Nebraska Judge: 128mph not Reckless Driving

[zippyjuan]

http://start.earthlink.net/article/nat?guid=20051207/43966c50_3ca6_1552620051207-826785058

Nebraska Judge Says 128 mph Not 'Reckless'
From Associated Press
December 07, 2005 4:35 PM EST
NEBRASKA CITY, Neb. - Speeding is not necessarily reckless, even at 128 mph, a judge ruled in the case of a motorcyclist who tried to flee from state troopers.

With some reluctance, County Judge John Steinheider ruled last week that Jacob H. Carman, 20, was not guilty of reckless driving on Sept. 5, when he was spotted by a trooper who then chased him at the top speed of his cruiser's odometer - 128 mph.

"As much as it pains me to do it, speed and speed alone is not sufficient to establish reckless driving," the judge told Carman on Friday. "If you had had a passenger, there would be no question of conviction. If there had been other cars on the roadway, if you would've went into the wrong lane or anything, I would have convicted you."

Otoe County prosecutor David Partsch acknowledged that Carman could have been charged with speeding but, "We felt that the manner in which he was operating the motorcycle was reckless."

Carman didn't get off entirely. He was fined $300 for expired tags and other violations.

[Thesifer]

"motorcyclist who tried to flee from state troopers." Isn't that something else to be charged with? And also a bit reckless to run from the cops ? Go figure what do I know, I'm not a judge.

[InfiniteNothing]

Way to go judge but what about the "evading arrest" charge? I've always felt that should come with heavy penalties.

EDIT:
:stupid:

[bachviet]

In CA if you go over 90 mph, it's reckless driving.

[Thesifer]

In CA if you go over 90 mph, it's reckless driving.

Not always. It depends on whether or not the cop puts it on the ticket and makes it a misdemeanor. Otherwise it's still just a ticket. Or atleast it was lasttime I got a ticket for going over 90 :)

[attgig]

Way to go judge but what about the "evading arrest" charge? I've always felt that should come with heavy penalties.



yeah, but then...could they have charged him for evading arrest after the judge said no to reckless driving?
or perhaps, the cop had to go 128 mph to get close enough to him to get him to pull over....which wouldn't necessarily mean he was evading...

[Thesifer]

yeah, but then...could they have charged him for evading arrest after the judge said no to reckless driving?
or perhaps, the cop had to go 128 mph to get close enough to him to get him to pull over....which wouldn't necessarily mean he was evading...


"motorcyclist who tried to flee from state troopers."


But I think since he was being pulled over and not arrested or being told he was being arrested, it might be some legal issue on why they can't change him with evading. Especially since they didn't charge him with speeding, so he really "wasn't doing anything wrong" in the eyes of the law after they dismissed the reckless charge.

[Jeffbx]

I think that's great (not the fact that he was going 128MPH - that's kind of silly). What's great is that a judge stated in court that excessive speed by itself is not reckless.

The insurance industry & the police have had this speeding ticket racket going on for so long, it's nice to see that there's a hole in their armor. Now I hope that someone sues their insurance company when they raise their rates for a speeding ticket. It's in every auto insurance company's best interest to keep everyone thinking that speeding alone is reckless & dangerous, when it's not at all.

Driving under the influence, driving erratically, poor conditions, distractions - all of these can cause accidents. Just going fast does not.

[mechmike0034]

I think that's great (not the fact that he was going 128MPH - that's kind of silly). What's great is that a judge stated in court that excessive speed by itself is not reckless.

The insurance industry & the police have had this speeding ticket racket going on for so long, it's nice to see that there's a hole in their armor. Now I hope that someone sues their insurance company when they raise their rates for a speeding ticket. It's in every auto insurance company's best interest to keep everyone thinking that speeding alone is reckless & dangerous, when it's not at all.

Driving under the influence, driving erratically, poor conditions, distractions - all of these can cause accidents. Just going fast does not.

That's two good comments from you today!

I agree in that speed by and of itself is not reckless. Speed doesn't injure and kill - stupidity does.

You use the term "accidents", as does almost all of the rest of the general populace. Not being critical of your choice of words, but I wish to respectfully submit that there are very few true motor vehicle "accidents".

There are, OTOH, many motor vehicle "incidents" - all of which have a root cause other than "act of deity" or "wrong place at the wrong time". I further submit that the true root cause of any given "incident" is stupidity on someone's part almost 100% of the time. This is borne by your examples (DUI, erratic driving, etc.)

A small point, but a point nonetheless.

