Speeder going 140 km/h on Oak who killed someone acquitted

[MarkyMark]

Originally Posted by prudz

It is unfortunate that people will see this as speed being the biggest contributing factor and ignore that poor driving choices and unsafe turns have an equal part to play in these scenarios.

If there's any certainty in this case, it's that speed was the sole reason the accident happened.

Go stand in a batting cage where the average pitch is 60mph and then randomly one comes at you at 100mph and tell me how that worked out for you.

[Jmac]

Originally Posted by prudz

Except you are assuming that the guy is doing 140km/hr steady. Which it was discussed in court that it was a momentary acceleration, not a reckless pedal to the metal swerving through traffic. He would have been accelerating to 140km/hr into the intersection, not flying for several city blocks at that speed.

After seeing the video I would put fault on both parties. I think he got off lightly and probably should be getting a harsher sentence. However I still think the doc made an unsafe left turn, which as it has been mentioned above, happens far to often in Vancouver and surrounding cities. The driving here is ridiculous for the most part. It is unfortunate that people will see this as speed being the biggest contributing factor and ignore that poor driving choices and unsafe turns have an equal part to play in these scenarios.

First of all, the only thing I assumed was that the poster stated that 140 km/h = 2 city blocks every 5 seconds, which I verified is correct. Don't project your incorrect inferences onto me.

Since you went there, your "momentary" acceleration would've taken place over approximately 7.4 seconds given specs on the 2007 Audi RS4 that was being driven, assuming 50 km/h to 143 km/h and vehicle is stock and in peak or near-peak mechanical condition. That would've covered about 212 metres.

Even if you assume 65 km/h as the starting speed when the acceleration began, it's still 6.6 seconds and that covers 200 metres, which would mean he started accelerating just before W 43rd Ave (2.x blocks away).

He would've been traveling approximately 100 km/h at this point and accelerated to 143 km/h prior to impact at W 43rd and would've covered that distance in just over 4 seconds.

https://www.google.ca/maps/dir/49.23...e3!4m2!4m1!3e0

The last car that passes through the intersection while Hui is waiting to turn occurs 3.5 seconds prior to Chung's Audi entering the intersection. Chung's Audi would've been about 124 metres (406 ft) from the intersection at that point.

https://www.google.ca/maps/dir/49.23...e3!4m2!4m1!3e0

Rideout relied on five witnesses and dashboard camera footage of the incident, as well as two Vancouver Police officers and an engineer. One of the police officers, Const. Uwe Rieger, testified that Chung was speeding at 143 km-h between 42nd and 41st avenues.

Rideout found Shedrack Katarama to be the most helpful witness. Katarama testified that the Audi merged onto the Oak Street Bridge from Bridgeport Road in Richmond and he observed the Audi to be “in a hurry” causing him and another driver to apply their brakes. He later saw the Audi behind him while he was driving at 50 km-h until 42nd Avenue, when the Audi passed him at a high speed, in the curb lane between 42nd and 41st before the collision.

[prudz]

Originally Posted by Jmac

First of all, the only thing I assumed was that the poster stated that 140 km/h = 2 city blocks every 5 seconds, which I verified is correct. Don't project your incorrect inferences onto me.

Since you went there, your "momentary" acceleration would've taken place over approximately 7.4 seconds given specs on the 2007 Audi RS4 that was being driven, assuming 50 km/h to 143 km/h and vehicle is stock and in peak or near-peak mechanical condition. That would've covered about 212 metres.

Even if you assume 65 km/h as the starting speed when the acceleration began, it's still 6.6 seconds and that covers 200 metres, which would mean he started accelerating just before W 43rd Ave (2.x blocks away).

He would've been traveling approximately 100 km/h at this point and accelerated to 143 km/h prior to impact at W 43rd and would've covered that distance in just over 4 seconds.

https://www.google.ca/maps/dir/49.23...e3!4m2!4m1!3e0

The last car that passes through the intersection while Hui is waiting to turn occurs 3.5 seconds prior to Chung's Audi entering the intersection. Chung's Audi would've been about 124 metres (406 ft) from the intersection at that point.

https://www.google.ca/maps/dir/49.23...e3!4m2!4m1!3e0

A moment is recognized as 90 seconds

Originally Posted by MarkyMark

If there's any certainty in this case, it's that speed was the sole reason the accident happened.

Go stand in a batting cage where the average pitch is 60mph and then randomly one comes at you at 100mph and tell me how that worked out for you.

Not the same thing at all.

[MarkyMark]

Originally Posted by prudz

A moment is recognized as 90 seconds



Not the same thing at all.

How so, you're reacting on what you assume the object is travelling towards you at. There's been lots of times where I start to turn left and then realize I need to stomp on the gas because the person is going well above the speed limit. Now if that person was going an extra 50k on top of that I'd probably be fucked.

I've driven a long time and have never caused an accident, but all it would take is some dipshit going 140km/h on a city street to change that.

Keep thinking you're judgement never fails you.

[Jmac]

Originally Posted by prudz

A moment is recognized as 90 seconds

So was he accelerating for 90 seconds? If he was, he was probably going pretty close to his peak 143 km/h for 2 city blocks.

If you're going to use obscure, long out-of-date definitions, you might want to make sure they match your argument.

But, of course, you're trolling, so you're just going to play coy and clever and it doesn't matter if it doesn't make any fucking sense.

[AzNightmare]

Originally Posted by prudz

Except you are assuming that the guy is doing 140km/hr steady. Which it was discussed in court that it was a momentary acceleration, not a reckless pedal to the metal swerving through traffic. He would have been accelerating to 140km/hr into the intersection, not flying for several city blocks at that speed.

After seeing the video I would put fault on both parties. I think he got off lightly and probably should be getting a harsher sentence. However I still think the doc made an unsafe left turn, which as it has been mentioned above, happens far to often in Vancouver and surrounding cities. The driving here is ridiculous for the most part. It is unfortunate that people will see this as speed being the biggest contributing factor and ignore that poor driving choices and unsafe turns have an equal part to play in these scenarios.

Just STFU. You obviously have never experienced making a left turn with an incoming vehicle travelling at 140km/h (nor should anyone ever experience that).

This is how far the Audi was from the intersection when Dr. Hui was making the left. You're full of shit if you would have scanned the "i̶n̶t̶e̶r̶s̶e̶c̶t̶i̶o̶n̶", I mean 3 whole blocks away for a vehicle that would have made it unsafe to turn in that moment.

Originally Posted by Great68

From another perspective, this is about how far away the Audi driver was from the intersection when Dr Hui started making his left turn:



That's fucking crazy.
I doubt the Audi was even in the Dr's field of vision when he started the turn.

[westopher]

Originally Posted by prudz

Not the same thing at all.

Your right. Stand in the 50km/h batting cages and see how you react when one comes at you at 140.

[kr4l]

Serious question for the people putting fault at the left turner, do you even have a license and drive a car?

[Nlkko]

Pretty clear cut & dry case to me. What's to debate?

He sped and killed a person, then get caught speeding again later. 0 remorse. This isn't a moment of stupidity. This is a history of disrespect for the traffic law and disregard for other drivers' safety.

My sentences would be:
For Kenny boy: Jail with no chance of parole for the entire duration. Restart with graduated licensing program with strict probation for a number of years.
For Team Idiots (anxiety, GG and prudz): restart the graduated licensing program.
For the judge: removal from post. If you can't try this case properly then what hope do you have?

[anxiety]

^calm down tough guy, everyone is entitled to their opinion, no one is calling you names. Just because you believe in something and disagree with someone else, doesn't mean they are idiots.

In this case, it's not all of you disagreeing with just 1 guy who's delusional, so clearly you don't have the upper hand and you are not winning the argument cuz no one ever wins in an argument, we can give each other prospective.

lol @ people questioning whether I have a driver license or not, thanks for your concern, since I got my learners, I have never got into 1 accident, already at full discount. hopefully I don't jinx it.

Maybe you and the rest of people should re-take your driving exam, just because the majority of population only scan the oncoming traffic based on distance, not speed, doesn't mean it's the right way. Maybe you should wait a little bit longer before you turn left next time. The driving manual clearly says turn left when "safe to do so" not when a a car is xx distance away.

You guys must be the "turn happy" bunch then, I wouldn't have spewed out bs if I didn't practice what I said, I scan the traffic based on speed, if the car seems faster than normal traffic, even if the car is farther away, I won't turn just to be safe because I don't know if I can make the turn in time safely.

