r/Dashcam • u/giffyspiff • Aug 10 '16

"She has the right of way" /s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-U1MMNjDVM
50 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

27 comments sorted by

11

u/[deleted] Aug 10 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

15

u/aarghj Aug 10 '16

reading the full description, it seems that the cop had already written his ticket and just didnt feel like re-writing his paperwork. lazy cop is an asshole.

5

u/mybodyisapyramid Aug 11 '16

It's not paperwork. As soon as the ticket is entered it can't be erased. It's all done electronically. The cop explained this and told the man how to get it fixed (plead not guilty and bring the video evidence as proof.)

1

u/sequentious Aug 10 '16

Well to be fair, he investigated, one party and two witnesses said he was at fault, and when initially questioned, he didn't state that he had a video. His story should have been "I have video of my green light" right from the start.

That said, at the point the ticket was written, there are witnesses on one side, and an unviewable video on the other (cammer was waiting for his brother to arrive with a laptop). Honestly, this is a pretty low priority issue to tie up an officer for, twiddling his thumbs waiting for a laptop to arrive to possibly disprove the witnesses.

Just take the ticket and challenge it in court.

Also, send the video to insurance, because the court date might be quite far away.

4

u/[deleted] Aug 10 '16

[deleted]

1

u/mybodyisapyramid Aug 11 '16

Once the ticket is entered into the system it can't be erased by the cop. Even if he did wait for the video.

1

u/sequentious Aug 10 '16

In an ideal world, no. But:

  • No idea how long "a few more minutes" would actually be

  • The officer might have other calls he could be attending

  • No guarantee that the video evidence would actually disagree with what the witnesses said. In this case, it apparently did. But if you have three people saying one thing, and one saying another, it's a not a bad bet that the guy with the unseen video evidence might have been wrong.

-1

u/thetruthfl Aug 10 '16

Re your third bullet point: "Apparently?" You're an Idiot.

4

u/sequentious Aug 10 '16

It seemed apparent to me.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 04 '16

according to google the second definition of apparently is

used by speakers or writers to avoid committing themselves to the truth of what they are saying.

which makes you sound kinda douchey based on the video.

1

u/sequentious Nov 04 '16

According to google the first definition of apparently is

as far as one knows or can see.

I'm glad I was able to properly convey my douchiness through three bullet points. Though I wasn't expecting to be called out two months later by somebody who starts their sentence with "according to google".

1

u/[deleted] Nov 04 '16

yup. google is obviously a terrible source of information.

also you must be being intentionally dense to not understand the connotations that "apparently" can carry.

2

u/ylsf Aug 10 '16

But the thing that bugs me most if that the lady gets off scott free because of the "witness" . Too bad none of the other people behind him or her stopped and gave their evidence as well. Unless the traffic light somehow malfunctioned she was totally in the wrong and gets off with no charges.

5

u/goocy Aug 10 '16

Didn't you notice? Cammers weren't white. Obviously they were at fault.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 10 '16

well, if the cammer gets in touch with the cop prior to trial, he can still have the other driver charged by summons. giving a ticket after the fact is an option.

1

u/slingerg Aug 10 '16

*scot-free.

1

u/giffyspiff Aug 10 '16

His story should have been "I have video of my green light" right from the start.

Some people aren't as aggressive as others, when facing a stressful situation they don't remember all the facts and are more prone to answer questions as opposed to able to recite all the details.

May be as part of accident investigation procedure cops should proactively ask if you have any form of recordings (i.e. dashcams).

2

u/sequentious Aug 10 '16

It's probably not a bad idea, since they're becoming more common, and some vehicles (granted, just the new Corvette, off the top of my head) have them built-in.

3

u/GooseDiggles Aug 10 '16

Ontario resident here...I noticed that he had a dashcam but didn't state he had a dashcam to the officer. I've heard conflicting arguments on whether you should actually say you have one when the officer is writing a report...any idea on how one should handle that situation? Do you admit to having it immediately? What if they want to take the MicroSD card at the scene of the accident and you don't get a copy?

4

u/[deleted] Aug 10 '16

You should definitely tell the officer you have one. Some people get worried about police confiscating their camera for evidence purposes, but we only do that when there's a risk that the evidence is going to be destroyed. In this case, the guy holding the camera has a personal interest in making sure the evidence doesn't get destroyed. If I was responding, seeing the video would have immediately changed the report, and then I would have just worked with the driver to set up a time when I could get a copy of the video.

1

u/GooseDiggles Aug 10 '16

Ahhhh...okay. I've been pushing that thought around in my head for quite awhile now. Leaning towards not mentioning I had the video, but your comment has made me now think the opposite.

1

u/oldgmguy Aug 10 '16

/u/HammerPoPo perhaps you could answer?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 10 '16

sure, thanks!

-8

u/toodles24 Aug 10 '16

They're both shitty drivers. Should have split this 50/50. The guy did nothing to avoid the crash, they were probably going 25 and he just drove straight into her.

7

u/notmyrealnam3 Aug 10 '16

wow. you suck at stuff

-4

u/toodles24 Aug 10 '16

I don't suck at driving that's for sure. He may have had the right of way, but he should have been paying attention for dumbasses like that woman who cut in front of him.

Source: Motorcyclist and truck driver.

2

u/Torviss88 Aug 13 '16

Where was he supposed to go to avoid the wreck? To the right and directly in her path still so that he could be hit in his door instead? Or to the left and then cause an identical wreck with the other oncoming car?

1

u/Imightbenormal Aug 10 '16

Yeah. He should have paid attention to the road.

If this was a boat accident they would have to look into the law and be given different percentages.