Jump to content
IGNORED

Ohio State Trooper Jacob Daymon, Distracted Driver vs. Cycle


BlueRidgeBoy

Recommended Posts

What was he doing that he didn't see them? Was he looking at traffic off to his left, or something?

 

It looks like inattentive driving to me. Those riders are very lucky to be alive. I LOVE my full face helmet.

Link to comment
These two are lucky to be alive. Seems to me Trooper Daymon should be charged with "following too close" as a minimum.

 

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/us/2013/09/11/pkg-trooper-slams-into-motorcyclists.wdtn.html

What's following too close? LEO wasn't following anyone until just before impact.

Complete the investigation before we judge. At issue will be speed of LEO and speed of biker...closure rate indicates vast difference.

Or was LEO looking at the MDC or using a phone? Or did biker run out of gas or have mechanical trouble? Or did biker slow down to make an illegal u-turn?

Link to comment

Wisdom suggests Bob is correct, that we wait and see what other evidence pours in. I gotta tell you though, I cannot fathom a circumstance that would justify this type of rear end collision. Strikes me as pure inattentiveness. Wow.

Link to comment

+100 on Beemerman's comment. I commend those that are able to not judge prematurely (albeit some professional bias has something to do with that ability - as it would with anyone), but I totally agree. The ONLY scenario I see this being remotely 'explainable' is if the bike was sitting still, blacked out on the highway - which clearly isn't the case. Even then it would be a severe stretch.

 

As with any profession, those in it are a reflection of society - a younger, distracted, A.D.D., selfish society. I often wonder why I see so many officers speeding, riding someone's a$$, changing lanes without signaling, etc., then I look around at how almost everyone (myself included at times) is driving... Sometimes I feel like the 80 yo man 40 years early :D

Link to comment

In Virginia "following too closely" is code section 46.2-816. It is the most common charge for a rear-end collision and is a minor moving violation.

 

I assume Ohio has an equivalent.

Link to comment

Well, the trooper definitely appears to be "at fault," but is there anyone among us who's never lost focus for a period of time while driving? Not excusing his actions, but sometimes I'm amazed at how critical we are when the victims of a collision are motorcyclist.

 

I'd guess that, at a minimum, the guy's going to get some kind of traffic citation and will suffer some career consequences. As Beemerman suggests, inattentiveness was likely the cause, but all the facts will, I'd hope, be thoroughly investigated.

 

Actually, with all that's going on inside a patrol vehicle, it's kind of surprising that this sort of thing doesn't happen more often.

Link to comment

Yeah, I don't know about 'career ending' because it's probably just as it seems, the driver was looking somewhere other than the road and bad as that is we've all been there before, and if any of us were in this kind of accident no doubt our lawyer would tell us not to comment as well. The outrageous thing here is 'no charges'. Yes, there always may be more than meets the eye and everyone has the right to an investigation, but if this were a civilian and the evidence was the same would there be no citation issued or no charges whatsoever until the investigation was complete? I think the public might be more outraged about that than the fact that a human being made a driving error (albeit a pretty bad one.)

Link to comment

If the driver wasn't a LEO, what would we say?

 

No excuse for what happened.

 

If it was a civilian there would be absolutely no defense

for this event.

 

Last time I checked rear end collisions was a small percentage of mc accidents, maybe 6%(?).

 

I was run over by a drunk driving a truck on my R50.

Had literally a tire track across my back.

It isn't fun.

 

This trooper needs to be driving a desk for a long time and should have civil and criminal penalties.

 

Regardless of any "duties" he may have had at the time, his first and primary directive

is to operate the vehicle safely.

Link to comment

At this point, I definitely see this as 1000% the LEO's fault. Having said that, I would also have a chat with that motorcyclist for not being more aware of what's going on behind him.

 

Didn't he see a pair of headlights coming up quickly behind him? No? Why not?!

 

IF he was going anywhere near the speed limit, or even less, then he should have been aware of the likelihood that cars might be coming up rather quickly behind him-- especially at that hour when you'll have a good number of sleepy, distracted, and impaired drivers out there.

 

No matter who is at fault, we have to face the reality that if anything happens out there, it's OUR (as motorcyclists) fault! At least that's my philosophy, anyhow. That woman's life was in the hands of that motorcyclist; from her point of view, he was not on top of his game like he should have been in that he was riding under the assumption that all was quiet behind him rather than being alert and on guard.

Link to comment

James,

 

Yes, and no.

He had a passenger and may have thought the vehicle overtaking him was going to continue around him.

 

I was making a turn when I got hit from behind.

Estimates were that the truck was going 100-110mph.

Closing rate at that speed is very fast (he deliberately hit me)

and difficult to judge in mc mirrors in the dark.

(Mine was on a sunny Saturday morning).

 

This is why my bike has extra rear lights and a ton of retroreflective stickers, as does my gear.

In this case, doubt that would have helped.

 

In no way is the mc at fault.

 

Link to comment
If the driver wasn't a LEO...

 

This is exactly how I see it. Just imagine if the roles were reversed and this was caught on video. A civilian cage hurtling into a mounted LEO...think there may be a citation...? Good grief, when I totaled my poor '08, I was the only one involved ( :dopeslap: ) and received a citation!! I fought and won removal of the citation in traffic court, but still....

Link to comment

This video really resonated with me. I was rear-ended a month ago by a 21-year old male. I spent a lot of time thinking about it afterwards and came to the conclusion that I couldn't have done anything different: I was sitting at a red light wearing high-viz helmet and jacket and had installed the BMW Police bike additional brake light. I saw the car approaching in my mirrors but his speed and distance seemed appropriate so I returned my eyes to the traffic signal. Fortunately, I was not injured. The RT was a total loss but his insurance paid me what it was worth and even negotiated fairly on accessories (like that $150 brake light!). The kid was charged with "following too closely" - pretty standard here in the Old Dominion.

Link to comment
This video really resonated with me. I was rear-ended a month ago by a 21-year old male. I spent a lot of time thinking about it afterwards and came to the conclusion that I couldn't have done anything different: I was sitting at a red light wearing high-viz helmet and jacket and had installed the BMW Police bike additional brake light. I saw the car approaching in my mirrors but his speed and distance seemed appropriate so I returned my eyes to the traffic signal.

 

Don't stop in the middle of the lane. If you stop on the edge of the lane (as if you were lane-splitting), you buy yourself some space in a situation like that. If the driver is in a normal lane position, they'll go right past you into the intersection. Worst case, at least they won't have as far to swerve if they look up and see you at the last minute.

 

My $0.02 as someone who's been rear-ended on a motorcycle.

Link to comment

Don't stop in the middle of the lane. If you stop on the edge of the lane (as if you were lane-splitting), you buy yourself some space in a situation like that. If the driver is in a normal lane position, they'll go right past you into the intersection. Worst case, at least they won't have as far to swerve if they look up and see you at the last minute.

 

My $0.02 as someone who's been rear-ended on a motorcycle.

 

This is what I mean when I speak of us as motorcyclists always being at "fault". No, of course we're not at legal fault; that would be ridiculous. What I mean, though, is that given how vital it is for us to avoid any contact with other objects out there, it is critical that we learn what the threats are and how to avoid them. This calls for active thinking, not passive thinking.

 

I see so many motorcyclists out there who ride their bikes like they drive their cars, and with all the sedentary level of awareness, too. They ride with an assumption that people out there will obey traffic laws and customs. They seem oblivious to the threats around them as they simply motor along like everyone else. If something happens to that rider, no, of course it's not his fault. But is there something that he could have done to avoid being a hood ornament to begin with? Most often, there is something that could have been done, as Russell points out in this case.

