Battery of Cyclist treated as Hit and Run

From a reader who was hit and nearly run over on December 28th while cycling to work.

The details are as follows:  On Monday, Dec 28,  I was southbound on 4th Ave NE and I stopped for the red light at the intersection with Rhode Island Ave. I was in a marked bike lane. To my right was a right-turn lane; to my left, the lane for through traffic and left turns.

The light turned green and the driver of an SUV in the right-turn lane started blowing her horn and merging into MY lane because she wanted to go _through_ the intersection. I pulled forward, staying in my lane, and when she continued to use her horn I stopped to ask what it was that she was trying to alert me about.   She continued to use the horn, then looked at me as she pulled forward into me, catching my rear wheel beneath her front left fender.  This forced me and the bike down onto the pavement. I rolled away as she continued to drive across my bike, narrowly missing my lower legs, and totally ruining my bicycle.  She immediately sped away south on 4th Avenue.

I called 911 for police and ambulance, as I was unsure as to the extent of my injuries.  The officers and emergency personnel who responded were all courteous, professional and efficient.

For the driver to look right at me when stopped, then drive into me and risk deadly harm needs to be treated as nothing less than an assault.

At this point the incident is being treated as a hit-and-run, but given the intent of the driver to harm my person and property, I insist that this be classified as an assault and the perpetrator pursued accordingly.

I actually think it's at least battery or possibly attempted murder (if that's a crime in DC).

The cyclist had the license plate number, a description of the car and a description of the driver - all of which he gave to the police. The hit and run investigator with MPD has tried to contact the driver, but hasn't succeeded yet. Obviously, the cyclist would like to see this crime treated more seriously than it has been. A few phone calls seems inadequate. And since he's out a bicycle, he's eager to get insurance information.

Update: This has been upgraded to a felony assault and being prioritized by MPD

Comments

[Lee Watkins]

you can look up any license plate number for a small fee on several websites. Gives the address and phone # of the owner, insurance info, make and model, etc.

[SJE]

"The hit and run investigator with MPD has tried to contact the driver, but hasn't succeeded yet"

What?

RING RING
Driver: Hello
MPD: MPD here. Do you drive a big SUV, license plate BIK H8TR?
Driver: Yes I do
MPD: Someone on a bike says you ran him over
Driver: No, it wasn't me.
MPD: Sorry to bother you. Have a nice day...CLICK...(heads out to wave guns at people throwing snowballs)

[SJE]

Assault and battery are both possible charges, along with malicious property damage, and miscellaneous traffic violations including failure to yield, operating a vehicle in unsafe manner, etc.

Interestingly, the charges chosen suggest that the crime, in the view of MPD, is LEAVING the area, not causing it in the first place.

Aren't there cameras, including at the BP gas station at the corner?

[Eugene Stevanus]

I am saddened to read this account, but not surprised. I am the father of two elementary school children who ride their bikes one mile to a DC charter school each day. We are part of a group of bike riding parents and kids, and our group varies in size from six kids with adults at the front and back of our “bike school bus” to as many as twelve kids and four adults.

We have had Metro bus drivers drive only five feet behind our kids while we are biking west on Park Road (where it is a one-way one lane street) and begin blasting their bus horns at the kids. I have had DC school bus drivers yelling at me to get our bicyclists off the street and onto the sidewalk “where they belong.”

Each school day we cross New Hampshire Avenue at a zebra walk one block from the school and drivers never yield until an adult cyclist (generally me) rides into traffic and blocks the car lanes. Every time I move into traffic at the zebra walk, I hope that no drivers are texting at the moment, and that no one is so angry with their commute that they will decide to simply run me down, as someone did to the rider in the story above.

DC police should act immediately to resolve the incident related by the rider in the story above, not just because of injuries to rider and the damage done to his bicycle, but also to send a strong message that belligerent behavior behind the wheel will not be tolerated on our congested streets. It’s outrageous the driver has not yet been arrested.

[bikinginla]

Assuming the process is the same there as it is here in L.A., it's the District Attorney who will decide what charges to file, rather than the police. However, the police will determine how the evidence is collected and presented to the D.A.

