OMG! My wife was arrested this morning!

[Xithras]

And NOBODY even bothered to call and tell me!!! :argh:

Apparently she was driving to work this morning when a 12 year old kid on a bicycle blew a stop sign and smashed into the side of her minivan, helmetless, while racing one of his friends to school. He laid on the ground for a minute dazed, but then got up, apologized, and rode off yelling "I'm going to be late for school!". Aside from a big rubber scuff mark on her paint (which will buff right off), there was no damage to the car, so she hopped in and continued driving to work.

She got about halfway there when THREE police cruisers pulled her over, and five officers ordered her out of the van at gunpoint and arrested her.

From what we've been able to gather so far, the accident was witnessed by an off-duty police officer who called it in when it happened. He wrote her plate down and took off after the kid when he split. They took the kid to the school nurses office, where they figured out that he apparently strained his neck and sustained a mild concussion. He was taken to the hospital from the school.

My wife was arraigned early this afternoon and has been charged with "Fleeing the scene of an injury motor vehicle accident" (hit-and-run in commonspeak), which is a felony. She called our lawyer, who got the judge to release her on her own recognizance, but she didn't bother to call ME because she "didn't want to bother me at work" :eyes: I love this woman dearly, but I think I just may lay into her a bit when I get home...that's friggin nuts!

Now, I have to go rent her a car. They've apparently impounded her van as "evidence", so she has no way to drive to work. That may be irrelevant anyway since she's a schoolteacher, and there's a damned good chance that she's going to get suspended anyway when they find out she's up on felony charges. FLUCK FLUCK FLUCK!

Anyone ever heard of someone getting charged for an accident like this? Our lawyer says they have no case, but all lawyers say that to their clients. She doesn't see where she did anything wrong, and neither do I!

I think need a drink. Or three.

[XemaSab]

1. That sucks!

It seems to me like the kid "fled" the scene first.

Good luck, and I hope it works out ok!

[trof]

2. 1. She should have stayed right there and called the police.

But given the circumstances, I think most people wouldn't.
Kid hits YOU, jumps up and says he's OK, there's no damage to your car, you go on.

2. The witnessing officer should be able to clear her, but I think he went overboard by calling her in as "fleeing" the scene. maybe there's no radio code for "hit vehicle leaves scene after hitting vehicle clears out"?

I really think once you get together with all involved the case will be dropped.

No, I'm not an attorney, but I DID spend the night in a Holiday Inn.
;-)
Best of luck.

[Xithras]

8. See, that's what I don't get.

I could understand if it was simply a miscommunication that got her arrested, but there was an assistant DA there at the arraignment requesting that she be HELD. If the DA's office is involved already, doesn't that mean that someone should have reviewed the evidence by now? Shouldn't they have seen how incredibly stupid this is?

I can understand her being arrested, but how in the world do they justify CHARGING her?!?!

[trof]

18. Waaay overzealous.

Keep us posted.

[LisaL]

56. To be fair, I don't think so.

Clearly, the kid got some sort of head trauma, and even though the accident was his fault, he is just a kid. The adult should have known better, I suppose. Although she probably was scared shitless herself, and hoped it would all go away, it obviously didn't. And clearly wasn't the right thing to do.

[Truebrit71sbruv]

91. I disagree completely...

... it is totally overzealous - especially the part regarding the use of three cruisers and unholstered guns.

If the off-duty police officer had engaged his brain, he might have asked the kid what happened before raining all kinds of police/legal-hell on the head of this woman.

Unless of course the kid had been "got to" by the legal-vultures by this stage.

Both parties were at fault for leaving the scene - but this is a human issue, where strict adherence to legal technicalities have a habit of becoming a steamroller and hinderance rather than the purveyors of logic.

Boof! Accident! Kid feels dumb, dazed and shaken but otherwise okay - hurtles off to school. Woman feels dazed, shaken and I'm sure more than a little confused - but sees kid is outwardly okay because he rode off at high-speed on his bike. Kid has left scene, woman stands - sheesh, that was a close call, glad the kid is okay. A shake or two of the head and on her way.

Can all those writing "well she should not have left, she should have stayed and called police, Superman, God etc" HONESTLY say they would not have done very similiarly given the same set of circumstances?

If there is any legal comeback on this woman then I'm afraid it only shows the law is an ass.

[LisaL]

92. Why would he ask the kid what happened? The police officer

saw it happen... and then he took off after the kid. And how do we even know the kid didn't get the ticket as well?

[Truebrit71sbruv]

93. Don't the police ask all victims what happened?

And if he saw what happened why did he not report the incident, give the kid a ticket (granted we don't know if he did or not), and then have the police call round to see the woman to get her side of the story? 3 cruisers and guns drawn is a) totally out of proportion and b) a complete waste of police resources.

She no more fled the scene than Bush won the election in 2000.

[LisaL]

95. Did you read the OP? The police officer was off duty.

When he saw the accident, he called it in (as in, reported it), then took off after the kid. I doubt he was in his car, he probably was at home, watching it trough the window or something. So, he didn't arrive at the scene before both the van and the kid were off. After the police officer took off after the kid, and found him, then he likely did whatever it is he is supposed to do to interview someone who has been in an accident. So, the cops that apprehended the wife were informed by the police officer she left the scene of the accident.

[Truebrit71sbruv]

98. (Yes, of course I did) and exactly...

... all the more reason not to "apprehend" and charge (for goodness' sake!) the wife with such over-zealousness.

[miss_kitty]

127. Facts not in evidence

"I doubt he was in his car, he probably was at home, watching it trough the window or something..."

you base conclusions on assumptions that you are admittedly making. Give it up...your argument loses all credibility when you draw conclusions based on non factual musings. Off duty officers do drive around in vehicles as well.

[Xithras]

129. Actually, I can understand the drawn guns part.

The police who arrested her really had no idea what was going on, they probably just received a hit and run report with her plate and car description. It's unlikely that they had any idea who was in the car or why she "fled".

