Here’s how it starts:
And here’s what happens later on:
Here’s how it starts:
And here’s what happens later on:
I suppose we as a society have all failed Mi’yana Gregory.
What can we learn from this?
Matier and Ross: A+
Continued excellence. They are the Un-Nevius. Before, I was wondering why the aunt was getting charged, but not anymore after reading that M&R piece. Speaking of CW Nevius, he would have taken the same info and came out with something maudlin and/or something packed with all his biases.
All the DA’s office can do is process what the cops give them so it’s still a bit early, but this is the proper tone:
“It’s truly a tragic situation,” countered Alex Bastian, a district attorney’s spokesman. “However, we don’t make the facts – they come to us as they are.”
If I know that that white Toyota product isn’t a Honda then so does the average SFPD cop, so it’s funny how the car’s initial description went out. Anyway, IMO, the horrible screen-grab photo from the video camera shows a 1990’s Lexus ES300, based upon what looks to be white on the taillights and also the dark-colored rocker panel (but I can’t really see what the C-pillar looks like and presumably the SFPD has seen a bunch of other images from other cams on Mission). I still don’t think the car could be a 1992-1994 Camry but oh well. What makes it distinctive are the dark wheels and that was emphasized, so that’s good. Why not drive an old Camry down that same stretch of road at night and see if you can see any white at all on the taillights? Just asking.
StreetsBlog SF: C
Check it out, it reads like Pravda, Comrades. The term jaywalking is put in quote marks because, because…
Walk SF (aka That Chick From Punahou High): D
What you should do, when talking about this accident, is to talk about this accident. What you shouldn’t do is to ride your hobby horse all over the place.
Defense Attorney F:
The “real killer” defense didn’t work for OJ either, right? The cell phone issue really hurts your client, of course, but crossing through traffic with a couple two year olds at night on Mission is a tough job under any circumstance. Perhaps that’s a better angle than talking about happened after the fatal injury already occurred, The defense might want to think about that.
So that’s it so far. (If I were the SFMTA, I’d be wondering why yet another employee is up on charges for the death of a pedestrian. Why not emphasize safety in your operations, SFMTA, since you don’t seem to be all that interested in moving people around efficiently? Why don’t you give us something back in exchange for all that money we give you?)
Now, let’s not ban surfing or kite-boarding or whathaveyou.
And oh, what about wading? Yes, that’s banned as well. How about above-the-knees as a demarcation betwixt wading and merely getting you feet wet.
Won’t the Feds need to be involved? Yes, sure, red tape, laws ‘n stuff – we could get around this if we tried, if we put our minds to it.
Won’t people violate the law? Sure, but that’s not the point. The point is that if sharks were eating people along this small stretch of beach every two, three, four, five, six months, like clockwork since forever, well, that would be international news. But when people die time and again, it’s like no big whoop.
Hey, do you know why we don’t have Baywatch-style lifeguard towers at Ocean Beach? Well, ’cause of the money, but also because the existence of the towers would send the message that swimming at Ocean Beach, and we don’t want to do that, right?
So we have these white pickups going back and forth, occasionally:
Click to expand
So instead of the signage we have now in all those languages, after swimming gets banned we’ll have signs that simply say “SWIMMING BANNED” or whatever else it takes to get the message across.
Hey, you know what we’ve got that the visitors don’t got? We’ve got the lore, we’ve got the knowledge about this innocuous-appearing place being dangerous.
That means the onus is upon us.
Here’s the latest effort from CW Nevius, who’s taking a break from being spokesman for San Francisco’s right-side-of-the-aisle political faction to go on a “bit of a rant” against local pedestrians. But what’s up with this?
“Even when they are in the right, I worry about them. When the traffic light countdown gets to five or six, they step confidently into the crosswalk — which is their right…”
Don’t you have an editor, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, you’re too old and experienced to have an editor, and plus, editors cost money, that’s right.
But don’t you have a fact checker, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, you’re too old and experienced to have a fact checker, and plus, fact checkers cost money, that’s right.
But don’t you have a photographer, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, photographers cost money. So all your observations, we’ll just have to take your word about them. OK fine. BTW, [sarcasmmode ON] nice stock photo you’ve got there, Neve. “Cause a stock photo taken in the People’s Republic of China, you know, from more than a thousand li away, well, that really illustrates how “militant” and “freaking nuts” San Francisco peds are, huh? [sarcasmmode OFF]
And oh, BTW Neve, the peds of SF aren’t militant, not at all. Try to find a different word for what you mean.
Of course you’re new in town, I get that. Sure, welcome to San Francisco, Neve.
But you’re doing a half-assed job doing your half-time gig.
You need to try harder.
*”Walk, Wait, or Don t Walk
21456. Whenever a pedestrian control signal showing the words “WALK” or “WAIT” or “DON’T WALK” or other approved symbol is in place, the signal shall indicate as follows:
(a) “WALK” or approved “Walking Person” symbol. A pedestrian facing the signal may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal, but shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time that signal is first shown.
(b) Flashing or steady “DON’T WALK” or “WAIT” or approved “Upraised Hand” symbol. No pedestrian shall start to cross the roadway in the direction of the signal, but any pedestrian who has partially completed crossing shall proceed to a sidewalk or safety zone or otherwise leave the roadway while the “WAIT” or “DON’T WALK” or approved “Upraised Hand” symbol is showing.
Amended Ch. 413, Stats. 1981. Effective January 1, 1982.”
