-law issue? After all, the one conviction for Abu Ghraib was thrown out, and I don't remember seeing any bikes in *those* pictures...
Posted by: guez | October 16, 2009 at 03:29 PM
It does involve a cyclist, for starters. But I guess it depends on how much the military amnesty plays into the willingness of the prosecution to accept the plea bargain.
Posted by: Washcycle | October 16, 2009 at 03:37 PM
If you can't be prosecuted for killing someone while driving a car on military business, how about a court martial?
Posted by: Jack | October 16, 2009 at 04:38 PM
If there was damage to the vehicle and the drver was at fault, non-judicial punishment is a definite possibility (Captain's Mast is one term we use in the Navy). Court martial would also be possible, but not as likely as NJP.
Regardless of the legal issues of this incident, it brings up a gripe I have with VDOT and their general lack of paved shoulders on divided highways across much of the state. I've been on the stretch of Route 360 where this incident occurred, and the lack of paved shoulders is likely a contributing reason as to why the bicyclist was in the right lane on a 65 MPH highway to begin with...
Posted by: Froggie | October 16, 2009 at 06:47 PM
Was the driver of the van Drunk there was no mention of drinking and driving
Posted by: its me | November 07, 2009 at 09:38 PM
Not drunk.
Posted by: Washcycle | November 07, 2009 at 11:01 PM
No one will ever know if he was drunk or not. No sobriety tests were done.
Posted by: Denise | November 18, 2009 at 11:59 PM