Motorcyclist and daughter killed when woman braked on highway to avoid hitting ducks

Praxius

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
QuebecCanadian said:
The story goes that she stopped dead on the highway in a curve and got out to shoo the ducks away. The motorcyclist came around the corner at highway speeds and didn't have time to stop or swerve.

Braking to save ducks leads to highway carnage and criminal trial - The Globe and Mail
Click to expand...

I didn't see anything in that report noting she was on a bend/curve where she wasn't visible, but I'm not saying that wasn't the case.

Even without the two deaths, Ms. Czornobaj could have been faulted for breaching Section 384 of the Quebec Highway Safety Code, which says that no one can stop a vehicle on a roadway where the maximum speed is 70 kilometres per hour or more, “unless in case of necessity.”
Click to expand...

Her lawyers will most likely challenge the "Necessity" part of that where she attempted to avoid her own accident. Hitting one animal like a Raccoon or Porcupine is one thing, but hitting a few birds at ground level might be a bit slippery on the wheels and veer her off into the median or in other lanes.... if she tried to compensate too much this way or that at a high speed, she could have flipped.

.... Just being the devil's advocate. :p

However, if she was out of her car and being a wank trying to shoo the birds off the freeway rather than go around them and keep going, then that's just stupid and she thus caused a whole other accident.

And at the same time, the people on the bike should have had more than enough breaking distance and should have been viewing ahead of them to see what was in front of them.... even in a bend in the road, highways, especially four lane highways, are not that sharp of a bend that you are cut off of view from what's around the corner. If it was, then there should have been signs noting for you to reduce speed and even then if there wasn't, it should be common sense that you slow down around a bend anyways, especially when your view up ahead is obstructed.

You don't just race around a bend on a freeway without a care in the world which results in you smashing into another car at full speed to produce death. If they were going fast enough that they had no decent time to slow down or switch to the next lane, then that would suggest they were speeding or they themselves weren't paying attention and thus.... just as careless.
 
Last edited:
W

wulfie68

Council Member
Mar 29, 2009
2,014
24
38
Calgary, AB
Stupidity: yes
Breach of Quebec Highway Safety Code: probably
Criminal negligence: a stretch

Its hard not to instinctively fault the motorcyclist, at least partially, as many of them are overly aggressive on their machines, knowing that they can maneuver and stop much better than a car. There should have been forensic calculations done, to estimate the bike's speed at time of impact.

I'll also say people get stupid about saving critters: a safety man I used to work with had a story about how, when he was younger, a close friend of his swerved to avoid hitting a squirrel... and was killed in the subsequent head on his swerving caused on a 2-lane road. He used to tell our guys "brake if you must, but if its not another person, stay firm in your lane".
 
Tecumsehsbones

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,639
7,099
113
Washington DC
Praxius said:
Her lawyers will most likely challenge the "Necessity" part of that where she attempted to avoid her own accident. Hitting one animal like a Raccoon or Porcupine is one thing, but hitting a few birds at ground level might be a bit slippery on the wheels and veer her off into the median or in other lanes.... if she tried to compensate too much this way or that at a high speed, she could have flipped.
Click to expand...
Your Honor, I call the Court's attention to the Migratory Bird Treaty. . .
 
relic

relic

Council Member
Nov 29, 2009
1,408
3
38
Nova Scotia
Since we're trying different scenarios, a truck in the oncoming lane could have hidden the stopped car, even from a car driver. Stopped in the passing lane !? did I read that right ? And you goomers are defending her ? Christ !
 
Nuggler

Nuggler

kind and gentle
Feb 27, 2006
11,596
140
63
Backwater, Ontario.
8O Driving on a paved road in local cottage country I came across a new car, fully in the ditch, with a woman behind the wheel, and two little kids in the back seat.
Woman had swerved to avoid a cat.
Wheels caught the shoulder
Hadda been a tree or a rock in the ditch = probably some dead people.
She said help was on the way, so I just kept on

I KNOW my wife would probably have done the same thing cat lover she is.

But pity the stupid cat who walks out in front of the ditch lady in the future.

Still gives me the creepy crawlies thinking bout those kids in the back

Glad I'm not on the jury.
 
JLM

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
relic said:
Since we're trying different scenarios, a truck in the oncoming lane could have hidden the stopped car, even from a car driver. Stopped in the passing lane !? did I read that right ? And you goomers are defending her ? Christ !
Click to expand...


You'd have to be at the at the time of the accident to know for sure in what ratios to assess the blame, but I really doubt if the woman could be held criminally responsible, but could probably be charged for some minor offense under the M.V.A. The guy on the motor cycle was either speeding or following too close or both and is pretty much the author of his own demise. He was almost certainly exceeding the stopping sight distance. I think stopping for the ducks was more a quick reaction than the result of any serious thought which at times like this you don't have time for.
 
#juan

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Motorcycles have no seat belts, no air bags, and they can't stop as fast as cars. The person that should be most aware
of these things is the driver of the motorcycle. More than any other vehicle diver, the motorcycle driver has his passenger's
life in his hands. In this case, the majority of blame has to go to the driver of the motorcycle though in this case he is
already dead. The car could have stopped for any number of reasons but is still only. partly to blame.
 
#juan

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
#juan said:
Motorcycles have no seat belts, no air bags, and they can't stop as fast as cars. The person that should be most aware
of these things is the driver of the motorcycle. More than any other vehicle diver, the motorcycle driver has his passenger's
life in his hands. In this case, the majority of blame has to go to the driver of the motorcycle though in this case he is
already dead. The car could have stopped for any number of reasons but is still only. partly to blame.
Click to expand...

I was wrong. Motorcycles generally stop faster than cars. It depends on which cars and which motorcycles.
 
eh1eh

eh1eh

Blah Blah Blah
Aug 31, 2006
10,749
103
48
Under a Lone Palm
Park your car on a highway and see what happens. [rollyeyes]
On freeways in Ontario you can get a ticket if you are going under 45 mph never mind parked in a travel lane.
Open and shut case. Bitch did wrong. Besides, even racoons just make an uncomfortable thumping under the car then you keep going.
 
S

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
bill barilko said:
Long ago in another century I was taught that a person never ever braked for a small animal-their lives are worth that much less and that's life.

If she really was stopped on a curve shooing ducks across the road she should hang.
Click to expand...
yup, my guy reinforces that with me all the time, try to slow down but do not stop and do not swerve into the other lane, ever, because I would do almost anything not to kill an animal by accident...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom