Protesters Hit By Car Oakland - ows

[bluebuzzard]

Run time: 01:39 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNXGL9As5aI   Posted on YouTube: November 03, 2011 By YouTube Member: allshtf Views on YouTube: 54   Posted on DU: November 03, 2011 By DU Member: bluebuzzard Views on DU: 3821

 

[leveymg]

1. The pedestrian was banging on the hood. The driver floored it. Both are lucky

nobody was seriously hurt.

[ooglymoogly]

2. Imo the pedestrian was banging on the hood because the driver

was not stopping for pedestrians to cross; as is the law. Imo, this is attempted murder or intent to cause bodily harm, with a deadly weapon. The pedestrian banging on the hood to let the driver know he must stop for the many pedestrians and was, Imo, an over reaction and is, at best, marginally extenuating circumstances for the driver to act criminally.

Of course the driver will say "in the heat of the moment" he meant to hit the breaks; or temporary insanity as the act was from the anger of the moment.

Driving to endanger.

[leveymg]

3. From what I see, that car was stopped or moving very slowly when the guy started pounding the hood.

The protestor made a threatening action by banging on the car. I agree, the driver should not have floored it, but did have every right and reason to try and flee in the only way possible. A slow, steady movement forward would have been appropriate under the circumstances, IMHO.

[EnviroBat]

4. Agreed...

[ooglymoogly]

16. You are wrong, watch it again with an open mind...

The Mercedes is clearly looking for trouble, challenging the pedestrians as if daring them to not run to get out of the way of his mighty dick.

[iamthebandfanman]

5. You see different from me.

I see the car edging forward, with two people infront. car stops. guy turns toward car. car NUDGES THEM. THEN guy hits hood of car. watch the video again. hes stopped. guy is doing nuffin. then car pulls foward and bumps him. THEN he hits the hood of the car. THEN the guy floors it.

Stop making excuses and use your eyes.

[leveymg]

9. Car stops. Ped stops infront. Nudge. The protestor strikes the hood. Mercedes lurches forward.

The lurch forward wasn't appropriate, I agree. I see grounds for a law suit here, but it isn't clear that the driver should have been charged with vehicular assault, UTC.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

19. The "nudge" IS vehicular assault (or whatever the comparable statute is).

Not to mention, the girl shown at the end is not the person who pounded on the hood ... so he/she ran over an "innocent"

[leveymg]

20. Only if serious injury results from criminal negligence. Good grounds 4 a law suit, though.

Here's NY law, but CA statute is probably similar. (As I said, there's probably a good law suit here, but it appears to have been within the discretion of the officer whether to charge the driver):

120.03 Vehicular assault in the second degree.
A person is guilty of vehicular assault in the second degree when:
(1) with criminal negligence he causes serious physical injury to
another person, and either
(2) causes such serious physical injury by operation of a vehicle in
violation of subdivision two, three or four of section eleven hundred
ninety-two of the vehicle and traffic law or by operation of a vessel or
public vessel in violation of paragraph (b), (c), (d) or (e) of
subdivision two of section forty-nine-a of the navigation law, or
(3) causes such serious physical injury by operation of a motor
vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of more than eighteen
thousand pounds which contains flammable gas, radioactive materials or
explosives in violation of subdivision one of section eleven hundred
ninety-two of the vehicle and traffic law, and such flammable gas,
radioactive materials or explosives is the cause of such serious
physical injury, by operation of a snowmobile in violation of paragraph
(b), (c) or (d) of subdivision one of section 25.24 of the parks,
recreation and historic preservation law or by operation of an all
terrain vehicle as defined in paragraph (a) of subdivision one of
section twenty-two hundred eighty-one of the vehicle and traffic law and
in violation of subdivision two, three, or four of section eleven
hundred ninety-two of the vehicle and traffic law.
Vehicular assault in the second degree is a class E felony.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

21. That's why I said what ever the comparable statute....

It may be a simple battery (or comparable) or it may be enhanced because he used a vehicle.

NO MATTER WHICH WAY YOU SLICE IT.... what you witnessed was an illegal act in ANY STATE IN THE UNION.

