法律英语：68 Those Pesky Pedestrians

Hello, and welcome to Legal Lad’s Quick and Dirty Tips for a More Lawful¹ Life. I’m your host, Adam Freedman

But first, your daily dose of legalese: This podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship with any listener. In other words, although I am a lawyer, I’m not your lawyer. In fact, we barely know each other. If you need personalized legal advice, contact an attorney in your community.   

Today’s episode: Those Pesky Pedestrians²

Ariadne writes:

I live in a Kansas college town with a quaint³ downtown area.  The pedestrians down here ignore the pedestrian walk signals all the time.  Many times, they won't even use the painted crosswalk lines in the road.  Is it illegal for me to hit jaywalkers with my car?

The short answer is: I wouldn’t make a point of it. Seriously, hitting jaywalkers with your car can get you into a heap of trouble. Although Ariadne might have posed her question in jest (at least, I hope so), it raises some genuine legal issues.

Now I know that jaywalkers can be annoying, but Ariadne’s quaint college town would probably be a lot less quaint if motorists were free to create their very own version of Death Race.

The fact is, any car accident can expose the driver to both criminal and civil liability. First let’s consider criminal law. Granted, there’s no specific crime for mowing⁴ down jaywalkers; however, if you cause a pedestrian’s death you may be charged with Vehicular Homicide – that’s the general name for state laws that criminalize negligent⁵ or reckless driving that leads to a person’s death.

Generally speaking, vehicular homicide laws require proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the driver failed to recognize a substantial risk that would have been apparent to a reasonable person. Sometimes, the standard is higher and requires proof that the driver actually did recognize the risk and disregarded it anyway. In most states, proof that the driver was under the influence of alcohol or drugs will suffice to establish vehicular homicide.

These same standards will apply even if you don’t cause the pedestrian’s death. You won’t be charged with Vehicular Homicide, but will most likely be charged under your state’s criminal negligence⁶ law. So again, the issue will be whether you failed to recognize the risk, or whether you recognized the risk and disregarded it.

The fact that the pedestrian was jaywalking will be relevant to the issue of the driver’s negligence. The ordinary reasonable person is not expected to be constantly prepared for pedestrians walking willy-nilly onto crowded streets. And so, whether a driver was criminally negligent or reckless may turn on such factors as how suddenly the pedestrian entered the road, the conditions of the road, the time of day, and how much time the driver had to stop.

And so, while Ariadne has identified an interesting issue, I’m not sure she’s looking at it the right way. Later in her email she asks:

What if the pedestrians who are walking in the road illegally are also doing it in a deliberately⁷ taunting⁸ manner, or are walking especially slowly for the purpose of holding up traffic?

Granted, that sort of behavior might make the pedestrian appear to be an inviting⁹ target, but it actually increases the likelihood that you’ll be found guilty of a crime. If the pedestrian is drawing attention to himself and/or holding up traffic, then the ordinary reasonable driver would be expected to have enough warning of the situation to be able to avoid hitting the pedestrian. I know it’s not fair, Ariadne, but the law’s the law.

As for civil liability, that annoying, taunting, jaywalking jerk (or his next of kin) might very well sue you if you hit him with your car. In most states, such a lawsuit¹⁰ will come down to a question or comparative negligence, or comparative fault. Under this doctrine¹¹, the jury would be instructed to look at the extent to which both the driver and the pedestrian failed to exercise reasonable care. For example, if a jury finds that the driver was 70% at fault, and the jaywalking pedestrian was 30% at fault, the jaywalking pedestrian would be able to recover 70% of his damages (which may include medical expenses, lost wages, and compensation for pain and suffering).

If the pedestrian was jaywalking, the jury may well conclude that he or she is at least partly at fault, but the exact percentages are determined¹² by the jury and depend on the facts of each case.