I'm just thankful that she didn't get shot or anything.

[Truebrit71sbruv]

94. And in the UK...

... a similar standard of behaviour on the part of the police would have a "Malicious Arrest" suit on the desk of the Chief Constable by tomorrow lunchtime.

[LisaL]

96. Well, it ain't' the UK, in case you didn't notice.

[Truebrit71sbruv]

99. No it's not...

and again, exactly my point.

[miss_kitty]

128. It can still be a false arrest here in the US

It does happen, and she is actually THE VICTIM, according to facts laid out in the OP.

[GrpCaptMandrake]

68. Fact is

the Assistant DA probably knew less about the case than YOU did. Saying "put her in the stir" is his/her job.

That's the problem with the modern state of "cookie cutter" justice. It can't help but fail in its presumption of guilt. We're all taught about the constitutional "presumption of innocence," but at this point in time, it's pretty much become a myth on a par with the tooth fairy and the easter bunny. Your wife was NOT presumed innocent. That off duty cop (who probably has every bit of a high school education, in addition to his badge, gun and radio) knew nothing more than to call and play "rat." Discretion is neither taught, nor valued nor cherished in modern law enforcement. Your wife was treated just like one would treat a "real" hit and run. Contrary to popular right wing belief, that's NOT the definition of "Equal Justice Under Law."

Sorry for your misery, and most especially your wife's.

More sorry for jumping on the soapbox.

[LisaL]

55. To be fair, sounds like the kid was out of it (dazed) for a minute

or so, if he was laying on the ground. Head traumas are the worst.
I don't think an adult should have let this kid to go off on his bike after this. That said, why didn't the police officer interfere right then and there, if he was observing the whole thing?

[Solon]

86. Problem I see is that you can be charged with more crimes...

by trying to detain the kid while trying to call the cops.

[LisaL]

89. Nobody said she should have detained the kid.

Kids actions are irrelevant to her being charged, because she isn't charged with hitting him, she is charged with leaving the scene. In fact, if kid wanted to leave, after she asked him not to, she had no choice but let the kid go, and not detain him physically. Instead, she should have remained at the scene, and contacted the police. This way, she would have been completely in the clear, since the accident was kid's fault.

[Solon]

102. True, but then again, I have to ask...

why isn't he in jail as well, for the same crime? After all, he left the scene first, did she do wrong? Yes, but it could be attributed to the fact that she didn't know he was injured, nor would she be qualified to make an assessment of his condition short of him bleeding on the street. He was apparently in a hurry and left first, he was guilty of a crime before she was, so in this case, her case could be dismissed on the premise that she couldn't reasonably ascertain his condition short of detaining him for said assessment, which is a crime unto itself.

[Xithras]

130. But what would she have reported?

"Hello 911? A kid just rode his bicycle into the side of my car and rode off. No, there's no damage. No, I don't think he's injured. No, I don't know who he was, he hopped back on his bike and left."

What are the odds that the police would have even responded?

[LisaL]

149. They have to respond, so, I would say the odds are pretty good.

Basically, the 100 %. And she did have some damage to her car. Had she reported it, she would have been collecting money from kid's parents insurance company instead of facing charges. Of course hindsight is always 20-20.

[Devra]

87. I agree

the kid fled first once he left there realy wasn't much of a scene to flee from, was there?

[Neshanic]

112. These days you need to call the police even if the kid rode off...

That way you have record of reporting, no matter how insignificant the incident. It's just the way things are now.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

3. I'm so sorry!

What an ordeal! I'll bet the charges will be dropped, given the circumstances. I just hope the cop who "witnessed" the incident got the facts straight.

Keeping you guys in my thoughts....

[Bunny]

4. Holy crap! She got arrested for that?

Dang, that just doesn't seem right. Hopefully this will all be cleared up with the judge.

[ikojo]

5. I suspect that had the person she hit not been a kid,

the witnessing cop would not have called it in as a hit and run.

I'd worry about the kid's parents suing you, especially if they smell any possibility of money. A 12 year old really cannot determine whether he/she is injured or not injured following an accident.

[trof]

6. um...the kid hit HER.

[ikojo]

25. When it's a kid the adult is ALWAYS at fault...

ALWAYS!

I can see a lawyer saying she should have looked all around her and should have seen the kid racing toward her van.

[XemaSab]

41. The kid was breaking TWO laws!

Running a stop sign on a bike and NOT WEARING A HELMET!

[SouthernDem2004]

48. Does not matter. She violated the law by leaving. The kid could have been

drinking a beer, smoking crack and carrying a severed human head in his backpack. She would still be guilty of Hit & Run.

[mtpWriter]

51. That's a "But he started it!" argument.

[XemaSab]

53. The other day my mom was driving to work

and she got hit from behind. She pulled over to the side of the road, and the other driver sped off.

As in this case, the other person started it.

[purr]

7. Exactly what I was thinking..

I bet they're seeing $$$ right about now :(

[Xithras]

12. Yeah, well, I hope not.

I'll probably have the body professionally inspected just for that reason. Since the kid ran the stop sign, he technically caused it and his parents can be pinned with any damages. Have you ever tried to take a slight ripple out of a door? Can't be done without thousands in body work.

Toss onto that the possibility of a "Mental Trauma" or PTSD countersuit ("my wife can't drive anymore because she's too afraid of pedestrians since the accident"), and I'm fairly sure we can scare off any lawsuits.

Of course, my lawyer will charge me a small fortune anyway, so I'm out no matter what we do.

[Left Is Write]

42. The off-duty cop should be able to verify that the kid hit your wife

rather than the other way around. I hope so, anyway.

Good luck to you both.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

9. How horrifying!

I'm thinking that the charges will be dropped, but what do I know?

Yikes.....

I'm sorry.....

And I'm holding the good thought for you all.....


