A grim day in NH

Sounds like the trial of the driver is going to start next week. Accident date was June of 2019. Sorting this out will be interesting.
OM

Omega Man said:

Sounds like the trial of the driver is going to start next week. Accident date was June of 2019. Sorting this out will be interesting.
OM

Click to expand...

I thought they decided the lead motorcycle rider caused the accident?
I need to go back and read the old posts.

Kinda what I thought. That’s why I said sorting it out should be interesting.
OM

All other factors aside, this incident says a lot (everything?) about maintaining a safe separation when riding in groups (as others have already noted and a reminder to self for today’s group ride to Shenandoah…). I recently read up on the physics of velocity and separation… at a certain point, reaction time will ALWAYS lose out to the distance/velocity ratio between one’s bike and another when the leading bike brakes suddenly. We grossly overestimate our ability to stop in time.

A > B > C

Three equidistant vehicles traveling at the same speed: leading C brakes, B brakes in time to stop, A brakes but still collides with B.

What was the rule about ‘one-one-thousand, two-one-thousand, three-one-thousand’?

Omega Man said:

Sounds like the trial of the driver is going to start next week. Accident date was June of 2019. Sorting this out will be interesting.
OM

Click to expand...

Scratch that trial date. Just announced that the trial has been bumped to March of 2022.
OM

Lawsuit just announced against the Mass RMV related to this event-

https://www.masslive.com/news/2022/...killing-7-motorcyclists-in-new-hampshire.html

Quite a mess.

OM

The latest on this multi year deal-

https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/live...-man-accused-in-deadly-nh-motorcycle-crash/#x

OM

Following up on the conclusion of this incident……

Not guilty on all charges-

A jury has found Volodomyr Zhukovskyy not guilty in a 2019 crash that killed seven motorcyclists in New Hampshire.

Zhukovskyy, of West Springfield, Massachusetts, was found not guilty of negligent homicide, manslaughter and reckless operation in the June 21, 2019, crash on Route 2 in Randolph, New Hampshire.

From Channel 5 Boston-

https://www.wcvb.com/article/jury-gets-randolph-new-hampshire-motorcycle-crash/40849109

OM

Drinking and driving. Never a good combination.

The driving record of the driver of the pickup/trailer combination was pretty awful. I don't recall if it was revealed to the jury during the trial.

The defense team did a great job.

mikegalbicka said:

Drinking and driving. Never a good combination.

Click to expand...

Did you mean drinking and riding?

Lee said:

Did you mean drinking and riding?

Click to expand...

I meant drinking and driving - your ride or anything else.

PGlaves said:

Did you ever notice that other than the judge, of all those permitted to speak in the courtroom the only ones not sworn to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" are the lawyers. Finding a so-called expert is easy for a criminal defense attorney. Telling the expert what you want to hear is also easy. Or should I say sleazy.

Click to expand...

Lawyers aren't sworn to tell the truth because they are not testifying before the court.

As for finding expert witnesses, no atty would conspire to deceive the court by asking an expert to testify to what THEY want to hear. Attys hire expert witnesses they know to have testified before with a certain bent whose opinion may be beneficial to the client.

In my world, it went like this. Call the expert, ask him to look at the materials to be presented and then give you HIS/HER opinion. If that opinion was favorable to the client, he's hired to testify. If his opinion isn't favorable, fine another whose opinion is favorable.

Nothing prevents a prosecutor or defense atty from running through questions they'll ask of that person on the stand in court. That's to get a sense of what to ask and what not to ask [ or how to present in a different methodology ] to gain the juries/courts opinion on innocent or guilt. Seen far too many prosecutors interview witnesses and dismiss them for subpoena to testify.

Neither side is after the truth, they are after a conviction or exoneration. It's their job to present their evidence in a way that helps them and hinders the opposition. Or not present certain evidence they have which harms their case.

28 years in district/superior court systems of Boston, 1st federal district court on federal cases.

American justice is dead, so are seven Marines. A sad day… again.

We weren't privy to the evidence submitted during trial. 12 jurors decided the evidence didn't support the truck driver being guilty of causing the crash.

The twists and turns in a courtroom are dramatic to say the least, in many high profile cases like this one.

Unless one believes 12 jurors colluded to not convict after the evidence was presented for some reason, the system worked. It's up to the prosecutor to make his case for a conviction, he didn't do that. Whether it was incompetence or negligence, we'll likely never know. One thing for sure, the defense team did their job whether he's guilty or not.

Well said Brownie....

No brownie, I don’t believe that the jury colluded to conspire, but I do believe that lawyers, insurance companies, and judges conspired (immorally in this case) to ensure the families couldn’t sue the trucking company that hired this irresponsible driver.

The America I would like to believe exists, or at one time may have existed, would generally frown on this gross miscarriage of justice. If our justice system was working right there would be much less appeals being won, and a lot more people in high places would be serving time.

Ok
So what was the final synopsis of this Trial?
Had the bikers been drinking?
Had the truck driver been drinking?
What actually caused the collision?

Nick

rangerreece said:

No brownie, I don’t believe that the jury colluded to conspire, but I do believe that lawyers, insurance companies, and judges conspired (immorally in this case) to ensure the families couldn’t sue the trucking company that hired this irresponsible driver.

The America I would like to believe exists, or at one time may have existed, would generally frown on this gross miscarriage of justice. If our justice system was working right there would be much less appeals being won, and a lot more people in high places would be serving time.

Click to expand...

Then the justice system worked. The prosecution presented their case, the defense presented theirs, and the jury deliberated on facts evidenced at trial.

I heard through two different sources that the lead motor was found to be over the legal limit of alcohol and had crossed the center line causing the chain of events that unfolded. If true, the jury voted correctly.

I've done enough legal work through the courts to understand attys make deals with each other often enough, attys make deals with judges [ usually in chambers between prosecutor/defense attys who decide to deal the case out instead of a lengthy trial ]. The America you believed existed for so long wasn't what you thought it was. I started that career in 76, nearly 50 years ago, the deals were being made back then between the parties. Some made in the hallways just before trial began [ like the insurance companies who'd wait till the day the trial was to start to cut a deal and make a payout..

The court system as far back as 76 wasn't any different then than what we have today. The only difference is the information age brings it to peoples phones and laptops instantly.

As for my Marine brothers who died that day, Semper Fi. Yet, if the lead jarhead was drunk and caused the start of this incident [ as I suspect the jury heard ], they rendered a correct verdict. Blood tests being customary in major accidents today, it's conceivable. I'd suspect all of them got blood work tested for AC. And knowing my brothers, if the lead jarhead was over the limit, the rest of them were likely as well.