 

Learn the threats, think actively, always be keenly aware of what's happening around you, position yourself in the lane and on the road such that you are least likely to encounter the unexpected. And when you stop at a traffic light, leave your bike in gear! for Pete's sake! That's another thing I see, motorcyclists, stopped at traffic lights in busy intersections, with their bikes in neutral. Totally unprepared for the unexpected.

 

Is it our fault? No. Could we have done something differently to avoid the calamity? Almost always yes. That's my point.

Link to comment

Thanks R & B. In this situation (narrow lane) the car would have struck my saddle bag and leg if I had been positioned on the edge of my lane. Being in the middle of the lane and taking the blow squarely maximized the damaged to my bike but minimized the impact to me.

 

I would also be concerned about stopping at a light on the edge of a lane because it would make my intentions ambiguous and decrease my chances of being seen and taken seriously (this seems like scooter behaviour). I can see a car nudging up right beside me ... too close for comfort.

 

I do agree that we are always "at fault" meaning it is our responsibility to ourselves, and our families, to avoid collisions regardless of who is legally at fault.

Link to comment
Yeah, I don't know about 'career ending' because it's probably just as it seems, the driver was looking somewhere other than the road and bad as that is we've all been there before, and if any of us were in this kind of accident no doubt our lawyer would tell us not to comment as well. The outrageous thing here is 'no charges'. Yes, there always may be more than meets the eye and everyone has the right to an investigation, but if this were a civilian and the evidence was the same would there be no citation issued or no charges whatsoever until the investigation was complete? I think the public might be more outraged about that than the fact that a human being made a driving error (albeit a pretty bad one.)

 

I do agree that there's more to this than meets the eye, that is precisely why I think it should be severe.

 

I've been told numerous times (generally during a traffic stop... ) that LEOs possess superior training in both driving and riding, that's why they can run faster on the roadway and manage things that I, a mere civilian, never could. I know we're all human and make mistakes. I also know that I could as well have been that LEO picking up a dropped french fry or whatever, but I could also have been on that bike with my son. These guys and gals are supposed to better than we are at things like this, he clearly failed in that regard.

 

Bust him...

Link to comment

This trooper needs to be driving a desk for a long time and should have civil and criminal penalties.

 

Nothing criminal happened. Traffic infraction at most. Trooper will likely face discipline, week off without pay perhaps. LEO's aren't fired for having an accident.

Civil consequences will be the responsibility of the the State of Ohio.

Whether the biker could have done something different to prevent the collision is speculation. Still think biker was driving too slow for some reason. If I'm driving slow, I'm watching my six.

Link to comment

Bob,

Do you know for a fact there was no prior contact

between the parties?

Let's wait for all the facts.

 

Being argumentative but this could have been intentional.

 

Driving too slow?

There's a good one.

Reminds me of the early days of National Speed limit when troopers would create rolling roadblock driving side by side

at 55 on the interstate for miles and miles.

 

Link to comment

I'm wondering, if I was driving the car and hit a Ill State Police Motorcycle LEO, if I would be facing some kind of charges?

 

An on a completely unrelated case, the Ill State Trooper who was doing 125 MPH in his car while talking to his girlfriend, and killed two teens is trying to get his license back.

 

He filed for workers comp but was denied benefits due to his misconduct.

 

 

Link to comment
  • 2 months later...

Here's the follow-up on this:

 

XENIA — A state trooper involved in an accident on Aug. 17 has received his punishment but will still be allowed to drive for work.

Jacob Daymon pleaded No Contest to a charge of Assured Clear Distance on Oct. 21. During his disposition in front of Xenia Municipal Court Judge Michael K. Murry on Oct. 28, he was fined $150 and court costs and had his driver’s license suspended for 180 days. Daymn requested driving privileges, which were granted.

At approximately 9:45 p.m. on Aug. 17, the patrol car operated by Trooper Daymon, of the Xenia Post, was traveling westbound on US 35 east of Stringtown Road. Trooper Daymon struck a motorcycle driven by Corey J. Waldman, 42, of Beavercreek.