:hug:

[Sanity Claws]

10. Not all lawyers say they have no case

Really. If your attorney does a lot of criminal defense work and tells you that, take some comfort in it. If he doesn't do a lot of criminal defense work, maybe you should consider getting someone else to represent you.

[catmother]

11. i think i would have

done the same thing that your wife did. hell, the kid took off -- apparently okay -- what was she supposed to do?

good luck.

[Jed Dilligan]

13. Good lord, do you live in Mayberry verging on Hitler's Berlin?

There are bullet holes in my building for chrissakes and tranny hookers spanging me at my doorstep. The busybody cop should be deployed to W. Oakland if he's so hot to arrest people.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

14. I agree completely.....

:hi:

[Xithras]

26. Hah, close!

I live in a town right next to Modesto, which is where this actually took place. MPD is well known for botching cases and shooting children and mental patients on "accident". They're a bunch of overzealous cowboys.

[Coventina]

114. No kidding. And there seem to be plenty of neo-nazis agreeing!

Scary world we live in when people think that a person should be arrested because an idiot kid hits YOU!

:eyes:

[LisaL]

155. The person wasn't arrested because an idiot kid hit her.

She was arrested because she left and didn't report it.
If you think you can leave the scene of the accident if you are a victim of it, you need to re-read your driver's instructions.

[chenGOD]

166. Perhaps the kid should have been charged with exactly the same offense?

after all cyclists must obey the same rules of the road as drivers in California.

[Coventina]

169. Ok, let me be more precise:

"Wow, I find it really amazing that there are so many neo-nazis that would agree that a person should be arrested on felony charges because they left the scene of a minor traffic accident in which the offending party left the scene of the accident first."

[Deja Q]

15. How about the frigging brat who broke the law too?

Bicycle riders have to follow the same rules, last I recall...

[Kathryn STone]

16. I am a paralegal. Try this on for size:

I know for a "fact" that police have quotas. Look at the date 10-26-05. I'm sorry I know you want to stay positive, but I do know this "fact" as well.
Best Wishes-
Kat

[Xithras]

27. Oh, good point! n/t

[SouthernDem2004]

44. Pffft I call BS. I am an Officer and we do not have quotas.

Do some agencies? Yes, sort of.

Is a felony hit&run part of any quota type? Heck no.

An adult was involved in a vehicle vs bicycle accident injuring a child. The adult failed to notify the police and left the scene. Bash Police all you want but clearly she failed to act within the law or responsibly.

[Kathryn STone]

85. rebuttal: what was this lady supposed to do, grab the kid and say, rop

"Ok you kid you stay right here I'm calling the police"?
I mean be real. This kid ran a stop sign. I know it's just a kid but he was the one who broke the law.

[LisaL]

88. No, she was supposed to call 911. If you are involved in a car

accident, and the other driver leaves the scene, it doesn't give you the right to leave the scene as well.

[Digit]

143. What if you don't have a cell phone? n/t

[SouthernDem2004]

147. Find a pay phone, a story etc

[Caoimhe]

120. Welcome to DU Kathryn! n/t

[SouthernDem2004]

142. They both broke laws. She should have summoned the Police even

if the child left.

[Left Is Write]

141. I agree that she should have called the police, but...

how can SHE be charged with "hit and run" when she did not do the hitting?

[SouthernDem2004]

45. Finger twitch :) Dupe

[SoCalDem]

17. It sucks, but you must ALWAYS call the police whenever you are

involved in a "dust-up" with another human..serious or not.. I was hit by a guy once, and everyone was ok, but I called the cops anyway, since I wanted it on the record that everyone was ok at the scene, and they got his information from him on the phone.. cops never came out, but my insurance said that was always the thing to do because you never know who else might be watching the incident..

I hope your lawyer can at least plead it to a misdemeanor for her:(

[miss_kitty]

19. The kid who hit your wife left the scene as well

was he arrested? He also ran a stop sign; she had right of way.

And lawyers don't say "They have no case" to all their clients.

[LisaL]

57. Yea, but he is just a kid. If he was an adult, he would have gotten

the ticket, and he should have been arrested for leaving the scene of the accident as well.

[miss_kitty]

71. It doesn't matter. That isn't a law just for adults

A bike is a vehicle and bike riders must follow the rules of the road.

My nephew hit a car on a bike after running a stop sign. He was 12 and got a ticket for it. And his parents' insurance had to pay for the repairs on the car.

[greblc]

20. I Child was hurt. My concern is for the boy above anything else.

I would have taken the boys phone number and or followed him to school and spoke with the school office and or parents.

Any time an Adult is in any altercation with a child gather adult witnesses and contact parents.

This will protect you and the child.

[LisaL]

78. Obviously, you would be better off not moving from the scene.

Any movement could be considered leaving the scene of the accident.

[NV Whino]

21. Seems to me

the kid was guilty of hit and run. Not to mention running a stop sign. And, it may be a good thing that the car is impounded to record the collision point. As far as I know they don't yet make cars that can move sideways.

[Momgonepostal]

22. Yikes, I have nightmares about stuff like this

Honestly.

I have no specific knowledge or insight that would help you. Sorry about that.

What a horrible, horrible thing.

Are you the one who lives near me? Were these guys MPD? Or county sheriff? I don't want to say the town you if you would rather not...I'm trying to be vague...

Good luck to you both!

[Xithras]

31. Yep, MPD.

I don't live in that town so I don't have to deal with them, but my wife drives through it on her way to work.

[Momgonepostal]

32. I'm so sorry you two are having to deal with this!

I hope it gets cleared up quickly and quietly.

[miss_kitty]

34. Ha! I have a friend who works with Turlock PD.

Lotsa great stories about the assholes running the MPD. And Turlock PD. And the assholes who work for them.

[LisaL]

60. Yep, I almost hit someone on the bicycle. He appeared

out of nowhere, and was riding on the sidewalk. Since he was riding on the sidewalk, had I hit him, it would have been his fault. I could have sued him for damages, LOL.

