Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bear Lover
Who says 25 mph was safe that night? Certainly not me!
You are forgetting that under HB162 the night speed limit will NOT be 25 mph. The speed limit will essentially be reasonable and prudent but never more than 25 mph.
As I remember it was a warm moonless night with lots of boat traffic. Perhaps reasonable and prudent under those conditions was 10 or 20 mph. Perhaps reasonable and prudent was 14 mph and the boat was doing twice the speed limit.
In a similar, future, fatal accident with the boat going 20 mph, the question for the jury will be if 20 mph was reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions.
X.(a) No person shall operate a vessel at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions and without regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing. In all cases, speed shall be controlled so that the operator will be able to avoid endangering or colliding with any person, vessel, object, or shore.
|
Well this is a new take on that incident. When we left Meredith that night I don't recall there being that many boats out and about but to be fair we left some 40+ minutes ahead of Littlefield and not from the immediate area of the collision. Visibility was not limited that I remember. I think there's an opportunity here to discuss a bit more about what "reasonable and prudent" is. I know SD started an inquiry similar to this but perhaps we can try it again, if in a limited form. What, in your opinion, made 20 the highest prudent speed ? And can I properly believe that it's your opinion that had Littlefield been doing that 20 (or less) that the collision would likely not have occurred ?
ps - I do think juries in a "Littlefield" type trial (negligent homicide) presently can consider whether speed in any given fatality was a factor and was unreasonable or imprudent. I don't believe they don't need a speed limit law to make that judgement but perhaps a legal scholar can tell me for sure. But let's say I'm wrong and juries will use not just "R & P" but, as a matter of law, presume that any speed in excess of the max permissible is not "R & P". This, to me, makes it all the more important that the speed limits be set according to some basis in fact. That speed in excess of the max posted is indeed unsafe and not set because it's some limit somebody thought was "thrilling enough". Which of course leads us back to what really is reasonable and prudent and why.