Canadian Driver Sues Teenager She Killed in Automobile Accident

a reply to: Lichter daraus

why would that be? she took a sobriety test (machine) and passed and went home was later cleared of all charges so jail is off the table for every one.only matter to be decided is if she will win or loose her lawsuit.cleared of all charges means that she was ruled innocent and while i dont know if Canada has double jeopardy or equivalent laws i think the only thing to be decided is who gets paid (who knows perhaps they will both with their lawsuits and it will equal out)

www.torontosun.com...

Police officials say their own internal review of the crash investigation indicates “standard procedures” were followed, including the on-scene investigation, visibility testing, mechanical testing of the vehicle, forensic scene mapping, sobriety tests and interviews with the driver and independent witnesses. Police say a roadside screening device was used at the scene and alcohol was ruled out as a factor in the collision. Simon wasn’t taken to the station for a breathalyzer test.

so they tested her concluded that alcohol was not a factor and i guess shes suing the county for not maintaining the road .and another police force is doing an independent examination just in case to make sure it was all legit.prosecutor declined to charge due to lack of evidence and lack of apparent fault on her part ,two police departments investigated it

originally posted by: Chickensalad

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71

originally posted by: HomerinNC
a reply to: Char-Lee

So are you saying the kid who was hit and killed was at fault???????

Actually yes, the kids were riding in the street. The car was not on the sidewalk.
Still doesn't excuse the lawsuit though

umm...its illegal to ride a bike on the sidewalk.

Where i live in town i live in calif it does not seem to be illegal as i have three streets where i ride on the sidewalks.
the city allowed new utilities to be buryed under the bike paths and substandard and unsafe repairs to be done to the pavement.
I want to get a ticket so i can call the city into court in front of the judge to explain why they allowed the dangerous conditions.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
WOW.. Hold the phone and back up here. I see a BIG BIG detail the article almost passes over like a piece of trivia!

Another interesting detail is that Simon’s husband Jules Simon, a York Regional Police officers, was driving behind his wife that night. Although the Sun says, “little is mentioned about him as a witness in the police report.” He apparently pulled over when the accident happened and then drove his wife home in his vehicle. Sharlene Simon was speeding about six miles-per-hour over the posted limit.

(Op Link)

So... A cop was following a speeder, presumably speeding as well to follow, and this speeder happened to be his wife. His wife then plows right over the top of boys on their bicycles ("Brandon Majewski was struck from behind and killed by Sharlene Simon" - From article) and what happened next?

Well.. What DID happen next??? Was she driven home by her police husband..from the scene of a fatal car vs. bicycle BEFORE or AFTER the full investigation happened on the scene?

I smell a big big rat in all this with that 'little detail' which comes later in the article and perhaps, needs to be paragraph 1, if not title.

She shouldn't be worried about suing...she ought to be worried more about her own skin..but somehow (hey, cops who see everything but don't play witness are handy huh?) she didn't even get dinged off this?? Nice justice in this situation.

What am I missing folks?

This sounds a little to neat and pat that the woman's husband, a York regional police officer, was following her. It will be hard to prove if the woman was drunk at that time, but they could investigate where they were and what they were doing before they went home. Also, it will be easy to get the phone records and show if she was actually on the phone at the time of the accident. Smells very fishy.

a reply to: ANNED

Where i live in town i live in calif it does not seem to be illegal as i have three streets where i ride on the sidewalks.

It is illegal in all of CA to ride a bike on the sidewalk. When you take your California drivers test it is actually one of the questions asked. The correct answer (I got 100%) is a bike must be treated as a car...you ride in the right lane on the street, you stop at stop signs and lights and you use hand turn signals.

Maybe they don't enforce the law on streets with little population walking the sidewalk, but it is still the law.

a reply to: ANNED
The road in question seems to have no sidewalk or bike path anyway so moot point.