If I can see a car is travelling at lower than normal speed, I can gun it if I want to because I know I can make it.

I will give credit for a few posts here, it made me realize that it was hard to judge based on how far the Audi was away, still I feel like the doctor could had been more aware of the situation which could had saved his own life.

[twitchyzero]

most of you guys are assessing it wrong, as was I earlier

both Suzuki and Audi were traveling on Oak, not 41st, with Suzuki turning onto 41st shortly before impact

we can safely assume the Audi was already in excess of 100kph by 42nd ave when he passed by the main witness in the curb lane...and was seen earlier weaving in & out of traffic in another municipality...his vehicle was pushed to the limits for far longer than the Suzuki's "poor" judgment of a few seconds max. You can blame Suzuki for not paying attention but not the other way around? The Audi also had pretty clear visibility yet braked quite late (since impact is 120kph)

after killing someone he gets recorded for excess speed again

then last month gets acquitted

the man in Suzuki was dealt a death...and years of pain for his family

the guy in Audi? a written-off vehicle and some PTSD? a loss of job and growing discontent from the local populace? but nothing from the judicial efforts

Originally Posted by GG

if i was driving at night on marine drive/ e hastings, and some genius/hobo decides to jump out of nowhere/jwalk and i just happen to run him over going 70km, should i go to jail for killing a moron? Like come on man. Straight of way has the RIGHT of the road

you mean a DTES transient getting seriously injured/dying at the hands of a pretty common city travel speed won't get the same attention as a physician getting killed by a repeated offender flying down Oak at almost 90mph? *gasps*

your heavier vehicle at more modest speeds example doesn't hold up because the effects are not linear. I already brought up the Audi's minimal braking distance few pages back, it's drastically longer than at 70kph...not to mention the impact will be amplified

also ask yourself this, if another motorists parked in the handicapped spot with no business being there, does that make it legal to go slash his tire? 2 wrongs don't make a right

and if you're so much better than the average shitty Vancouver driver, you can say with confidence you won't turn left when you're not expecting 140 on the streets? that you scan at the very minimum a few intersections away, 100% of the time, when visbility is decent?

sincerely, late yellow if no lefties crew checking in

[twitchyzero]

anxiety, your post doesn't make any sense

you realize speed is just a rate of distance? unless you have a radar mounted on your dashboard that gives you a green or red light we don't know about...guess what, you're also using distance as an estimation

I don't think a guy doing 140 gives a fuck about red or green in that heat of moment...you can wait for a super late yellow/or red and that might diminish your chances of dying on a regular basis but if you happened to be at the wrong spot wrong time...you're still done

[AzNightmare]

Originally Posted by anxiety

Maybe you and the rest of people should re-take your driving exam, just because the majority of population only scan the oncoming traffic based on distance, not speed, doesn't mean it's the right way. Maybe you should wait a little bit longer before you turn left next time. The driving manual clearly says turn left when "safe to do so" not when a a car is xx distance away.

You guys must be the "turn happy" bunch then, I wouldn't have spewed out bs if I didn't practice what I said, I scan the traffic based on speed, if the car seems faster than normal traffic, even if the car is farther away, I won't turn just to be safe because I don't know if I can make the turn in time safely.

If I can see a car is travelling at lower than normal speed, I can gun it if I want to because I know I can make it.

Like I said in another post, you (and those on your side) are clearly underestimating the amount of distance a vehicle covers in 140km/h. Do you actually know how fast that is in the city? This isn't your highway route where all you see is long stretches of open fields and distant haystacks that gives the illusion of "safe controllable speed". In the city, houses and everything will be flashing by very rapidly.

With your many years of driving experience, just how many times have you encountered an oncoming vehicle of 140km/h while trying to make a left turn? You make it sound like it's as easy as seeing something travelling 30km/h. Even a typical city speeder at 70-80km/h is reasonable for a typical driver to gauge. And most likely, they're punching it last second to beat the light. But we're talking 140 here. Constant excessive speed leading up to the intersection.

Your example of a slow vehicle is a flawed example, as that is just simply a vehicle that is within your range of reasonable sight the entire way leading to the intersection.

