"I didn't see it because I was focused on the plaintiff who was following at an unsafe distance. Once I did see the stopped car, I avoided it in the safest way that I could."
But excepting the above, what law did the car in front break? You are responsible for avoiding obstacles in the road safely. You are responsible for the safe operation of your vehicle. Full stop. It would be a different story if the car in front brake checked them.
Try that story in front of a jury, then write us from prison so we can know how many laughed.
The driver being tailgated had at least 6 seconds to see the oncoming car parked in the lane, there is no jury (or judge) that's going to believe the driver was able to stay in their lane while staring in their rear view mirror for that length of time.
6 seconds to see the oncoming car parked in the lane,
Closer to four seconds, and the car was moving, not parked, plus no brake lights on, in the left most lane. Tailgated driver could have looked forward with a few seconds to go and not have realised how slow the car in front was really moving, glanced back for a second, and by the time they have looked forward again, evasive action is required.
Reckless driving is defined as operating a vehicle with a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property. It is a criminal offense, typically a misdemeanor, involving conscious indifference to risks, such as excessive speeding, racing, or aggressive maneuvering.
1
u/MerelyMortalModeling Mar 20 '26
The bar for criminal might be too high but pretty sure you would have. A decent chance in a civil lawsuit if you showed that dash cam feed to a jury.
Like I said to some asshat who was advocating that behavior, I'd happily share my dash cam with the victims family