Rob_U

Another fatality - this time the cops caught up with the driver - after she tried to cover her tracks.

https://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...812010408/1361

mike

ROYAL OAK -- A 44-year-old woman was charged this morning in the hit-and-run death of bicyclist who was struck along Woodward Avenue on her way to work.

Kimberly Cooley Dancy was arraigned on a felony charge of failure to stop at the scene of an accident when at fault resulting in death. Royal Oak police also sought a charge of malicious destruction of property against Dancy, 44, of Royal Oak, because they allege she staged a car accident to cover up damage from striking cyclist Jacqueline Robinson.

Robinson was riding in the northbound curb lane of Woodward Avenue south of 12 Mile about 1:30 a.m. Sept. 19 when she was struck by a white car that dragged her a short distance, police said. A passerby found the woman lying in the curb lane and contacted police.

Royal Oak police Lt. Corrigan O'Donohue said several investigative leads pointed to Dancy, who was a prior conviction for impaired driving and driving on a suspended license.

"We solicited help from the public and the media, and we did receive some valuable tips," O'Donohue said.

Dancy allegedly ran her 2008 Liberty Jeep into a parked car in a parking lot outside a Royal Oak drug store the day after the accident. She called Royal Oak police to report the crash and later had her car repaired.

Dancy turned herself in for her arraignment at the 44th District Court. She was arraigned by Judge Terrence Brennan on both charges and bond was set at $20,000. She is expected to return to court Jan. 14 for a preliminary examination.

You can reach Jennifer Chambers at (248) 647-7402 or jchambers@detnews.com.

Sounds like some good investigative work on the part of the police.

I can almost imagine panic taking over someone so that they leave the scene of an accident. Let's face it. In the USA, if you hit a pedestrian or a bicyclist, life as you know it is pretty much over. I would expect that after the panic attack, a good cry, and a call to her lawyer that the driver would then call the police and return to the scene of the accident.

In this case, however, the driver turned the event into a crime by going far out of her way to try to cover up the accident. WOW! Crashing into a parked car to throw off the police. Man alive.

Notice that the police had a bead on her from the beginning because of her prior record of driving impaired...

Can we imagine that she is going to work drunk or impaired?

Yeesh.. I just had some home repair guys come to my place to give me an estimate and a quote. One of the guys smelled so bad of booze that I wouldn't ask them back if they were giving free chocolates with each visit. Drinkin' n workin'. Workin' n drinkin'. hic. What could possibly go wrong?

unterhausen

since she was probably drunk, this would have been a problem for her, but I'm not sure how bad of a problem. If she wasn't drunk, she screwed up beyond belief. The guy that killed one of the professors from my department got one year of house arrest, and he was driving while legally blind. The DA said that he felt like that was the most he could get with a conviction. Driving while legally blind is probably going to get more leniency from a jury than driving drunk, but it's still very irresponsible.

Covering up the crime is going to cause her to get much more severe punishment. I predict at least 2 years. (yes, I'm bitter)

dougmc

Do you live in the same USA I do? Here, if you weren't drunk or otherwise impaired, it's unlikely you'll even see a courtroom over the incident. I guess the victim (or his family, if you killed him) could sue, but I don't know how often that happens. Especially if you didn't even get a citation for the incident. But criminal charges (beyond your basic traffic violation) are rare if you're sober and not doing something like drag racing, even if somebody is killed.
The event became a crime when the driver left the scene without aiding the injured party. (Or the event was a crime before the accident ever happened if the driver was drunk. Or the accident itself was a crime, depending on the level of negligence involved.)

mike

Huh? Do you have a drivers license?

If you hit and injure or kill a pedestrian with an automobile in the USA, I can assure you that you will be going to court at least twice even if you were stone sober and did not leave the scene of the crime. At least one time will be traffic court and the other will be civil court.

You stated, "I guess the victim (or his family, if you killed him) could sue, but I don't know how often that happens." The answer is "Very nearly every time!, unless the driver settles out of court"

Did you ever wonder why people buy liability insurance? It isn't because liability insurance is fasionable.

SeattleShaun

Let's face it. In the USA, if you hit a pedestrian or a bicyclist, life as you know it is pretty much over.

Sure - if by pretty much over, you mean life will get slightly inconvenient for a brief time as you deal with the impending minor wrist slap...

Unfortunately, we don't take negligent operation of a motor vehicle seriously.

A motorist hit 10 cyclists at the Tour de Tucson recently, very seriously injuring several. He got out, looked at the damage, looked at the cyclists, got back in his car and drove away. The driver has been identified, but has not even been so much as arrested for hit and run....