In my experience, police won't take a cyclist's word that an assault was intentional without independent evidence — at least, they didn't in my case. Unless you can find a witness or video footage to show she did it on purpose, or apply sufficient pressure at a higher level of the department, it's likely to be treated as a traffic accident.

[SJE]

Biking in LA, you raise good points. However, Its hardly just "the word" of a cyclist. You have (a) an injured cyclist (b) a destroyed bike.

[bikinginla]

I understand, SJE. But from the perspective of the police, that only proves that a collision occurred — not that it was intentional.

The driver is liable to argue that a) she never saw a cyclist and had no idea she hit anyone, or b) it was somehow the cyclist's fault, which makes it his word against the driver's.

That was exactly the situation I found myself in when a drive ran me down in a very similar road rage assault. All the physical evidence supported my version of the events. And the police ignored it all, said it was a case of "he said/she said" and let her get away with it.

With the current "blame the cyclist" mentality, far too often it takes a lot more than that to get an arrest — let alone a conviction.

[SJE]

Sorry for what happened to you: did you actually get the car driving over your bike?

[Contrarian]

My experience is that east of Rock Creek Park it is very difficult to get the police to take any sort of crime seriously. Theft will be reported as lost property and attempted murder as assault. The cops are under intense pressure to keep the crime numbers down and it's much easier to prevent crimes being reported than it is to prevent crimes.

I'm not sure the cyclist in this case is being treated differently because he's a cyclist.

[stan]

the dc police are not going to help. i've had numerous filings with them, and plenty of direct evidence. two of the assaults were similar to yours and are STILL IN PROCESS 2 years after the fact....ive viewed mugshots, etc.. the dc police need to be sued. maybe that will draw attention from afar and embarrass them into action.

to be fair, police are, historically, sociologically and psychologically, not the brighest lights in the harbor. the data is overwhelming on this front.

i would arrange to go to city hall during an open questions and answer period and tell the political morons your story...invite the media.

welcome to bicycling in the usa...plutocracy has supplanted emocracy, and there is not a social institution yet that does more than sustain the status quo. think im kidding? forget about something serious like vehicular assault. NO ONE can answer the SIMPLE question of when the WOD trail, or the Mt Vernon Trail or the CCT will be repaved. (answer: they are not going to repaved
in the next 20 years. but pressing an "official" to admit this is too embarassing, so they just duck the question...as they can in a plutocracy.

[Catherine]

@ contrarian:

ding ding ding! i thought i was the only person who realized this. i still think i may be the only person who realizes this and also used it as a deciding factor to live where she lives (i just cannot and will not live somewhere where i don't believe that the police have the law-abiding public's interest as a priority)

[washcycle]

stan, for a minute I thought emocracy was some government term I didn't know. I'm guessing it's a typo, but I like the idea of a government based on DC-born Emo music.

[JTS]

Contrarian FTW. Cops in this city actively avoid enforcing laws because of this.

[Daniel]

The term I've heard is vehicular assault but a witness is critical to show that the driver did in fact knowingly run over the rider. If not the driver will say they never saw the person and may even deny they were involved.

[Washcycle]

MPD is now treating this as a felony assault.

[Jonathan Krall]

Thanks for the report and the update. Kudos to whomever got the police to take this seriously.

[SJE]

When did the police upgrade the charges?
Will it make a difference? (i.e., will the difference in classification make a difference in actual investigating this)

[Washcycle]

Today I think. I believe the case is getting more attention, but only time will tell if that makes a difference.

[An Officer and a Cyclist]

"Assault and battery are both possible charges, along with malicious property damage"

I love the armchair lawyering from people who have no idea what's in DC code and what's not.

"Interestingly, the charges chosen suggest that the crime, in the view of MPD, is LEAVING the area, not causing it in the first place."

Question: In order for there to be an assault, you have to have the suspect, an assault and criminal intent. If you were writing up the incident report, which elements of a crime could you definitely sustain? At the bare minimum you could sustain Leaving After Colliding (LAC), which coupled with a complainant ID of the driver might get you bare minimum probable cause for a warrant. But that's shaky at best and unless you can put the person you haul in behind the wheel operating the wheel you'll have an extremely weak case and one in which I'd be skeptical that the US Attorney would paper.

