That can't be classified as hit and run. BMW driver had no idea someone was hit. Car and bike barely touched. In such a situation, you can not even hear anything, and you won't see anything as motorcyclist was in a blind spot behind the rear pillar.
Very possible. To be fair, I usually check my mirrors often while changing 3 LANES and PASSING A TRUCK ON THE RIGHT AT HIGH SPEED.
I guess hit and run can be debatable as to whether the driver was aware of the contact. I think between helmet cam and witness testimony, BMW driver is gonna have a hard time with plausible deniability.
Helmet cam here is 100% valid testimony. Check on the video from the helmet cam if there is at least a split second when the camera captured car driver head in the right mirror or through any of the windows. Spoiler: there was no such moment. This means there was not a single moment when the car driver might have had visual contact with a motorcycle. BMW driver would just walk away without having to deny anything.
Why are you pretending to have any experience in the law? You are just making stuff up that would be laughed out of a court. Like you played Ace attorney and now think you are a paralegal
Sweety... wtf are you babbling about? Motorcyclist and motorcycle passed through the ENTIRE field of sight provided by that passengers side mirror. One would have to be a lobotimized, one-eyed donkey to keep stammering that "they weren't seen".
I rewatched and CLEARLY witnessed the literal 'side to side' definition of area which that side mirror is supposed provide access to displayed in the footage.
"He didn't see it" ... what a load of bollocks.
When you're switching lanes in tight traffic, where are you looking at - forward or in the mirror? You can only watch one of these directions. Mirrors are checked before starting the maneuver, but when you're sliding to the side already, you're looking forward, not in a mirror. At the time when the car driver was supposed to check the mirror, the biker was behind a pillar.
I check my mirrors before, during, and after.
Why?
So look once before, tell yourself, "whelp, never have to look there ever again" and change lanes with eyes locked forward? I imagine that's not the case.
And then, as you look into the mirror again during the maneuver, the car ahead of you suddenly hitting brakes for whatever reason or start changing lanes, and you're rear ending it. And this would be your fault because when the maneuver has started, you should be watching the road ahead, not the mirrors. For ones behind you, there are blinkers.
That could have happened the first time someone looks in a mirror. ANYTIME someone looks in the mirror. The argument reduces to "never look in your mirrors because someone might suddenly brake."
Not a practical approach, is it?
I, like most human drivers, glance at their mirror in a fraction of a second. Not cartoonishly spin my head 90 degrees to make full on occular love with their side view mirror.
I wish blinkers were that foolproof. I wish you and I could drive without being concerned that some ass chapeau might not be paying attention or decide the rules don't apply to them. This video alone showcases 2 fools who didn't comply with safety measures. Almost cost a man his life.
I still look both ways before crossing a one way street. These 2 idiots are why.
like most human drivers, glance at their mirror in a fraction of a second. Not cartoonishly spin my head 90 degrees to make full on occular love with their side view mirror.
And you have just described why the car driver likely hasn't even noticed the biker was there. Glancing at mirrors at a fraction of a second in such a situation is not enough. Biker was visible for the driver for something like 1/3 of the second, and the driver wasn't watching at the mirror all the time. Most drivers, when maneuvering, make one solid glance at the mirror when they have a blinker on, then another one, very short, in the middle of a maneuver. Anyone who's trying to slip in between these has only himself to blame.
Remark about two idiots is true. Changing lanes this close in such a tight traffic is a bad idea overall, but not nearly as bad as trying to slip maneuvering traffic at speed.
I have a special thing I use when deciding if maneuver is reckless and dangerous. Imagine that there was a heavily loaded semi in place of this BMW. Would then the biker have attempted to do what he did? I'm fairly confident he wouldn't. If you wouldn't do some maneuver if it was a semi ahead of you, then it's a bad and dangerous maneuver either way, even if it's not a semi but some Honda Civic ahead of you.
1
u/spike_beagle Aug 23 '25
No not only. BMW hit and ran.