If you want to kill someone in the states, hit them with a car and claim you didn't see them. Lots of chuckleheads will write in to the local newspaper soundoffs discussing how badly you must feel...

mike

My understanding is that as of 25 November, they only found the car that they thought was involved, but had not yet identified or arrested the driver. Maybe that is the key to not being punished - don't get caught - and that is why drivers leave the scene of the crime.

By the way, if you hit someone and injure them with your automobile, you can anticipate more than a wrist slap. Injury settlements are often in the millions of dollars. Check the umbrella on your liability insurance. Yes, you CAN lose everything, and I mean EVERYTHING.

JoebikerLa

I'm sorry officer. I was just driving home from work and this cyclist just swerved in front of me. I did what I could to avoid the collision, but... If the cyclist would have just looked where she was going...

And be sober and not try to cover up the event... and you are freeeeee

Pig_Chaser

Or the simpler: "I didn't see him." Perfectly valid and unassailable legal defense.

genec

Injury settlements mean lawyers and lawsuits... if you are killed and there is no close family, the driver gets away scot free. Even if you have close family, they have to have the energy and resources to mount a lawsuit... often they are grief stricken and chose not to take on a lawsuit.

dougmc

Sure, but I don't see the relevance First, you didn't say injure or kill ... you said `hit'. But even if you injure or kill somebody, unless you're drunk, you're likely to get off scott free.
Definitely, you live in a different USA than I do. Certainly, this happens sometimes, but it doesn't seem to happen often. And even if you injure somebody and it's clearly your fault and everybody knows it's your fault and you get a ticket, it's likely you'll still never go to court -- you'll pay your ticket via mail, and your insurance company will take a deposition from you and will deal with the victim without that ever going to court.
Citation for this claim? Civil cases rarely make the news, but if it's simply your word vs. his, it's not really enough to take to court. (But an out of court settlement is certainly possible.) And really, if the motorist has no assets, and his insurance is laughable (more on this in a moment), why bother suing him?
1) people buy it because the law forces them to, 2) the law forces them to have a tiny amount -- if you put somebody in the hospital, the odds are good that the cost of his medical care will exceed your liability insurance limits in the first few hours. And 3) people with assets buy insurance to protect those assets. However, I think #3 is a minority, and they also seem to be more careful drivers in general than those with no assets.

Perhaps you haven't been paying attention, but the police, nation-wide, have a poor record of citing motorists who injure or kill cyclists or pedestrians. Often, the police determine the motorist broke a traffic law and don't even cite them for that. And certainly, things like assault, manslaughter or murder are very rarely charged, and when they do they often don't get convictions. The only (somewhat) reliable way to get a manslaughter conviction is to be drunk and have the police confirm that, and assault/murder convictions generally require several witnesses.

HoustonB

I thought you were just intellectually blind, but now I see you just have this awesome super advanced sense of humor that transcends all that came before!

Seriously, I could join the chorus and question which Universe you are in, but I think you are impervious.

Also, can you tell me if people buy liability insurance mostly because it is a legal requirement to drive or because they fear civil litigation? (PS. its a rhetorical question).

Pig_Chaser

Mike lives in the recession-free USA, do you live there too?

InfiniteRegress

I don't know. I've heard of quite a few drivers walking away with absolutely no charges after hitting and killing a pedestrian or cyclist. I believe the truck driver who killed the young woman here in DC never was charged with anything, even though the young woman killed was riding legally in a bike lane at the time. There have been many other incidents like it in our area over the years.

InfiniteRegress

I think the important thing is for such outcomes to be better publicized and shared with new drivers and those who have maybe slipped up here and there. Most people don't want to intentionally hurt someone, but often fail to see how doing stupid things behind the wheel (reading an email on their Blackberry, putting on make up, reading the morning paper, etc) can lead to very serious and lasting consequences. Most of us just don't think about it. There should really be more monitoring at a national level of what happens in cases where a motorist hits and injures or kills a pedestrian or cyclist AND it's the motorist found to be at fault. Are they charged? Do they have to settle? Do they lose their driver's license? Are they still able to get insurance? I realize all cases are different, but it would be interesting to see how this plays out nationally and in individual states.

phoran

i think it is extremely unlikely in this case, but it is possible to hit and kill a pedestrian or cyclist and not be at fault. i would expect no criminal or civil liability in that situation, but it would still be a horrible situation.

genec

Good points, it would also be nice to have a national set of driving laws, so that things are consistent from state to state.