Originally Posted by
prathmann
You're the one who was insisting on supposedly reading the law as written. In this case the law defines "negligent" as "failure to do something that a reasonably careful person would do under the same or similar circumstance." So unless reasonably careful people are routinely failing to stop at crosswalks when there is someone in them and therefore running them over, the motorist in this case failed to do something that a reasonably careful person would have done and is therefore negligent as defined in this law.
I'm not insisting on anything, and it wasn't my decision. I'm simply pointing out what their decision was and why.