I think the trooper charged the guy with reckless because he was unable to accurately measure his true speed in a manner that would hold up in court. I guess Nebraska doesn't have a law like Virginia does that states that speeding in excess of twenty miles per hour over the posted limit is prima facie evidence of reckless driving.

[Merlin]

"motorcyclist who tried to flee from state troopers." Isn't that something else to be charged with? And also a bit reckless to run from the cops ? Go figure what do I know, I'm not a judge.
The judge does not bring the charges he reviews them. I think the judge made the right call - speeding is speeding not something else. If you wanted to get the guy on the other charges than that is what he should have been charged with.

Good call by the judge...bad call by the prosecutor...good luck for the guy who got away with 128+

[Jeffbx]

That's two good comments from you today!

Thanks - must be the coffee!


You use the term "accidents", as does almost all of the rest of the general populace. Not being critical of your choice of words, but I wish to respectfully submit that there are very few true motor vehicle "accidents".

That's an excellent point - never thought of that. We may be better off calling them 'stupidity incidents'... what do you think?

"Wow, what happened to your car!"
"Well, I was driving along and had a stupidity incident."
"Oh no - your fault or the other guy?"
"My fault. I AM stupid, you know."
"Yeah, I know. Everyone knows."

:heh:

[Thesifer]

The judge does not bring the charges he reviews them. I think the judge made the right call - speeding is speeding not something else. If you wanted to get the guy on the other charges than that is what he should have been charged with.

Good call by the judge...bad call by the prosecutor...good luck for the guy who got away with 128+

"And also a bit reckless to run from the cops ? Go figure what do I know, I'm not a judge."

That's what I was mentioning not that he should have charged him with something else. I know how the legal system basically works. The first sentence was more for the DA/ Cops to put him in for more.

[ufcrusher]

Like you havent gotten pulled over going that fast. Oh wait, what the hell am I talking about thats faster than most of us could push our cars.

As for the charges...there are a few things that no one mentioned but probably should be.

It sounds like it was basically an empty road....which means that if the guy crashed his bike, the only person to get killed would be him. Plus, in most instances on bike on car collisions, the bike and rider gets totalled/killed...the people in the cars injuries are much less severe as they were protected by the car.

It comes down to he was charged with the wrong thing. For whatever reason, they didnt want to claim he was evading the police. In fact, I know a guy who when a cop in a cruiser started coming after him punched his bike up to 200 mph and lost the officer...so if the guy was really trying to get away, chances are he could have.

[Merlin]

"And also a bit reckless to run from the cops ? Go figure what do I know, I'm not a judge."

That's what I was mentioning not that he should have charged him with something else. I know how the legal system basically works. The first sentence was more for the DA/ Cops to put him in for more.
Ah fair enough. I misinterpreted the first post.

[mechmike0034]

That's an excellent point - never thought of that. We may be better off calling them 'stupidity incidents'... what do you think?

"Incidents" is fine - the stupidity is unfortunately a given and IMHO, already implied.

That's my problem with the word "accident", like I said. "Incident" means that some DA either did something stupid or didn't do something that they should have out of sheer stupidity. The end result is the same - death, injury, and/or destruction of property.

[Houdini]

I'd like to know how they calculated the max speed of his cruiser's odometer!

[Thesifer]

I'd like to know how they calculated the max speed of his cruiser's odometer!

Yeah I was kind of thinking that. It obviously not by whats written on there, since I have never seen an odometer that says " 128 mph " on it.

[Merlin]

It was probably the max speed of his cruiser. :shrug:

[Houdini]

Yeah I was kind of thinking that. It obviously not by whats written on there, since I have never seen an odometer that says " 128 mph " on it.

Odometers measure distance, not speed. That was my point. Unless he had a stopwatch or something, using the odometer for speed is stupid if the speedometer works. I'm sure it's just an uninformed journalistic error, sorta like "the officer pulled his Glock service revolver!"

[Pemolis]

The guy was 20 too, and probably had a completely clean record. Sometimes there is no need to ruin (which may have well happened) the guys life cause he needed to get somewhere at an excessive amount of speed.

Then again its nebraska.. The closest toilet has to be like 100 miles away.

The Judge used some discression in not taking the guys license away, and also wanted to make clear that.. well everybody speeds. It does not mean that everybody's reckless.

It takes more than that. This guy was Excessive, but I don't believe reckless.

[Grimm]

I'd like to know how they calculated the max speed of his cruiser's odometer!
One would assume that it could not travel any faster than the rest of the car. :shrug: