CdM is in love!

[grumbler]

Of course.  It applies under normal traffic conditions.  Not when someone stops in the middle of the road for no reason, without any flashers.

Dead aniumals on the road, tree branches on the road, fallen objects on the road, large potholes on the road... all of these, and more, are "stopped" objects, on the road, don't have flashers, and are part of normal traffic conditions.  It's a concept you seem to willfully ignore, for reasons unknown.

Any of those things would have killed the guy and his daughter.  It's another concept you seem to willfully ignore, for reasons unknown.

[Neil]

While I have no doubt that the duck-loving woman was stupid and negligent, both to a criminal degree, I wonder how the motocyclist managed to do nothing at all to avoid ramming her car.  Was there a bend or rise in the highway that prevented him from seeing her in time?  Was he just not paying attention?

[The Brain]

Fallen women on the road.

[viper37]

So what happens in Canada if say your car broke down and perhaps there might have been time* for you to steer it into a shoulder but you failed to act. In the interim, someone smacked into you on a motorcycle and died. Would you be doomed to suffer the same blame and shame as this woman?

*hard to see how this could easily be determined after the fact apart from I guess witness statements?

Depends.  If your car breaking down is the result of a gross negligence in maintaining it, you knew there was a problem but never bothered to fix it, you might be liable.
If it's a heavy truck you are driving in Quebec, the owned of the truck is definately criminally liable if he can't prove his truck was well maintained through regular inspections and proof of repairs.

[viper37]

It would certainly be relevant if the dead guy's estate sued the woman. Maybe BB could fill you in on whether the Judge would take it into account in sentencing as a mitigating factor.

No fault.  Can't happen in Quebec.

[grumbler]

While I have no doubt that the duck-loving woman was stupid and negligent, both to a criminal degree, I wonder how the motocyclist managed to do nothing at all to avoid ramming her car.  Was there a bend or rise in the highway that prevented him from seeing her in time?  Was he just not paying attention?

It appears* that he was tailgating the vehicle ahead of him (a car pulling a camper, so he couldn't see around it).  He was also speeding.**  When the camper and car swerved into the right lane to avoid the stopped car, he was too close to the stopped car to even significantly slow.**  His wife, also on a bike with him, had no problem stopping in time.**

From what i have read from people who claim to know the area, there was no blind curve or rise or anything, which fits the idea that the woman was able to see the ducks in time to (criminally-stupidly) stop and try to assist them.

*from the outcome, not the testimony

** from the testimony

[Eddie Teach]

I stopped on the side of the road

Anyway, no motorcycles ran into my car.  Granted, there weren't any other cars at all on the road, but hey.

bold part emphasized.  Conditions are different than aforementionned.  Try it again, but this time, stop right n the middle of your lane, don't use hazard flashers, see what happens.

Something tells me he would have gotten the same results. 

[Neil]

Hmmm...  Seems like the motorcyclist was a bit of a dickhead.

[Razgovory]

While I have no doubt that the duck-loving woman was stupid and negligent, both to a criminal degree, I wonder how the motocyclist managed to do nothing at all to avoid ramming her car.  Was there a bend or rise in the highway that prevented him from seeing her in time?  Was he just not paying attention?

The wife said he was was trying to gesture at the woman on the side of the road, so I think we can infer that he was focused on the driver of the car and did not have both hands on the handlebars.  I suspect the wife was going the same speed as the husband otherwise she wouldn't have been able to witness the incident.

[crazy canuck]

While I have no doubt that the duck-loving woman was stupid and negligent, both to a criminal degree, I wonder how the motocyclist managed to do nothing at all to avoid ramming her car.  Was there a bend or rise in the highway that prevented him from seeing her in time?  Was he just not paying attention?

As was established early on in the thread, we dont know enough about the facts.  But that didnt stop Grumbler in his one man crusade to establish that the motorcycle driver was clearly the one with the majority of blame and that Quebec legal judgments are subpar.  The rest of us posed hypotheticals to might explain the motorcyclists behaviour.  Since they conflicted with Grumbler's proclamation he denounced them as being "assinine".

So, everything was as usual while you were away. 

[viper37]

Dead aniumals on the road, tree branches on the road, fallen objects on the road, large potholes on the road... all of these, and more, are "stopped" objects, on the road, don't have flashers, and are part of normal traffic conditions.  It's a concept you seem to willfully ignore, for reasons unknown.

Any of those things would have killed the guy and his daughter.  It's another concept you seem to willfully ignore, for reasons unknown.

Did you even look at the road?  I'm guessing not.

[viper37]

Lots of cars and motorcycles stopping, and perhaps an accident if following drivers are careless or inattentive.  What would a non-reasonable person like you expect?

I expect to see brake lights well in advance.  I certainly do not expect a car to be stopped in the middle of the highway, on the left lane.

[viper37]

The wife said he was was trying to gesture at the woman on the side of the road, so I think we can infer that he was focused on the driver of the car and did not have both hands on the handlebars.  I suspect the wife was going the same speed as the husband otherwise she wouldn't have been able to witness the incident.

He was gesturing at his wife to slow down.  The wife also hit the stationary car.

[DGuller]

The wife said he was was trying to gesture at the woman on the side of the road, so I think we can infer that he was focused on the driver of the car and did not have both hands on the handlebars.  I suspect the wife was going the same speed as the husband otherwise she wouldn't have been able to witness the incident.

He was gesturing at his wife to slow down.  The wife also hit the stationary car.

Must run in the family.

[Razgovory]

The wife said he was was trying to gesture at the woman on the side of the road, so I think we can infer that he was focused on the driver of the car and did not have both hands on the handlebars.  I suspect the wife was going the same speed as the husband otherwise she wouldn't have been able to witness the incident.

He was gesturing at his wife to slow down.  The wife also hit the stationary car.

Must run in the family.

They marry family members up there?  That explains somethings.