[leveymg]

23. So was banging on the hood an illegal act. Without that, driver likely would've been charged

with reckless driving, at least, as there were injuries.

You can never hit back or even make threatening gestures in civil disobedience situations. The cops and the public often freak out and overreact, as we see here. This should be a training film for how not to behave during a protest march.

People need to know how the law works in these situations if they're going to be effective political protesters.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

24. What law was violated by banging on the hood? I'm curious to see your take on it.

Also, there were no immediate charges due to the volatile situation but names were taken.

How much you want to bet the driver is indicted in the near future?

[leveymg]

25. Whether the driver's indicted depends upon the extent of the injuries. As for

banging (twice) on the hood of a car with your fist, that depends upon the extent of the damage. Given that late-model MBs have aluminum hoods, I'd say that it will be expensive. Could be charged with 2rd or 3rd degree destruction of private property, depending.

The point I'm making here is that the presumption is always against demonstrators involved in civil disobedience actions, even if it's just marching and blocking traffic. Do not threaten or arouse hostile responses by the public, even if the public refuses to cooperate with the marchers. Don't hit people's cars if they refuse to stop. That is dangerous and not effective political persuasion.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

26. The victims were transported by ambulance.

Oh, and btw, the mercedes driver attempted to switch seats with the female passenger. Probably drunk.

[leveymg]

27. I'm sure all this will be brought up in the law suit. Not hard to find a lawyer to take that case,

particularly for the girl who was also injured.

[Limelight]

8. Not what happened....

The guy was walking across the street. The driver, deciding to be childish tries to cut off the pedestrians and go through the intersection. When the car gets too close The dude turns and looks at the driver as if to say "Chill out". The driver lets off the brake and starts inching forward to prove he's a tough guy and the pedestrian had better get out his way. When the driver bumps him with the car, THAT'S when the pedestrian bangs on the hood. He shouldn't have done it, but what the driver did is utterly unacceptable and he should be in jail right now.

[ooglymoogly]

14. +1 nt

[greiner3]

13. "every right and reason to try and flee;"

Tomorrow's headlines;

NRA declares 4 wheel vehicles to be 'arms' in its continuing quest to have every citizen so armed.

[zentrum]

17. That's not true.

The car was nudging the pedestrian. A car is a deadly weapon in this match-up. In response, the pedestrian banged on the car hood. You would do the same. At which point the Mercedes driver gunned it.

Get the punctuation right.

In any event, you do not use a deadly weapon that could kill someone when that someone bangs on your car--and not even with an implement--but with just bare hands.

TWO pedestrians were hit--that would include one who was NOT banging--how do you rationalize that?

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

22. Not to mention, you have some pretty fucked up views about the driver's "rights" to...

... act in a completely unreasonable manner to someone pounding on a hood. Running two people down? Really?

[iamthebandfanman]

6. Yes

After he was nudged.

You need new eyes.


Car stops with two people infront of it. One of them turns and stands infront of the car. Car nudges guy. Guy hits hood. car floors it.


I would have hit his car too if he bumped me with it on purpose.

[iamthebandfanman]

7. Wow, i never thought id see so many excuses

as to why it was okay to run someone down.

you people above me trying to justify the guy being run over are amazing... amazingly ignorant.


i suggest you re-watch the video.

the guy didnt hit the hood of the car until the car nudged into him. it then floored it after he hit the hood.

[AsahinaKimi]

10. Hit and Run? Did anyone get his plates? Did they stop him?

Was the driver arrested or did he get away with this? I hope he is caught or if caught, he will be charged with the maxium penality allowed.

[rainy]

11. The driver definitely hits the protester with car before

his car is banged on. Then, he floors it when his car is banged on. The protester is in the street before the car is close but the car keeps coming.

[KansDem]

12. Attempted murder.

Arrest and convict...

[ooglymoogly]

15. The victim should sue the pants off this dickhead.

Mercedes...+...bully....equals a substantial lawsuit. If lawyers have not already showered the victim with business cards it will not be long.