Self defense ......or not?

[TS12000]

At a target the size of a dump truck, no less. I would take a lot of lessons.

I would get my perscription checked

[Irving]

But if there was no child on board, don't you have the right to stand your ground even at the risk of escalation?

In traffic? No. Every driver has the explicit duty to do everything in their power to make traffic flow smoothly and most importantly, avoid causing an accident. The Jag driver doesn't necessarily have any duty to let the truck merge, but he DOES have a duty to avoid auto accidents and that puts them both at fault. However, if I got assigned this claim I would put the dump truck driver at 100% fault since he was the one changing lanes. I might toy with the idea that the Jag driver had the last possible chance to avoid collision, but probably not.

[buffalobo]

IMO, the jag driver had a responsibility to get his daughter out of that situation immediately with out escalating it. Engaging in aggressive driving with a dump truck seems pretty stupid if you want to protect your children.

In this case claim of self defense is lame. Both parties should be charged.

[KevDen2005]

IMO, the jag driver had a responsibility to get his daughter out of that situation immediately with out escalating it. Engaging in aggressive driving with a dump truck seems pretty stupid if you want to protect your children.

In this case claim of self defense is lame. Both parties should be charged.

I can second that...there is no need to put your children into harms way further if it can be avoided. Was there an opportunity to get a good vehicle description, license plate, location of occurrence, and could he identify the driver. It would be a different story if the dump truck was ramming the guy and the guy was trying to get away and couldn't.

[TFOGGER]

Since there was a child on board, there is no question that the young father should de-escalate and disengage.

But if there was no child on board, don't you have the right to stand your ground even at the risk of escalation? I don't mean that it is a wise thing to do. But wisdom can't be expected from all people all the time.

There's a definite line between "standing your ground" and deliberate provocation. This asshat tap danced right across it. I stand by my earlier comment that both of these idiots belong in the clink.

[SA Friday]

But if there was no child on board, don't you have the right to stand your ground even at the risk of escalation?

Not really, no. If you have an option that de-esclates the stuation, you have to attempt that avenue of resolution first unless you can prove that attempting that avenue would put your life in greater danger.

i.e.: You are standing on a bridge and a guy is coming at you 40 yards away with a knife. You can run down the street, jump over the bridge side, or stand and fight. If you jump over the side, you get seriously hurt or die. If you run down the street, you could escape. You stand and fight, one or both gets hurts or dies. If you draw your gun and shoot him, a case could be made you disregarded an avenue of de-esclation. If you run down the street and he's catching you, now you turn - draw - and shoot him. There is no case against you.

Same situation but the guy has a gun. running down the street would put you in jeopardy of getting shot in the back. There is no case against you if you drew and shot him.

These are hypatheticals and very general in nature, but I've had more than one conversation like this with a prosecutor when we were trying to figure out if charges were going to be brought against a subject of one of my investigations. You never hurt yourself legally when you can show you attempted other options to de-exclate a violent confrontation. It negates proof of mens rea of the crime.

[funkfool]

Once the threat is over/gone - you must not re-engage.

The truck driver pulled away into traffic.

Then:

The car driver then followed after the dump truck.

You become the aggressor.
Call the authorities, report and be safe with your child.

[theGinsue]

I've thought of this before. Both drivers escalated the situation and this was not a situation of self-defense. He should have just stopped his car instead of continuing on with the pissing contest. They both acted extremely dangerously. I think the dump truck driver should have more serious charges.

+1 The guy is driving a dump truck and crashed into the car at least twice. Dump truck vs car - hmmm. By my math the dump truck driver definitely had the ability to KILL both occupants of the car. He should definitely be facing more serious charges

[Seamonkey]

I can second that...there is no need to put your children into harms way further if it can be avoided. Was there an opportunity to get a good vehicle description, license plate, location of occurrence, and could he identify the driver. It would be a different story if the dump truck was ramming the guy and the guy was trying to get away and couldn't.

I don't have any kids but I'd like to think my first thoughts would be to get the kid out of harms way not chase some jerk down.

Depending on the number of cars on the road I'm also wondering how a Jaguar was tagged by a dump truck.

[KevDen2005]

I don't have any kids but I'd like to think my first thoughts would be to get the kid out of harms way not chase some jerk down.

Depending on the number of cars on the road I'm also wondering how a Jaguar was tagged by a dump truck.

I used to live in that area before moving back to Colorado and know exactly the interchange they are talking about...my only thought is that everyone is a f-ing moron out there and some of the worst drivers I have ever seen