Northern California - pickup truck driver fined $100 for killing bicyclist on Mines Road (Alameda County)

He was originally charged with felony manslaughter and hit-and-run, but plead guilty to misdemeanor manslaughter. The DA agreed to the plea deal because he thought the jury would be biased against bicyclists. The pickup was allegedly speeding on the wrong side of the road and hit the on-coming bicyclist head on.

http://www.bicycleretailer.com/news/newsDetail/4283.html

Just goes to show you, if you want to kill someone, make sure they're on a bicycle.

Justice prevails! :rolleyes:

I'm sure the driver will learn his lesson with that massive fine and community service.

DA seems to have taken the quick and easy route.

“In spite of that evidence, the DA felt if it went to a jury of a bunch of drivers there was a good chance it would either come back hung or come back not guilty, and he would rather plea bargain this,” said Clark

That's not quite the same as being prejudiced against cyclists. Still, the plea bargain could have included jail time for misdemeanor manslaughter.

Just goes to show you, if you want to kill someone, make sure they're on a bicycle.

Unfortunately that is a sad truth. Time for a new DA. When is the re-election time?

“In spite of that evidence, the DA felt if it went to a jury of a bunch of drivers there was a good chance it would either come back hung or come back not guilty, and he would rather plea bargain this,” said Clark

That's not quite the same as being prejudiced against cyclists. Still, the plea bargain could have included jail time for misdemeanor manslaughter.

I think the "a jury of a bunch of drivers" part of that quote speaks for itself.

absolutely unreal

I think the "a jury of a bunch of drivers" part of that quote speaks for itself.

Maybe, but it sounds more like the DA thought the jury would empathize with a driver who killed anybody, because they know it could happen to them... rather than being hostile to cyclists. And I do think the DA was wrong - folks understand hit and run is a jail time offense... although I couldn't find any details on the actual accident and investigation... why did the judge throw out felony hit and run?

Wow, that's just stupid. I wonder what would have happened if he(the pickup driver) had hit another car while on the wrong side of the road, and killed the driver of that car? Probably more than $100 and community service...

Here is information about the Paul David Clark Bicycling Safety Fund, established by the family of the victim: http://bikesbelong.oli.us/Misc_pdfs/Paul_David_Clark.pdf
http://www.bikesbelong.org/what-we-do/bikes-belong-foundation/paul-david-clark-bicycling-safety-fund/

And I do think the DA was wrong - folks understand hit and run is a jail time offense... although I couldn't find any details on the actual accident and investigation... why did the judge throw out felony hit and run?

Here is an excerpt from a 2005 Oakland Tribune article about the incident: "Because of poor cell phone reception in the area, the truck's driver -- Brian Evitt, 28, of Livermore -- had to drive to his house to report the accident and then return to the accident, said Creel, adding the incident remains under investigation."

Wow! Finally I know what my life is worth...$100. Any bids?

Wonder what a driver's life is worth when I so call accidently bump them into traffic as they just got out of the car?

I hope that the relatives are at least pursuing a civil suit against the driver. I sure would.

I wrote a note to the alameda county DA's office (info@acgov.org), and I suggest others do the same. Here is what I had to say:

"I'm told that a man who crossed the line and struck and killed a bicyclist received 100 hours of community service and a fine of $100.

http://www.bicycleretailer.com/news/newsDetail/4283.html

I understand that written reports often report facts incorrectly. But if your office truly accepted that plea bargain because you had only physical evidence and no eyewitness, I fear you have truly shortchanged the victim, his family, and the entire cycling community. The sentence might be appropriate for striking and killing a dog, but not a human being.

Frankly, it's outrageous."

Rider dead = very bad, but family can still sue the AH for a ton of money, so criminally it may be pretty light, but civilly they can nail him to the wall!

Wow, he's speeding on the wrong side of the road when he hit and killed a cyclist...and there's no severe criminal charges??? We need some Oscar Grant-style protests...

Rider dead = very bad, but family can still sue the AH for a ton of money, so criminally it may be pretty light, but civilly they can nail him to the wall!

Suing for a ton of money only works if the killer has a ton of money. Otherwise, the victim's family may spend a lot of time and money and emotional energy for little return.

Suing for a ton of money only works if the killer has a ton of money. Otherwise, the victim's family may spend a lot of time and money and emotional energy for little return.

True. But there are mitigating circumstances here that might warrant a civil lawsuit.

(1) There's no need to litigate fault, as conviction in the criminal case assures a finding of negligence. All that is at issue are damages, and under the facts presented, they are likely to be huge.
(2) The defendant likely does have some insurance, and enough to make litigating the damages worthwhile.
(3) Judgments are good for 10 years and renewable for another 10. Assuring that the driver lives in near penury for the next 20 years is the next best thing to what would have been a reasonable jail sentence and fine.

If he was driving on Mines Rd with an F-350, he probably has property up there, so a civil judgement could cost more than just insurance money.

Don't forget that this is the area of Alameda County that was pushing for the overly restrictive ordinance for rides of 50 or more. Lots of people on juries from the east side of the county, so the DA might be making the safe choice. Of course, with what he got for the guilty plea, the brother was right about might as well go to trial and chance it. It would at least send a message if convicted.

Well, the DA is an attorney, and his job is to win cases, so that sometimes enters into decisions (which is BS, but a fact of life), and the defense attorney's job is to raise doubt about what happened and get his client off, so that has a lot to do with it. Since we don't have all the facts, and the jury has to go by the law, this may have been the best that could be done.

I had an incident where a criminal was hit head on by a police officer. Both vehicles were at the scene and the cop car was completely on the wrong side of the road. The officer died and it looked like the criminal was innocent of the officers death. Fortunately there WAS a witness that testified that the bad guy went to the wrong side of the road to hit the cop head on, the officer went to the on-coming lane to avoid the collision, but the bad guy went back into his lane and hit the officer, killing him. Without witnesses sometimes you just don't have enough to go on and evidence can have a couple of different explanations. Hopefully the truck driver has insurance (like is required to get his drivers license) and there will be some justice.