Initial reports indicate that both vehicles were westbound on US Route 35 and Daymon’s cruiser “failed to maintain assured clear distance ahead,” according to OSP spokesperson Staff Lt. Anne Ralston. “Exactly why and how that happened is still under investigation.”

After the initial impact of the two vehicles, the motorcycle came to rest on the right berm. The patrol car continued off the right side of the roadway into the grass then came to rest back onto the right berm.

Corey Waldman and his passenger, Amy L. Waldman, 38, of Beavercreek, were ejected and sustained non-life threatening injuries, attributed to their use of helmets.

CareFlight transported Amy L. Waldman to Miami Valley Hospital and she has since been released.

After a crash reconstruction team made its report, the case was turned over to a special prosecutor.

Seth Tieger, the Hamilton County prosecuting attorney, was assigned as special prosecutor in the case when Greene County Prosecutor Stephen K. Haller recused himself from the case. Haller said he sees troopers from the Greene County area in his cases and felt it would be better to hand the case off to a special prosecutor.

Link to comment

Some more info - here.

 

"According to court records, Daymon told a supervisor he was on his way to work at the Xenia post when he was dispatched to U.S. 35, near the Jamestown exit, for a report of a pedestrian walking in the highway.

 

Daymon radioed to dispatch that he was unable to locate the pedestrian.Daymon told the supervisor he was using his mobile command terminal, a laptop mounted between the front seats, to clear himself from the incident when he struck the motorcycle from behind, according to court records. He "stated he never saw the motorcycle until the riders were striking the windshield," according to the supplemental incident report included in the court file.

 

According to the report, a sergeant dispatched to the accident said Daymon was "visibly shaken and emotionally distraught. He kept asking over and over if 'they,' the motorcycle riders, were going to be OK." The sergeant said Daymon was told that emergency medical crews would take care of the motorcyclists.

Link to comment
.... Daymon told the supervisor he was using his mobile command terminal, a laptop mounted between the front seats, to clear himself from the incident when he struck the motorcycle from behind, according to court records. He "stated he never saw the motorcycle until the riders were striking the windshield" ........

 

A similar accident occurred here in SoCal this past Sunday.

Link

 

I suspect that the officer was also distracted by some sort of electronic device.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

Do you all know how many rear end crashes I work in a day??? Probably 3-4 a day in a 10 hours shift. More if it raining. About 90% I do not issued a citation because it is between insurance companies. I can get back to work faster looking for bad guys. Crashes happen and yes LEO crash too.

Link to comment

Undoubtedly it varies by state, but in general is it permissible for law enforcement personnel to use a mobile data terminal or other similar device while moving? In most areas drivers would be fined heavily for that.

Link to comment
Undoubtedly it varies by state, but in general is it permissible for law enforcement personnel to use a mobile data terminal or other similar device while moving? In most areas drivers would be fined heavily for that.

 

What is the difference in me using a MDT and or looking/typing on a GPS device???

Link to comment

Being that I live in Florida I noticed people here just do not pay attention to their driving. Situational awareness is limited at best for many drivers. I ride a RT and since Florida passed a NO TEXTING law I still ride past drivers texting. You can spot them so easily. Their speed changes, usually slows down. They veer within their lane and sometimes drift into other lanes. At night it is obvious to see. The inside of the car lights up even with tinted windows. People know it is illegal but still do it. No regards to the law and no consideration for others on the road. Many will see that you spotted them texting and just continue to text.

Link to comment
What is the difference in me using a MDT and or looking/typing on a GPS device???

No difference, both are dangerous. I'm just saying that if I texted or used a MDT while driving in most states and I was caught I would likely be cited and fined, not to mention subjected to the scorn of society for performing such a callously dangerous act. What is the difference in my using a MDT terminal while driving and you doing it?

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...