A vehicle 3 blocks away, especially a silver one, looks like a tiny dot that blends in with the road, most likely not even very visible... then it suddenly appears "out of nowhere." It is very reasonable to think a 3 block car gap is safe to make a left turn.

Could have, should have, would have, hindsight is 20/20. If the doctor skipped work that day, he would still be alive. There's a reason why excessive speed is a big issue. It's not just whether the driver can handle his own speed, but whether it gives other motorists on the road a chance to see him and properly gauge his distance/speed.

[MarkyMark]

I've driven nearly 20 years and I have yet to encounter someone going 140km/h as I'm turning left on a city street. I've seen cars going really fast, but in reality it was probably in the neighborhood of 100km/h. Unless you have dashcam evidence to prove it I'm betting the majority of drivers haven't witnessed this scenario first hand.

Would you be singing the same tune if it was your mom, dad, sibling, or child who got smoked by someone going that fast? Would you call them an idiot too? I bet you'd be outraged when they let the dude walk.

[GG]

18 years , zero accidents 43% discount. I seen car/bike going 90-100+ gunning thru the intersection just to make thru that yellow light.


my dog was killed while jwalking and got hit by a taxi, should i blame the car? or myself? or the dog? The moment i open the fence he vtec out the door before i can put a leash on him.Guess who i blamed? myself, NOT the taxi


The doc was turning at a speed that even a snail moves faster than that, half way thru the turn he braked. If he turned faster, he may avoid the accident.


People has to realize the danger of making a left turn. There are so many ifs and buts, one poor judgement can get you t boned if not killed.

[GG]

Originally Posted by kr4l

Serious question for the people putting fault at the left turner, do you even have a license and drive a car?

u must be one of the locals who cant drive worth shit. turn at will, turn whenever u want, turn when there is only one car length, turn regardless the speed of the vehicle thats coming right at u

[MarkyMark]

Originally Posted by GG

18 years , zero accidents 43% discount. I seen car/bike going 90-100+ gunning thru the intersection just to make thru that yellow light.


my dog was killed while jwalking and got hit by a taxi, should i blame the car? or myself? or the dog? The moment i open the fence he vtec out the door before i can put a leash on him.Guess who i blamed? myself, NOT the taxi


The doc was turning at a speed that even a snail moves faster than that, half way thru the turn he braked. If he turned faster, he may avoid the accident.


People has to realize the danger of making a left turn. There are so many ifs and buts, one poor judgement can get you t boned if not killed.

There's an acceptable amount of accountability on someone making a left turn, but I'd say it goes out the window when someone is going that fast. You just said yourself that you have only seen 90-100km/h in that situation.

It's easy to prepare for someone to blow through a yellow light because you know anyone in the vicinity of the light could decide to gun it, so you wait to see them slow down first. It's a little harder to gauge someone so far up the road that normally they wouldn't be a thought, yet you start to make the turn and they are suddenly 3 times closer than the car that was next to it.

[GG]

140 km in the city is absurd, dont get me wrong. I said 90-100km plus, maybe 120 max.


I do see your point tho


I just dont like how the media keeps portraying its a doc, its a doctor..its a god damn doctor.
its just another human being, guess the doctor is worth 10 times the life of a regular person.

IMO, 50/50 both parties at fault.
Should ken still drive like a moron and show no remorse? Absolutely not, how do i know? well he still got caught doing 100km in the city after the incident

I do agree that his license should be taken away or suspended for a period of time.

[Hakkaboy]

Originally Posted by GG

140 km in the city is absurd, dont get me wrong. I said 90-100km plus, maybe 120 max.


I do see your point tho


I just dont like how the media keeps portraying its a doc, its a doctor..its a god damn doctor.
its just another human being, guess the doctor is worth 10 times the life of a regular person.

IMO, 50/50 both parties at fault.
Should ken still drive like a moron and show no remorse? Absolutely not, how do i know? well he still got caught doing 100km in the city after the incident

I do agree that his license should be taken away or suspended for a period of time.