Not every state uses “comparative negligence.” There are still a few that embrace an older rule called “contributory negligence” – and that rule makes it very hard for the jaywalker to recover any money at all.   Under the contributory negligence theory, an accident victim’s failure to exercise due care prevents him or her from recovering anything in a lawsuit. In other words, if the driver can show that the pedestrian’s own carelessness contributed to the accident – even if the driver was speeding or talking on his cell phone or otherwise negligent – then the driver will not be liable to the pedestrian.

Today, the rule of contributory negligence exists in only five states and – I’m sorry to break this to you, Ariadne – Kansas is not one of them. So please drive carefully. And for the rest of you listeners, especially those who live in Kansas, I urge to wait for the signal before crossing the street!

You can send questions and comments to..............or call them in to the voicemail line at 206-202-4LAW.  Please note that doing so will not create an attorney-client relationship and will be used for the purposes of this podcast only.

 

1 lawful   

adj.法律许可的，守法的，合法的

参考例句：

• It is not lawful to park in front of a hydrant.在消火栓前停车是不合法的。
• We don't recognised him to be the lawful heir.我们不承认他为合法继承人。

2 pedestrians   

n.步行者( pedestrian的名词复数 )

参考例句：

• Several pedestrians had come to grief on the icy pavement. 几个行人在结冰的人行道上滑倒了。 来自《简明英汉词典》
• Pedestrians keep to the sidewalk [footpath]! 行人走便道。 来自《现代汉英综合大词典》

3 quaint   

adj.古雅的，离奇有趣的，奇怪的

参考例句：

• There were many small lanes in the quaint village.在这古香古色的村庄里，有很多小巷。
• They still keep some quaint old customs.他们仍然保留着一些稀奇古怪的旧风俗。

4 mowing   

n.割草，一次收割量，牧草地v.刈，割( mow的现在分词 )

参考例句：

• The lawn needs mowing. 这草坪的草该割了。 来自《现代汉英综合大词典》
• "Do you use it for mowing?" “你是用它割草么？” 来自汉英文学 - 中国现代小说

5 negligent   

adj.疏忽的；玩忽的；粗心大意的

参考例句：

• The committee heard that he had been negligent in his duty.委员会听说他玩忽职守。
• If the government is proved negligent,compensation will be payable.如果证明是政府的疏忽，就应支付赔偿。

6 negligence   

n.疏忽，玩忽，粗心大意

参考例句：

• They charged him with negligence of duty.他们指责他玩忽职守。
• The traffic accident was allegedly due to negligence.这次车祸据说是由于疏忽造成的。

7 deliberately   

adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地

参考例句：

• The girl gave the show away deliberately.女孩故意泄露秘密。
• They deliberately shifted off the argument.他们故意回避这个论点。

8 taunting   

嘲讽( taunt的现在分词 )； 嘲弄； 辱骂； 奚落

参考例句：

• She wagged a finger under his nose in a taunting gesture. 她当着他的面嘲弄地摇晃着手指。
• His taunting inclination subdued for a moment by the old man's grief and wildness. 老人的悲伤和狂乱使他那嘲弄的意图暂时收敛起来。

9 inviting   

adj.诱人的，引人注目的

参考例句：

• An inviting smell of coffee wafted into the room.一股诱人的咖啡香味飘进了房间。
• The kitchen smelled warm and inviting and blessedly familiar.这间厨房的味道温暖诱人，使人感到亲切温馨。

10 lawsuit   

n.诉讼，控诉

参考例句：

• They threatened him with a lawsuit.他们以诉讼威逼他。
• He was perpetually involving himself in this long lawsuit.他使自己无休止地卷入这场长时间的诉讼。

11 doctrine   

n.教义；主义；学说

参考例句：

• He was impelled to proclaim his doctrine.他不得不宣扬他的教义。
• The council met to consider changes to doctrine.宗教议会开会考虑更改教义。

12 determined   

adj.坚定的；有决心的

参考例句：

• I have determined on going to Tibet after graduation.我已决定毕业后去西藏。
• He determined to view the rooms behind the office.他决定查看一下办公室后面的房间。