[flvegan]

23. A bicycle is a vehicle. That boy...fled the scene as well.

When are they arresting him?

Obviously, I don't believe they should. However, goose, meet gander. If they charge her and not him, that's unfair.

Also, since he hit her, the accident is his fault and his parents should pay damages AND your legal fees.

Your lawyer is right. There is no case. And frankly, if that asshat cop put a felony charge on MY record, I'd be seeing his department in court.

[Deja Q]

38. B-I-N-G-O!

:yourock:

[flvegan]

52. You like that, huh?

I was destined for law school. Never happened.

Thanks, btw.

[LisaL]

61. Hmm. Could it have something to do with the fact that he is 12?

[flvegan]

62. Could "what" have something to do with it?

Specifically...

[LisaL]

64. His age. He is 12 years old. Do you think

police would arrest a 12 year old for "hit and run"?

[flvegan]

69. Yes.

You should read a newspaper now and then.

Happens all the time for less.

Besides, my suggestion wasn't such that they should. However if fair is fair, it can't be argued that the kid should have as well.

Law is law. A bicycle is a vehicle. He did worse than she.

Welcome to America.

[LisaL]

73. Maybe you should read some newspapers too.

She is charged with leaving the scene of the accident, which she admits she did. It doesn't matter what the kid did, because what she accused of is an actual felony. So, the fact that the kid caused the accident is not relevant, considering she isn't charged with hitting him, but with leaving the scene of the accident.

[flvegan]

74. Which by the same standards, he should be too.

Why don't you just forget that this is a kid, and base your argument on the law, as my initial one was.

He also left the scene, right? That is the same felony, (except he quite possibly caused it).

Your scope of what is relevant makes my head spin. Congrats.

[LisaL]

75. Now, what does the law say about 12 year old being charged

with a felony? Do say...
:eyes:

[flvegan]

77. Well

depends on the state and the law violated. You obviously aren't going to get that (argumentative).

Never seen a minor charged with a felony, no? Get cable. There's news out there you should see. Better yet, seek news-oriented websites. You might be shocked, but you'll be amazed.

[Solon]

100. In most states?

Depending on the severity, they get relatively similar punishments as adults, anywhere from community service to prison time, in the appropriate juvenal facility of course. For some of the more severe crimes, they cannot be locked up past their 18 birthday, and all records from 18 years down are supposedly expunged. In other words, no lifetime felony record.

[ScreamingMeemie]

144. It's not that way in Michigan. Records are not expunged. They are sealed.

:hi:

[SouthernDem2004]

79. Only the driver of a vehicle can be charged with Leaving the Scene.

One could argue the bicycle is a vehicle but I doubt it will fly.

[SouthernDem2004]

80. Oops Ca Code does not consider a bicycle a vehicle.

670. A "vehicle" is a device by which any person or property may be
propelled, moved, or drawn upon a highway, excepting a device moved
exclusively by human power or used exclusively upon stationary rails
or tracks.

[flvegan]

82. CA Vehicle Code 21200

"Every person riding a bicycle upon a street or highway has all the rights and is subject to all the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle, including the provisions of law dealing with driving under the influence of alcoholic beverages or drugs, except those provisions which by their very nature can have no application."

Anything else?

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LostinVA]

105. In VA, a bike is considered a vehicle, and must follow

the same rules as cars, and must also be accorded the same respects/rights as a car. They should! The kid is only twelve, and I don't know what the law is there, but I suspect the OP will get off with a fine and a suspended sentence.

[radwriter0555]

67. You're right. Her lawyer MUST immediately seek damages from the lad's

parent's insurance.

Then the whole case will be tossed out.

[LisaL]

70. She was arrested for leaving the scene of the accident,

not actually hitting the kid. Since she actually did leave the scene of the accident, what legal fees should kid's parents pay for, do tell? She isn't denying that she actually did what she is accused of, is she? The kid hasn't been arrested because he is 12. At this age, he probably is too young to be charged as an adult, even if he kills someone.

[flvegan]

76. Whatever.

I'm really glad you aren't a judge nor my lawyer.

The kid, btw, hit her. He broke the law, then broke it again by leaving. He (read the post) left first. Ignorance of the law? Rigth. Why should he be judged differently? Because he's a child? Okay. Fair enough. Then she should be judged innocent because she was a victim of the same innocense.

Not looking to be charged as an adult. Looking for equal charges for an equal crime, if one was committed.

My point is, neither one should be charged, let alone arrested and having a felony blight on a permanent record.

[SouthernDem2004]

81. A bicylce is not a vehicle according to Ca code. By definition she

did commit a felony. She did violate the Ca statute without a doubt. The Police did their job. The DA is doing his job. The jury will be the one to decide. I have $20 that says they let her plea down to a misdemeanor.

[flvegan]

83. You'll do well to note my post above.

Thanks for playing.

[Evergreen Emerald]

111. I agree with you

As a prosecutor, I would reduce the charge to a misdemeanor--even perhaps give her a deferred sentence in which she would be required to be law abiding for a year, and attend driver's ed, and then if nothing else occurs, dismiss the charge all together.

I do not see this being a felony conviction.

[Xithras]

132. I don't know about that.

California law says that accidents have to be reported if there are injuries or damage to either of the vehicles. There was no real damage (my kids get scuff marks on our cars all the time, and she knows that I can buff them right out), so her only legal obligation to call would have been in case of an injury. Three people HEARD the boy say he was OK. Six people saw him get up, climb back onto his bicycle, and ride away at full speed. There was no visible bleeding, only a couple of tears and a minor scrape to his arm.

So the question really becomes this: Could any reasonable person have honestly believed that there was an injury here? There's no question now that he actually did have a concussion (I found out last night that he ended up with a nasty welt on his forehead), but there was no way for my wife or the other witnesses to know that at the time.