1. YOU NEED TO BE IN THE CROSSWALK WHEN YOU GET HIT. This one’s pretty basic. And actually, it’s pretty flexible IRL. So let’s say you’re over the line a bit, your foot was 18 inches away from the white paint, well that could be OK. This rule becomes important if you’re halfway between blocks and you start jaywalking – a top cause of death of peds in SF. There’ve been many cases of this on the streets of San Francisco lately, like Hayes, Lombard, Masonic, Market, I could go on and on.
2. YOU CAN’T START TOO EARLY. This is called jumping the light. So of course, you’ve got to wait for the green light (or green WALK signal), you already know that. BUT THAT”S NOT ALL. You’ve also got to wait for traffic legally in the intersection to clear the intersection. So, GREEN DOES NOT MEAN “GO.” Green means you need to look for traffic clearing the intersection. And if that traffic isn’t over the speed limit and if that traffic entered the intersection on a yellow (which is totally OK under CA law, generally) and you step off and get hit, then, surprise, you’re the one at fault. So yes, you were in the crosswalk, but the collision is your fault, sorry.
3. YOU CAN’T START TOO LATE. This means that DON’T WALK means don’t walk. Now, in many places about town, you don’t have a ped-only signal telling you what to do. So, you’re allowed to start crossing on a green all the way until a yellow light appears. Effectively, the yellow light is your DON’T WALK signal. Of course this means that you might still be in the crosswalk when the light turns green for cross traffic. But now the law is in your favor, ped. The law says that cross traffic needs to wait for you to clear the intersection.
4. YOU CAN’T GO TOO SLOW. This one’s easy – it means you’re not supposed to stop during your trip across the street as best I can figure. (Leaving aside the law, there are standards for how long peds should have to cross an intersection, but they get thrown out the window when SF deals with 100-foot-plus wide monsters like horrible, horrible Octavia Boulevard, oh well.)
5. YOU CAN’T GO TOO FAST. Ooh, joggers. Your California Vehicle Code was written without concern for joggers, pretty much. So if you’re sprinting into an intersection and get hit by a MUNI, look for the SFPD to put the blame on you, yes, even though you were in the crosswalk.
Click to expand
So that’s reality.
But if you’d prefer a distorted, rose-colored view of reality, feel free to surf on over StreetsBlog SF (Straight Outta Park Slope!), or the SFBC (declining membership these days, despite being sponsored by SFGov SFMTA MUNI DPT) or Walk SF (sponsored by let’s-build-high-near-the-Waterfront real estate interests).
This is news to me:
“Zhu reportedly told police that the car may have malfunctioned and that it began accelerating* on its own. ABC7 news has learned that investigators brought in an engineer from Mercedes Benz and experts from the California Highway Patrol to look into that possibility. Court records state that they ‘found there were no mechanical issues that could explain unintended acceleration.'”
Other reports had driver Jennie Zhu even unwilling to speak to her attorney.
That makes this accident look more like a run-of-the-mill case of pedal misapplication.
I’ll just say that if her foot had been on the brake and she was pressing hard, there’s no way that her car would have done what it did.
Here’s a brief checklist of things you can do when your car takes off on you:
Make sure your foot is on the brake pedal (because it’s not there the way you think it is**)
Use your emergency brake
Throw the gear selector into Neutral.
Turn off the ignition by turning your key to the left (or do whatever you had planned to do to turn your car off after you arrived at your destination)
Scrape up against parked cars on either side of the road in order to slow down
Those are just a few ideas.
Solving this mystery would have been helped if driver Jennie Zhu had been more forthcoming. At this point, it’s very possible we’ll never know the full details of what occurred.
But her telling the police that the Mercedes just took off on her is probably good enough to keep her from any jail time in SF, IMO. This is a much better story than her saying that she was in a hurry and was trying to beat the red lights on a street that, more or less, has timed*** lights.
At the end of this thing, nobody’s going to believe that the car just took off on its own and she had her foot hard on the brake the whole time.
*”Unintended acceleration resulting from pedal misapplication is a driver error wherein the driver presses the accelerator when braking is intended. Some shorter drivers’ feet may not be long enough to touch the floor and pedals, making them more likely to press the wrong pedal due to a lack of proper spatial or tactile reference. Pedal misapplication may be related to pedal design and placement, as in cases where the brake and accelerator are too close to one another, or the accelerator pedal too large.”
**Now if you want to make your brakes fail by boiling your brake fluid through misuse like that guy in SoCal did with his Prius, well then be my guest. But the accident you cause will be on you.
***More or less. But on this stretch of Pine, it’s possible a jackrabbit start will get you through a few yellow lights and on your way westward. Depending on the traffic, this might save you a minute or two when travelling from Polk to Buchanan on Pine.
Click to expand
And here’s Uber’s first statement on the matter, awkwardly-phrased:
And here’s the second statement, with another graf added:
And here’s the text version of this ham-fisted statement:
“Our hearts go out to the family and victims of the accident that occurred in downtown San Francisco last night. We work with transportation providers across the Bay Area, but we can confirm that this tragedy did not involve a vehicle or provider doing a trip on the Uber system.
Our policy is to immediately deactivate any Uber partner involved in a serious law enforcement matter. For that reason, we urge the police to release information about the driver in question as soon as possible. If the driver is, in fact, a partner of Uber, he or she will immediately be deactivated from using Uber technology.”
I’m not up to speed on this issue.
If I were to be in a situation involving a missing family member, would I be well-advised to hire a PR flack? IDK..
And does Mayor Ed Lee typically say that SFGov is to blame for a death at such and early stage? No he doesn’t.
Here’s the press release, just issued. (Sorry, no OCR.)