"Assuming the process is the same there as it is here in L.A., it's the District Attorney who will decide what charges to file, rather than the police. However, the police will determine how the evidence is collected and presented to the D.A.

"In my experience, police won't take a cyclist's word that an assault was intentional without independent evidence — at least, they didn't in my case. Unless you can find a witness or video footage to show she did it on purpose, or apply sufficient pressure at a higher level of the department, it's likely to be treated as a traffic accident."

If there's an arrest, an officer writes up the arrest paperwork and the narrative. Your narrative on your arrest paperwork needs to contain the elements of the statute you're stating the person committed. When the case is presented for papering, the USAO or OAG attorney screening the case will look at the paperwork and the evidence presented and decide what will ultimately be charged. In this case, MPD can say that they're treating this as a Felony Assault (or ADW car, or whatever the actual charge is), but what the case is ultimately papered as is what counts.

Biking in LA, you raise good points. However, Its hardly just "the word" of a cyclist. You have (a) an injured cyclist (b) a destroyed bike.

And that proves what? That an accident with injuries occurred and there's destroyed property. So far all you have is LAC. If the incident was an accident between two vehicles it'd still only be LAC. How do you prove intent?

My experience is that east of Rock Creek Park it is very difficult to get the police to take any sort of crime seriously. Theft will be reported as lost property and attempted murder as assault. The cops are under intense pressure to keep the crime numbers down and it's much easier to prevent crimes being reported than it is to prevent crimes.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm fine writing up incidents as thefts, robberies, etc. No big deal. But what you have to realize is that just because you think something should be written up as a particular kind of incident doesn't make it so. For instance, say you're taking your car through the car wash and the guys forget to fold your mirrors and the mirror gets damaged/torn off. How would you classify that? You'd say destruction of property...and you'd be wrong. It's a damage to property which isn't an offense. It's subtle things that change how officers write up an incident.

to be fair, police are, historically, sociologically and psychologically, not the brighest lights in the harbor. the data is overwhelming on this front.

Very old trope. Just because many officers don't have a four year diploma hanging on their wall like I do, doesn't make them dopes. Many of them are far smarter, both intellectually and street-wise, then the people who look down on them. Yes, there are many departments where they aren't that bright, but many are, and there are few jobs in which you have to have a comprehensive knowledge of both law and departmental and municipal regulations. I know more about criminal law than the average attorney and do more writing critical thinking in a week than the average office drone (of which I was one).

"Contrarian FTW. Cops in this city actively avoid enforcing laws because of this."

Nobody tells me how to write up things and how to enforce the law but me. No sergeants or lieutenants are riding with me and making decisions for me unless they're paying attention to the radio or if I call them.

-An Officer and a Cyclist

[Washcycle]

@Officer, Thanks for your response. It does indeed help to hear from experts. I think that there is probably a lot of ignorance about how officers do their jobs and it's instructive to hear about the process.

[Froggie]

I'm assuming, based on the Officer's comments, that LAC is DC's equivalent of hit-and-run?

[SJE]

Office and a Cyclist: as for "arm chair lawyering" I am a member of the DC bar (among others) and have read the DC code on point, and am well aware of the common law elements of assault. I appreciate your experience on the ground, but ad hominems are unecessary.

The fact that it may not be papered is a matter of practice and procedure, not the code. This reflects not only the practicalities of prosecution, but also the policies and beliefs of law enforcement and prosecutors. As such, when a particular charge is levied, and not another, it is reasonable to ask why.

There is a widespread belief that cyclists are poorly protected by the law. Part of that derives from the weak penalties under the code, part from the lack of enforcement or the minor charges that are levied. A prosecutor could, if she wanted, try for more serious charges to make a point, instead of just going along with what is easier to get a conviction/plea. In this case, I wanted to ask why only some charges and not others.

[Forrest]

At least the man wasn't seriously injured. I hope he finds justice, gets a bike quickly, and that it's covered by the assailant, ideally, or at least by insurance.

[Lisa]

I wonder whether DC cops on bikes are more likely to write up traffic violators, since they share the risk more. I have no reason to think so, because when I've asked them, they say their job is just providing "visibility." But I cycle on in hope.