MD Senate Candidate Hit by SUV
 

Natasha Pettigrew was struck by an SUV while training for a triathlon.

You can read the Wash. Post story here:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/cri...?hpid=newswell

That driver's story sounds like a TOTAL 'crock' to me.

Even if it had one iota of truth, the fact that they didn't stop to see if they could help the 'deer' shows what a despicable person they are.

Not much you can do for a deer unless you have a gun. If they're well enough that they're going to be able to leave, it's crazy dangerous to approach. If they're unconscious and you have a nice big sharp knife you might be brave enough to try to bleed them.

But yeah, odds are the guy wanted to wait until the alcohol was out of his system.

He drags her bike under the car all the way home where he "notices" the bike and then calls the police? What did he think he was dragging, deer antlers? What a POS the driver is.

The story is incomplete but it already bears out that the driver is incompetent. I don't care if you can't do anything about a dying deer, you have to know your car is either dragging something or your car is damaged. She should have stopped at the first well lit area and checked her car for damage.

Legally the bicycle should have been equipped with reflectors and light for a pre-dawn ride, but I have a feeling that those kinds of items may have been lost in the crash. I doubt a seasoned cyclists would have been out in the dark without any lighting.

Some motorists are just plain clueless

Why are hit and runs not considered hit and runs? IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU THOUGHT THEY WERE A DEER. YOU THOUGHT WRONG.

Almost as dumbwitted as riding a bike at 5:30 in the morning without lighting or reflective devices.

Let's see, what is more likely.

1) A trained cyclists was out at 5:30 in the morning for training with no light or reflectors.

2) That the light and/or reflectors were casualties after being dragged around town. Something we will have to wait for the cyclists side to know.

http://www.tbd.com/articles/2010/09/...ent-12745.html

Distance from hit to home 3 miles... time between accident and calling police 1 hour.

Where does it say in the article that the cyclist had no lighting or reflective devices? I've read the story 4 times now looking for this info and I don't see it.

I bet you can guess which scene from Goodfellas this reminds me of.

Sounds like the driver knew they hit someone, panicked and drove off.
The hour between the accident and the reporting call makes the story a little fishy.
Also, I would think dragging a bicycle for a few miles would make more than a little racket, sparks ect.

By Matt Zapotosky | September 20, 2010; 12:22 PM ET

Pettigrew was not dragged by the SUV, Clark said, though she was critically injured. He said she remained hospitalized and alive Monday morning.

Clark said the driver of the SUV did not report the crash until about 7:30 a.m. after apparently noticing the bike underneath the SUV. He said the driver took another vehicle to the Prince George’s County Police Department’s District III station to tell officers there what happened.

Investigators are still probing the driver’s story and are exploring whether alcohol or drugs might have been factors, Clark said. He said Pettigrew was not wearing reflective gear and lighting was low at the time of the collision, but investigators have not yet ruled out “foul play,” such as alcohol or drug use, on the part of the driver.

No one has been charged or cited, Clark said.

-- Matt Zapotosky

Revised

By Matt Zapotosky | September 20, 2010; 5:12 PM ET

Pettigrew was not dragged by the SUV, Clark said, though she was critically injured. He said she remained hospitalized and alive Monday morning.

Greg Shipley, a spokesman for the Maryland State Police, said in an e-mail that the driver reported the crash to Prince George's County police sometime before 6:30 a.m., and officers there reported it to state troopers. He said "while the investigation is continuing, there is no indication at this time alcohol or drug use was involved in this incident."

No one has been charged or cited, Clark said.

This post has been updated since it was first published.

-- Matt Zapotosky



Good ol Matt apparently got lots of things wrong, like reflectors, time the accident was reported, suspicion of drugs or alcohol

The last comment on the story reads --

The victim of this accident is now deceased. My prayers and condolences are with Ms. Henry and her family (Natasha's mom). All those who care please show your support by listening, being available; take appropriate initiative to help Ms. Henry during this time as this is a very difficult time.
As for the driver of the SUV; my prayers are with you too as you will forever have to live with the fact that you accidently took a life. Yes it was an accident and accidents happen. There are just so many unanswered questions. It's now between you and God.

Posted by: nikkimitchell | September 20, 2010 6:39 PM

It was not an accident if drugs or alcohol were involved. The person knowingly took control of a deadly weapon in an impaired state.

I hope it's NOT between him and God - I want to see it be between him and the state, to put his ass in jail for a few years and ideally make sure he never drives again, and between him and the woman's estate, to take away every penny he owns.

According to this report she was in the road without reflective clothing, no mention of lights

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/lo...103385829.html

Nice, make the crash the fault of the victim, even though there's no requirement that cyclists wear reflective clothing.

And I like how the cop says that the driver (eventually) called the police "so she complied with the laws".

The story stinks to high heaven. Notice that the tire was flat in the video, the tire was all torn up? I'll bet it went flat almost immediately and the person drove home on it.

To me, this looks like a drunk hit the cyclist and drove home. Perhaps the person who called in to report it wasn't actually the driver?

The report, as posted now (it may have been revised) says nothing about reflective clothing. Maybe this is just a rewrite of the other story, which was revised.

It also does not say that she has died, but that she lost a kidney and has broken bones. Maybe (hopefully) the comment in the other news story that Ms Pettigrew died was a mistake--or a cruel hoax.

I've noticed that if a cyclist is complying with the laws regarding lights there is often a remark about the lack of reflective clothing. I thought I saw something about it too.

I really would like an explanation of how you hit a cyclist and think it's a deer or inanimate object. This leads me to infer that there was a very long period of inattention to the road -- there is some malfeasance on the part of the driver.

'lighting was low at the time' - that would be very low at 5:30am, 10min past astronomical twilight (total dark), 22min before nautical twilight. Most would call those conditions dark at one hour and 15min before headlights are no longer required.

"At the beginning or end of nautical twilight, under good atmospheric conditions and in the absence of other illumination, general outlines of ground objects may be distinguishable, but detailed outdoor operations are not possible, and the horizon is indistinct. "

When did I say it was the cyclists fault? I simply repeated what was reported, that there was no reflective clothing in use. Whether or not there was lighting on the bike, which appears to be a hybrid, never known a tri-bike to have nobbies, vbrakes and risers isn't evident.

As to the requirement for wearing reflective clothing, are you asserting that they have no obligation to make themselves visible on the roadway?

The comment about reflective clothing was in the video, not the text.



Ever hit a deer in the dark? I have. And I can imagine that it would be quite similar to hitting an unlit cyclist.

And where did I say you did? You did not, I did not. You brought attention to a part of the article, I commented on that.

Even a black cyclist wearing black and riding a black bicycle is still quite visible, even at night -- that's what headlights are for!, though at night they are especially visible when they have the legally required lights and reflectors.

Far more important than wearing "reflective clothing" is having the required lights and riding in the proper location on the road. There is no legal requirement to wear a certain color of clothing, or reflective clothing, and for them (police? reporter?) to say that the person was not implies that the accident was the cyclist's fault for not wearing what they felt they should be. Screw that. If the cyclist is a ninja, report that. If not, don't bring up irrelevant stuff.

Why don't they report some generally irrelevant facts about the driver? Wearing his seat belt? Driving a brightly colored car? Were the lights on? (ok, that's completely relevant, though we'll all assume that they were) Inspection current?

Driver drove 3 miles home like this?

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/h...eenShot030.jpg