Originally Posted by OneTinSloth
the thing that people seem to be forgetting is that the criminal case should have been about the fact that the defendant struck torrin with his car, and then drove off and had to be cornered by witnesses before turning himself in. the blindness was a bodily injury, which could have increased the severity of the punishment, but hit and run is still a felony, with or without permanent injuries.
I don't think anyone's forgetting this. If Torrin had been honest from the start, that's exactly what the case would have been ALL about, and that road-raging **** would probably have been charged with felony hit and run by now. Another one off the streets. Instead Torrin has very publicly confirmed the unfair stereotype of a reckless, irresponsible cyclist, prepared to go to extrordinary (not to mension illegal) lengths to punish a motorist, increasing his own compensation payments into the bargain.
I predict (and honestly hope) that Torrin will be back on his bike soon after all the legal preceedings are over.