I was originally critical of the Suzuki making a really slow left turn, let's face it, we've all seen some really slow drivers out there. BUT looking at the video more closely, there was another car that was turning right onto 41st in the opposite direction to the Suzuki. That's probably the reason why the Doctor made such a slow left turn and he was probably watching THAT car and trying to avoid turning into them instead of seeing the RS4 coming down at the outrageous speed

[westopher]

Originally Posted by GG

18 years , zero accidents 43% discount. I seen car/bike going 90-100+ gunning thru the intersection just to make thru that yellow light.


my dog was killed while jwalking and got hit by a taxi, should i blame the car? or myself? or the dog? The moment i open the fence he vtec out the door before i can put a leash on him.Guess who i blamed? myself, NOT the taxi


The doc was turning at a speed that even a snail moves faster than that, half way thru the turn he braked. If he turned faster, he may avoid the accident.


People has to realize the danger of making a left turn. There are so many ifs and buts, one poor judgement can get you t boned if not killed.

Would you put some blame on the taxi if it was going 140km/h through your neighbourhood?

[AzNightmare]

lol, it's funny how people putting blame (or partial blame) on Dr. Hui is completely disregarding the specific scenario and the data presented, and continue to treat this like your typical generic left turner who gets smoked by a car going through the light at reasonable speeds, or even reasonable speeding speeds.

No actual counterpoints to the specifics, but just countering with irrelevant scenarios like a loose dog that gets hit by a car, or thinking because you can gauge a slow moving car, it also means you can equally gauge an excessively speeding car that's probably too far away to even be noticed in the first place.... to how it's disliked that the media is referring Dr. Hui as a doctor too much (What does that have to do with the incident??)

Originally Posted by Hakkaboy

.

Your sig applies very well in this thread.

[kr4l]

Originally Posted by GG

u must be one of the locals who cant drive worth shit. turn at will, turn whenever u want, turn when there is only one car length, turn regardless the speed of the vehicle thats coming right at u

Jokes on you, I don’t even drive

[twitchyzero]

assuming that you even saw the Audi

probably takes a savant who can count the grains of sand in a sand castle or accurately guess a building's height off in the distance to be able to judge those kind of speeds within city limits

i'd bet even peace officer in traffic enforcement who are trained to gauge vehicle speeds may not expect 140kph when executing a left turn

you can't expect the average motorist to have that kind of training/insight/6th sense...there's probably a good reason why there's a no U-turn sign on highways where the median/shoulder has a break/emergency vehicle driveway

[Hakkaboy]

As I mentioned above, I doubt the Doctor ever saw the Audi as he was probably focused on the car turning right opposite him.

There's no way he can reasonably see/expect that another car would flying in when he decided to make that fatal left turn

[prudz]

Originally Posted by Jmac

So was he accelerating for 90 seconds? If he was, he was probably going pretty close to his peak 143 km/h for 2 city blocks.

If you're going to use obscure, long out-of-date definitions, you might want to make sure they match your argument.

But, of course, you're trolling, so you're just going to play coy and clever and it doesn't matter if it doesn't make any fucking sense.

I'm not using an out of date definition, i'm using what the court used. The momentary lapse in judgement. A moment is 90 seconds. So anywhere in that time period is fair game to be called a moment.

The hypocrisy on car forums is always what cracks me up and depresses me. As if everyone on these boards are angels and have never broken any laws in any kind of vehicle. Most of you act as if you have never sped. Most of us were 18 at some point driving like an asshat. Even more hypocritical most still do speed in their adult lives too. You all act like this is a scenario you could never find yourself in on either. The reality is you can spend years never speeding and decide one day you are going to open your car up for just a moment and next thing you know you end up in a situation like this. I'm also willing to bet on almost a daily basis many of you make unsafe left hand turns. Aka Vancouvers signature 3 car rule.

Reading the comments of this thread lead me to believe that licenses need to be revoked for some of you guys. I have in fact experienced fast cars flying by me in the opposite direction many, many times in my life. Have you ever turned left on a highway with a posted limit of 120km/hr? Most people are doing 140-160km/hr. Have I experienced people flying by at those same speeds in 50 or 60 zones? Ya, and trust me when I say you can tell the difference if you are paying any kind of attention. The fact you all seem to think that it is near impossible or extremely difficult to gauge this kind of speed is disturbing to me. The fact you are even on the road and can't spot cars going various different speeds is scary. It implies you are all giving at best a glance at traffic while doing a left hand turn.

Trolling, not in the slightest. The courts made a decision and thank god they made it and not the people of this thread. Pray you never find yourself in a situation where you are being tried by your peers because they apparently have very little mercy.