Without any apparent injury, no damage to the vehicles, and since the other "vehicle" had already left, I don't see how she broke the law by leaving!

Our lawyer thinks it will end up getting dropped completely. My wife also informed him last night that she has no interest in plea-bargaining this, because no reasonable person on a jury could throw her in jail for what she did. She's pretty pissed over this whole thing :)

[SouthernDem2004]

140. Hit & Run

Your attorney needs to get a copy of the report with the Officer's statement or speak to the Officer. The results hinge on what he says. If he says your wife was driving like a maniac and jumped out of the car and laughed at the innocent child she struck she is in deep trouble. I am sure he will say nothing like that but the odds are his story is what the jury will believe.

Make sure you have a criminal attorney familiar with the court she is to appear in. Also, Call the DA and have a meeting with him. The whole thing seems to be a honest mistake but that does not mean she will not get convicted. You may be able to get him to reduce the charge. Avoid going to trial if you can.

The one thing you both have to realize is that she did commit a crime. It seems unlikely she knew the child was injured but she is still required to remain on scene or notify authorities. I doubt she will get off with no charge. She should take the misdemeanor. (Just my opinion.)


Please do not let your attorney give you a false sense of comfort. If this goes to trial she could very well lose. Take this seriously. Here is a copy of the statue that applies: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=veh&group=19001-20000&file=20000-20018

Good luck

[Neshanic]

113. Yes, he is a vehicle. I got a ticket for riding a bike in a crosswalk

that was not signaled, and the other cars stopped...I am a vehicle when on the bike, and if I walked the bike across, I am a pedestrian.

[LoZoccolo]

119. Yes, you must get the kid in trouble.

Serious. The kid cooperated with the police to get your wife arrested. The kid must pay. The parents need to be taught that it would be good for them not to let the cop get away with this as well. Sue them for the lost time from work and the mental anguish if you can.

[LisaL]

151. Are you living in the US or are out of space somewhere?

When someone leaves the scene of the accident, they are breaking the law. The cop reported the accident, as he is supposed to do. I would hope anyone with any sense would have reported the accident as well. WTF do you think this cop can get in trouble for? For tracking down this child, and sending him to a hospital? The kid did have head trauma, after all.

[LoZoccolo]

164. The kid left first. Sue the kid!

If the parents or the kid want to sue someone, it should be the school for causing the kid mental anguish and making him be in a hurry to get to school.

[cleofus1]

24. the charges will not be dropped

don't be foolish call a lawyer with experiance in these types of cases now!

this is a slam dunk for the judge and the police...they have a witness that is a police officer...if that witness were going to drop the charges...they would not have been filed in the first place...consult with a lawyer asap!

that's my 2 cents anyway...

[Shakespeare]

28. Yup. And I'd also look for the parents to file a civil suit.

Sorry to sound pessimistic. :-(

[miss_kitty]

36. I'd file a suit against the kid and his parents.

He hit HER. And left the scene first. and ran a stop sign.

[Tallison]

150. That's what I was thinking

The civil suit may cost the wife more than a criminal conviction. :( is right.

[Xithras]

29. She called the lawyer before she called me!

Heck, she didn't actually call me until after she was released :)

The lawyer thinks there's no case, and I can't see where there's one, but the DA's office thought enough of it that they didn't drop it this afternoon when they had a chance.

There were other witnesses by the way. The kid had a friend with him, a lady who lived at the intersection saw the whole thing, and there was another car behind her that stopped. I doubt this will come down to a "her word vs. the cop" scenario, but just to be safe her lawyer is actually interviewing the lady and the other kid TONIGHT.

[Arkana]

30. WTF?

What felony? The kid crashed into her! For fuck's sake, did anyone bring that up?????

[Xithras]

33. In California...

If you leave the scene of an accident where injuries are involved, it's an automatic felony punishable by a year in prison and a $10,000 fine.

According to the lawyer, you can't have a misdemeanor hit and run if there are injuries involved.

Now that I think about it, that should give her another defense. If the kid rode off on his own, it was impossible for her to know that he was injured. Heck, for that matter let's see them prove that he didn't fall down AGAIN after the accident, causing whatever injuries he has. All the witnesses saw him leave the scene of the accident under his own power, and two of them heard him repeatedly say that he was fine.

As far as I see it, they can't prove that his head injury happened during the accident, or that there was any way for her to know that he was injured. Without that, there's no felony.

Of course, misdemeanor hit and run can still land her in jail for a few months, cost her a license, and pop us with a few thousand in fines. I'd rather see this dropped completely.

[Arkana]

35. So the question is--was the kid injured?

Anyway, good luck, and I hope you and your wife beat this. What a bum rap.

[Xithras]

37. Mild concussion.

May have strained his neck too. Their definition of injury is rather spurious.

[I Have A Dream]

39. Do yu have a child helmet law in your state? n/t

[LeftyMom]

40. Yes, CA does. nt

[SouthernDem2004]

47. Afraid your points will not matter.

I have arrested for hit and run numerous times.

Both parties involved in an accident must wait for authorities to arrive. Does not matter uf there are injuries. Any part that leaves can be charged with hit and run. The adult should have stayed. Sorry.

[hiaasenrocks]

49. Good luck with this part:

"Heck, for that matter let's see them prove that he didn't fall down AGAIN after the accident, causing whatever injuries he has."

There's no way you're going to get in a position in court where the state has to prove something didn't happen. If you want to go that route, you're going to have to do your own investigation, and prove that he did fall down after he fled from the accident scene...or at least create enough doubt, somehow, that the accident that did in fact happen didn't cause the injuries. There is no proving a negative in court. Hopefully your lawyer will know this. It won't work.

[Tallison]

152. Yes, but...

the point the OP is making is that given the time period between the accident and the discovery of injuries, the prosecution will have a harder time proving that it was the accident that did cause the injuries. Burden's always on the prosecution.

