By Carol Tannenhauser
The driver of a Ram truck that struck and killed a 74-year-old Upper West Side man while he was crossing Amsterdam Avenue at West 106th Street was arrested Wednesday afternoon and charged with “motor vehicle fail to yield to a pedestrian,” according to the NYPD.
On May 10 at around 3:45 p.m., Angel Rodriguez-Albuquerque was in the crosswalk, steps away from the assisted-living facility where he lived, when he was hit by Jose Naula Remache, 45, of Queens, who was making a left turn from 106th Street onto Amsterdam Avenue. Mr. Rodriguez-Albuquerque was initially reported in stable condition, but succumbed to his injuries — lacerations and head trauma — on May 12.
The incident caused some controversy when the Rag reported that a police officer told a witness at the scene that “the pedestrian had the light…the driver did too. Accidents do happen.” If convicted, Remache faces a fine and possible jail time.
The whole thing is odd. It took 2 months to arrest someone for killing a pedestrian who was obeying the law. I’m not lawyer, but where was the controversy?
Someone died and he’s charged with “motor vehicle fail to yield to a pedestrian”???? Way to go Bragg. I pray for the victim’s family that will never see justice.
It’s been this way for decades, long before Bragg. So many people hit and killed and drivers never charged if they stay on the scene. Literal slaps on the wrist.
It’s not Bragg’s fault. Manslaughter charges can’t be applied in vehicle crashes where there’s no evidence of impairment or recklessness. Here’s a link to the applicable law
https://fastlawpc.com/new-york-manslaughter/
This is exactly the case. In NY State a driver must be in violation of two major traffic rules like dui plus speeding or be completely reckless (for example speed more than 25 mph over the limit) before prosecution for vehicular homicide is possible.
New York law needs to be changed.
Yes, my husband is going through something similar per the above post.
Hit by a truck and smashed his entire pelvis, broken ribs, major internal bleeding, almost died. The driver was not drunk nor doing anything “officially” reckless/criminal, other than clearly being distracted and unconcerned with people on the ground. No charges.
My husband’s life is forever changed and this guy is probably kicking back this summer, sipping a beer and hanging out with his pals. Sickening
What do people/police believe “reckless” means? “Negligent homicide”? “being distracted and unconcerned with people on the ground” NOT negligent? I’m in no position/condition to render a legal opinion, but what would be more reckless?
For clarity, the vehicle was a commuter mini-van that shuttles Fordham students between Rose Hill and Lincoln Center campuses.
I don’t think that’s right. It’s a RAM truck- the main pick up from Dodge. Not the Ram Van as the Fordham shuttle is known. The shuttle is typically driven by student employees.
Terence,
Thank you for that information.
“Accidents do happen” while insensitive is literally true. Both the pedestrian and the vehicle likely had their respective “green” lights, but ultimately 1) a motor vehicle must always yield to pedestrians and 2) a turning vehicle must always yield before completing its turn
In other words, not an accident. Accident means neither one was doing anything wrong and it was just the way the cookie crumbled. But the driver has the responsibilities you mentioned. Failing at those responsibilities is doing something wrong, so it was therefor not an accident.
A fine and some possible jail time…
If you want to end someone’s life in this city and face little to no repercussions, do it with a car.
Not mentioned is that the “possible jail time” for this charge, an unclassified misdemeanor, is a maximum of 30 days. But at least there is a fine, right? Maximum $250.
So, “…a police officer told a witness at the scene that “the pedestrian had the light…the driver did too. ” This is a controversy? Not! This sort of thing happens regularly on our streets. Let us assume that a driver is driving north and makes a left turn onto the street where the pedestrian is walking north and crossing the same street. As the driver makes the turn, he hits the pedestrian crossing with the light. This is not an accident. The pedestrian had the right of way and the driver was careless in not seeing the pedestrian whom he drove into. Was the driver turning too fast to try to “beat” an oncoming car? Was he driving while impaired by alcohol or drugs? Was he looking at his cell phone instead of the road? It really doesn’t matter. The driver killed a pedestrian who was legally crossing a street and the driver bears full responsibility and jail time. Else it will encourage other drivers to be careless because they know that they will suffer little in the way of consequences if they mow down pedestrians and drive away
Drivers never have the right to run down pedestrians. Drivers making a turn at a light must always yield to crossing pedestrians. POs like the one quoted refusing to enforce laws against lawbreaking drivers are a hazard. Why no sanctions v. the PO?
I see many respondents not using the same energy towards automobiles as they do e scooters. Imagine if it was an e scooter !!! The comments section would go crazy
I’ve seen too many drivers not yield to pedestrians. Sometimes they speed into a turn. Worse yet is that some are on their cell phones