Who is at fault here? What's your opinion?

Question

http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_24559.aspx

I am perplexed and a bit outraged after reading this story. Why is the driver of the Pontiac at fault for other than speeding? If a vehicle slams on the brakes for whatever reason (animal running across the road, or you suddenly felt chest pain), it’s the responsibility of those behind him to stop in time. Drivers are supposed to leave sufficient distance to allow for a safe stop. If someone decides to tailgate at high speed and loses control because the car in front brakes, it’s their own fault. What if the SUV had rear-ended and killed the Pontiac driver instead, then whose fault would it be? I hope this guy manages to successfully fight these over the top charges.

Answer 1

according to the article the driver of the pontiac is charged with those charges because he intentionally breaked.. meaning he had no reason to but did it for some reason. As a result of his careless actions, hes responsible for what had happened.

Answer 2

Remember that the SUV sits taller than the Pontiac, so that the SUV driver could see everything that the Pontiac driver could. There was no obstruction in the road, so jamming on the brakes was purely a malicious act (the clod in the Pontiac having previously cut off the SUV driver).

The Pontiac driver left the scene of the wreck, so he is guilty of that, plus reckless endangerment, reckless driving, etc.

Answer 3

My take:

Street racing – guilty

Speeding – guilty

Negligence – over what? Can’t be responsible for someone else being a bad driver

Failure to remain – maybe, there was no impact and the guy lose control because he followed too close

Answer 4

Well, #1 we can't know what the dead guy MIGHT have been charged with had he lived. Likely, there would have been some charges because indications are that BOTH had been driving recklessly and with intent to cause problems. THAT seems to be the basis of the charges, the INTENT behind the driving pattern.

Answer 5

Yes... it is the responsibility of those behind him to stop in time... and the driver should be charged with failure to assure a safe distance... Oh wait, the driver is dead...You can't charge a dead person with a crime.

The Pontiac drive was negligent by breaking when there was absolutly no reason to do so, so he was charged with criminal negligence.  The Pontiac slammed on his breaks for no reason that lead to the death of another person, so he was changed with dangerous driving causing death.  After the acciedent, the Pontiac took off, so he was charged with failure to reamin.

You are incorrect to assume that a driver can simply slam on their breaks whenever they want.  The driver did so recklessly and was appropriatly charged for it.