For what it's worth, I think it's a long-shot defense strategy, myself.

[LisaL]

153. What time period? This kid was followed by a cop after the

accident. Obviously, the cop can say whether this kid fell again or not.

[Tallison]

159. Good point

Though I was mainly making a point about the legal process. Personally, I think it was in bad judgment for the woman to have left the scene. Always err on the side of caution and conservatism (behavioral - not political!) when kids and potential injuries are involved.

[LisaL]

59. The felony is leaving the scene of the accident.

It doesn't matter who crashed into who, you still aren't supposed to leave the scene of the accident. Since the kid is only 12, it probably doesn't matter he left the scene of the accident first.

[SouthernDem2004]

43. What state are you in? The laws vary. I would have arrested her.

No offense but in my state (MS) she is legally obligated to stop. Leaving the scene of an accident with injuries is a big deal. Make sure you have the correct type of lawyer. You wouldn't want a patent attorney representing you on this one.

[Solon]

97. She had no way to know that he was injured, plus he left first...

in many states, such as my own, he would have been the one under arrest, not her, don't know CA's laws on this though. Of course, I know this from experience, I had a buddy arrested at the age of 10 for exactly that, he sideswipped a guy in a car that was parked at a stopsign, and promptly took off, scraped the car pretty good with his bike.

[Floogeldy]

46. That's bullshit!

It is a good idea to call the police, though, when something like that happens, I guess.

[mtpWriter]

50. You GUESS it's a good idea? LOL. Gee, ya think?

[LisaL]

58. No, you think?

Gee, if she hadn't left, she should have been in the clear, considering the accident was the kid's fault. Since she left, she is facing trial and god only knows what else.

[Tallison]

154. Kids + potential injuries =

always erring on the side of caution, good judgment dictates.

[LisaL]

54. Did she have a cell phone? How the police officer know

she wasn't going to notify the police? Maybe she took off so she could notify the police? I mean, the kid left first, what was she supposed to do? The whole thing sucks. Of course, if she had a cell phone, she probably should have called an ambulance for the kid anyway, but that is neither her nor there, since the kid took off.

[flvegan]

63. And by your defense, so to speak

if she does, she's dead.

Or, if she passed a store or payphone, she's dead.

Try again.

Besides, speculation.

[LisaL]

65. Actually, in the eyes of the law, she likely did the wrong thing

However, I understand why she did it, considering it's not that often a police officer would witness the whole thing and write down a license plate. She had some bad lack. But then again, there were other witnesses.

[Orrin_73]

66. Its these kind of things that make me

happy that I dont live in the USA. The laws over there are different then here in Holland. Unbelievable something like that wont happen here easily. Sometimes I think that living in the USA is a horror story with all the police brutality.

[SammyWinstonJack]

123. It's a horror story since 12/12/00 at any rate and continues to be.

:-(

[AngryAmish]

72. I did that a few times as a kid

I rode my bike like a maniac. If the accident happened the way she said it did (and I have no reason the believe otherwise) then she is not, morally at least, at fault.

[Caoimhe]

121. Yeah my best friend ran into the side of a station wagon

once. Crunched the bike but she was just shaken up. The person in the car didn't call the police, neither did we. Nothing serious. I think it taught BOTH of us to watch out for cars a lot better in the future!

People are so caught up in this liability crap nowadays, it's rather sickening isn't it? It's too bad people can't learn their lesson without being arrested! I hope she doesn't lose her job!

[LisaL]

156. Obviously, she only got in trouble because the policeman

witnessed it. Just like most people driver faster than a legal limit, and nothing happens, unless policeman witnesses it.

[Caoimhe]

162. yep n/t

[jmm]

90. If the matter was serious enough to have her arrested

then the cop should have said something at the scene. If he was close enough to witness the entire incident and get the plate number then he had plenty of time to walk over and inform them they shouldn't leave the scene while she got out of the car to check on him.

I've been involved in car accidents where we decided not to call the cops because both parties felt there was no damage. If the kid was worried about getting to school then there was no legal way she could make him stay so what's the point of calling?

[LisaL]

101. He could have been at home, watching it trough the window.

As for him informing them they shouldn't take off, do you think that would be a good defense? Aren't you supposed to know you shouldn't leave the scene of the accident without a police officer having to inform you about it?

[jmm]

124. If he could see it out a window he was in ear shot,

He could've easily yelled for them to wait for police to arrive. I never claimed I was offering a court defense just one of the many ways this situation could've been handled differently. All accidents do not need to be reported everywhere especially if there is no damage or are no injuries. She is only human and was shook up about the incident so the nuances of every traffic law in her county were probably the last thing on her mind. He thought it was no big deal and neither did she. Yeah she's an adult and he is a child but she's not a nurse and had no authority to hold him until the police arrived or make any determination that he was injured.

[LisaL]

148. Again, it's not the police officer's job to inform someone about

the rules they have to know. You are not supposed to leave the scene of the accident. Using your logic, if you run a stop sign and police officer was behind you, you would say it was his fault for not informing you that you are supposed to stop at the stop sign, etc. Of course if it wasn't her bad lack having a police officer to witness it, it could have turned out well.

[jmm]

161. I will not allow myself to be pigeon holed into advocating

that cops should inform people about rules they should already know especially blatant ones like running a stop sign. I never claimed or implied such. Like I previously wrote all accidents do not need to be reported especially when nobody was injured or there is no damage. If 911 and cops had been called for every accident I've been involved in thousands of dollars worth time and resources of our government services would be wasted. She was shooken up by the experience, he didn't want to stay around she couldn't make him stay at the scene, and everything seemed alright. It's not like she caused the accident and had anything to be afraid of. If a professional was close enough to see what happened, take down the plate number, chase the boy to his school, and call for help he could've easily come over or yell out from a safe distance that they need to stay. Even if she did break the law, which is not clear at this point, if the cop had handled the situation better this wouldn't have escalate to the point where a woman had a gun drawn on her because some kid didn't know how to ride his bike. Thanks to his actions a non-issue has been turned into a felony waste of time and money.

edited because I hit update too soon.

[LisaL]

165. The cop was off-duty.

He called it in. I am sure off-duty cops have rules on what they can and can't do.
No way you can pin any blame on this cop.

[lakemonster11]

103. I agree.

If anything, the kid didn't give her a chance to collect his information in case she did want to report anything to the police or the insurance company. *And* if she had detained him in any way, even to insist that he be examined by a doctor, she would be in way more trouble than she is now (remember the article from a few months ago about the man who grabbed a girl's arm to tell her not to run out into the street and was convicted as a sex offender).

She may have broken the letter of the law (and he broke it first, not only by leaving the scene of the accident but also for running the stop sign and causing a collision in the first place---why isn't he being arrested?), but not the spirit of it. She got out to help the kid (even though he's the one who hit her)---she didn't leave him there on the street to die. She wasn't trying to get away before any witnesses could place her there.

She determined (to the extent that she could legally) that he was unhurt. He said he was fine and ran off. She wasn't worried about the damage to her car. Like you said, if "both parties felt there was no damage," how could there be any more than a technical breach of the law here?

If a police officer witnessed the whole thing, he should have come out into the street right then and helped to facilitate (yes, even if he saw it while he was reading the paper in his pajamas) rather than let the kid who caused the whole incident (breaking several laws in the process) go skipping off to school and calling in his coworkers to detain the driver *at gunpoint*.

[LisaL]

109. To be fair to the police officer, he called it in right away.

If the kid was only out for a minute, and then took off, the policeman might not have had enough time to get out and detain the kid or the driver.

[SouthernDem2004]

116. Sorry but we do not do that kind of thing off duty. To dangerous

in most cases. We are trained to be "expert witness" when off duty and we witness a crime. An Officer should only get involved if someones life is in danger and the Officer is able to. The Officer did the right thing.

Some Officers do not carry a weapon off duty. None wear their vest and few carry handcuffs. Also, the Officer may have had his family with him.

[Xithras]

134. She has no idea where the officer was

It was in a residential neighborhood, so he (or she) may not have been on the street. There were a few other cars in the area as well, so the officer may have been in one of those.

What we know is that at no point did ANYONE identify themselves as a police officer, and nobody suggested that either she or the boy should stay at the scene. When the boy rode off, everybody seemingly assumed that it was "over", and went back to doing what they had been doing before.

[noonwitch]

104. Because it was a kid, she should have called the police

Or, asked his name and address and gone directly to his parents after he cruised off, to tell them what happened, and then called the police.

[newportdadde]

106. I wonder if the cop waited to see if she would leave? Case will stick.

He was close enough and had time for the plates...

The law part of it this will stick, it might end up like a traffic incident were you just double the fine(you know 'court costs') and the ticket become 'vechicular malfuntion'. Get yourself a good lawyer who knows the DA, then get out your wallet and the lawyer will right up a deal to plead it down to nothing and 'take care of it'. But your not getting out of this without paying the court some nice cash.

Then watch this kid will come down with all types of issues... Sorry man I probably would have done the same thing as your wife if the kid jumped off and took out of there. The end result of this will be your wife will be okay but you will be out a good size chunk of change for the lawyer(a grand??) and the kid will tap your insurance company for a side settlement, at least the medical. Your rates are going to get jacked.

Thats the real stinker here, your cost for the freakin lawyer you shouldn't need and of course the insurance companies who will screw you for years over it, no matter how clean your record is prior to this. That and if there is a civil case it will drag on and on for years, kid will be driving himself or out of highschool by the time its over.

[kwassa]

108. Your insurance company is obligated to defend you

Wait and see exactly what the charges are.

Talk to your insurance company, they are legally required to defend you under the terms of your liability insurance policy. If for some reason this does not fall under your policy, find out exactly why.

Your wife might end up paying a fine that would cost far less than the cost for an attorney.

[kwassa]

107. As a former CA insurance adjuster for basic liability

The kid on the bike is subject to the same laws as someone in a car. It is actually illegal to ride a bike on the sidewalk, though few people know it. They are also required to observe all the same traffic signals.

I denied a claim that was similar to this. A man riding a bike ran into the side of our insured's car, coming off a sidewalk at an intersection. He was bruised and scratched, but otherwise o.k. He claimed that he had the light, though several witnesses said that he didn't. That made him actually liable for the damage to our insured's car, though I don't know that we ever recovered for any damages. He wanted us to pay his medical bills, but we had no liablity. He was also riding on the sidewalk, which is illegal in itself.

Now, presumptions of liability with children are another matter, because of their age and their limited ability to understand right and wrong and act appropropriately. Irregardless, this limitation would in no way make your wife liable for the accident. I assume that you have witnesses, including the off-duty police officer.
Witnesses are your strong suit.

[SouthernDem2004]

115. Did the company you worked for ever deny a claim because the person

was committing a crime such as speeding, DUI or running a stop sign?

[kwassa]

118. We insure the legal liability of our client, a civil matter rather than

criminal. If our insured is at fault, we pay. That is the risk the insurance company takes on. I can't say for sure, but I never heard of it happening. It depends on exemptions in the policy.

What many people don't understand is that insurance covers a specific risk. If the damage falls outside that risk, you are on your own.

[Tallison]

157. Could you elaborate on that

last point? You're right, I don't think I understand it. An example would help. Thanks.

[henslee]

110. You need to be careful. The wrong counsel could be a disaster.

[Pacifist Patriot]

122. I was just thinking the same thing. I'd be very careful choosing

a lawyer.

[Xithras]

135. He's been my attorney for years.

He was a criminal defense lawyer for many years until he got tired of it and switched to business law. Now he's primarily on retainer to handle legal matters for the small business that I own. Since he does have a background in criminal law in this county, I'm not too worried about him handling it. I asked him last night if he was up to speed enough to handle it, or if I should get a referral, and he seemed to think that the case was "trivial" and that it's unlikely that it will make it to court anyway.

On the off chance that it does, his practice has a couple of lawyers who specialize in criminal law and he'll ask one of them to sit in as a co-council (if that's the right term).

[Pacifist Patriot]

136. Excellent. I hope all goes well and I'm really very sorry your family

is dealing with the stress. I imagine the child is perfectly fine despite the minor injuries. I can totally understand how something like this could happen. My FIL had something similar happen to him except the child involved deliberately ran into his vehicle. Fortunately it was an ongoing scam and the police had already begun to be suspicious. Otherwise he'd have faced the exact same thing your wife is dealing with. I truly hope the school understands and waits for an outcome before taking action. Best wishes!

[LizW]

117. Geez, that is awful.

You can never really predict what the cops are going to do. I have always been told never to leave the scene, no matter what. But a few years ago I got rear-ended at a red light. I was sitting dead still and the woman ran into my car. It wasn't a hard hit, and her car was hurt more than mine. She wanted to leave, and I insisted we stay put and call the police. She bitched me out, but stayed. Then, when the cop got there, HE was pissed off and yelled at me, too! He ridiculed me for wanting a police report and complained about me making them come out on the call. Never said a word to the woman who hit me.

You can't win.

I hope it all gets cleared up when all the facts come out and your attorney has a chance to "discuss" it with the police and the kid's parents.

[GreenPartyVoter]

125. O hamn.. glad the kid is ok and hope all ends well *hugs*

[ScreamingMeemie]

126. Please don't lay into your wife. I once hit an officer walking across a

parking lot with our truck. My heart just about exploded into the puddle of vomit I almost expelled, when he stood up and I saw it was an officer. Luckily, I was 9 months pregnant at the time, and the officer took the blame for "running across the parking lot" *what a sweet, sweet man*. Unfortunately, I forgot to tell MrG in the midst of telling everybody else and their aunt....When my son was 3 weeks old we were sitting in the living room with a neighbor and she brought it up. the look on MrG's face was priceless...in hindsight. ;) :hi:

[bigwillq]

131. Oh, that's awful.

I hope everything turns out alright. :hug:

[NNadir]

133. I got hit by a truck when I was a kid on a bicycle and I split.

The driver got out the truck, he was real upset. Meanwhile I was bicycling where I wasn't supposed to be and I was afraid my parents would find out.

I had some bruises, but I insisted on splitting. The driver wanted to take me to the hospital, but it was wholly unnecessary. I'm glad there was no cop there. It would have been a terrible thing for someone to lose their livlihood over. Everything came out well in the end.

(All my other bicycle accidents were much worse, and I did experience one hit and run that was nasty, but I think your wife is being unjustly screwed.)

[anarch]

137. that sucks

I hope things turn out relatively OK in the end, for everybody.

It seems to me that this would basically be a complete non-issue for all involved if the cop hadn't been there. The kid was in good enough shape to pedal off...I myself had several concussions and sprains as a kid, and healed pretty fast, so I'm guessing he'll probably be fine. There wasn't really any damage to the car, it sounds like, so no big deal.

But, just because a cop was there, the car is impounded and the driver charged with felony hit and run. I bet if anybody else had called it in, nothing would have come of it. What a shame.

[LisaL]

160. It's the same way for everything.

You can speed, or run hundreds of stop signs, and unless you get caught by a cop, you are fine. But if you get caught, watch out.

[Maestro]

138. Absolutely and incredibly wrong

If the kid jumps up and takes off, the responsibility of having to report something is over. In good faith we can assume the child is fine. He left the scene so you can. If the officer was that worried he should have tracked down the child and checked on his status. If he were hurt he should have gotten help for him, not tracked your wife down. Your wife stopped and checked on him. What more could the officer want? How ridiculous

[LisaL]

146. How long ago did you read your driver's handbook?

It doesn't matter if the other driver leaves the scene of the accident. It doesn't mean you can also leave it. The fact that the kid run off has no relationship to the driver having to stay at the scene and reporting it. And if you read the OP, you would see that the officer did track down this child, checked on him and send him to the hospital.

[Maestro]

168. Over twenty years ago...So what.

This is wrong. The kid went off. I don't care if it is the law. It's stupid. I was so flaming mad that I just skipped to the bottom. So the kid gave himself a concussion and then went on his merry way. If it were me, and I had spoken with the kid and he said he was fine I would have gone on as well. Are you insinuating that I would leave the scene of a an accident with another motor vehicle? Not quite, but if I am invloved in an accident with a teenager on a bike who then gets up and states he's okay and hurries on his way to school, I'd be shaken up but I'd think that the situation was finished. Am I supposed to follow the kid to school? Go the nearest police station and report that a kid ran into me? Wait until I flag someone down with a cell phone to call the incident in? Leave the scene to make a phone call at the nearest convenience store? Jeez. The kid ran into me as far as I can tell. I'm not at fault. It seems to be an overzealous cop to me.

[Zhade]

139. Um, if anything, it was the KID who hit and run.

Thank goodness no one was hurt.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

145. I hope it all gets straightened out

Personally, I would have followed the kid to school and made a fuss there, if he wouldn't agree to wait for a cop.

But you know, hindsight is so great.

Hopefully all this will do is cost you some bucks.

[LisaL]

158. No, it's wrong. You are supposed to stay put.

And call the police... Unless you want to get in trouble for hit and run.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

163. But what if the victim leaves?

Would it be better to just stay and wait? I think I am answering my own question: they couldn't get you for leaving the scene, could they? Not if you stayed. So I think you are right...following him to school, you couldn't do it.

[LisaL]

167. Yes, you have to stay put, even if the other person leaves.

This way, they are breaking the law, but you do not.