Roethlisberger in motorcycle accident

[Peter Parker]

We can speculate on this till the cows come home. There was an investigation that seems to have found her at fault. However due to the nature of the charge (that Roethlisberger is getting preferential treatment) I qould not think that any of us will ever convince the others.

 

[Purogamer]

We don't know what the investigation found, or even if it's over. Witnesses in pittsburgh all say it was her fault, though they also seem to have not actually have seen it in the few that I read. I remember the first day the woman said she saw the bike and next time she saw it, it was after the crash. That's a poor witness IMO...

 

[Peter Parker]

We certainly do know what the investigation findings and that it has been concluded.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/steelers/2006-06-19-roethlisberger-accident_x.htm


As always you should read the whole article but here is an excerpt

The police report indicated that Roethlisberger, 24, was traveling at 35 miles per hour, which is the speed limit, when a 1996 Chrysler New Yorker turned in front of him. Dan Connolly, a collision investigator for the Pittsburgh police, called it a "basic crash that did not present any significant difficulties for investigators. We now consider this investigation closed."

You can google it as well. Mr. Connolly seems to have talked to quite a few media types. the exact words vary from media source to media source but the common theme is that the investigation has been concluded and that Mr. Roethlisberer was cited for being on the bile unlawfully and that the driver of the car was cited for failure to yield that caused the accident.

He is also not being fed by his mother ng through a straw. Thankfully (for him) he is able to eat solid (albeit soft) food as his jaw is not wired shut and nothing prevents him from feeding himself. I am personally amazed that they no longer have to wire jaws shut in cases like this. But I guess it si one bit of good news in all this---although I hope that none of us has to experience this.

 

[Digital Dude]

Nothing said if she was on a cell phone, who wants to bet?

 

[Purogamer]

at 22, i'd say it was a decent bet, but at 62 I'm not so sure.

Plenty of accidents are just caused by good old fashioned stupidity. I've heard "old people shouldn't drive" cries since the day I was born, so I don't think it's a good bet that she was talking on the phone...

Maybe ben was on a phone, thus why the moron wasn't wearing a helmet and couldn't stop in time despite allegedly only going 35mph...

 

[Jimbo]

at 22, i'd say it was a decent bet, but at 62 I'm not so sure.

Plenty of accidents are just caused by good old fashioned stupidity. I've heard "old people shouldn't drive" cries since the day I was born, so I don't think it's a good bet that she was talking on the phone...

Maybe ben was on a phone, thus why the moron wasn't wearing a helmet and couldn't stop in time despite allegedly only going 35mph...

On a cell phone while riding a bike with no helmet .......
Classic, this I have yet to see....

Did anyone FIND a cell phone on the ground ? NO, there went that theory.
However IF Ben had been wearing a helmet, there would have been a better chance of him being on a cell phone, possibly built into the helmet ( I don't know if they actually do that type of thing or not) .... It wouldn't suprise me.. should I look into a patent for that idea ?

Jimbo

 

[Purogamer]

I'm pretty sure it would be illegal to have phones inside of motorcycle helmets for street-usage purposes...

If ben had been on a phone it would have hit the car and been destroyed based on what happened to him and his bike and the car. No way a phone made in taiwan would survive, though it would be ironic...

But let's stop talking about ben being on the phone, even he's not that dumb...

 

[Peter Parker]

BMW sells a helmet that uses Bluetooth to allow a rider to make cell phone calls. Do a google search to find pictures etc. But there is no evidence to suggest that a cell phone was in use by anyone. Sure it's possible but so area lot of things.

 

[Jimbo]

Whoa whoa, I initially thought it was her fault, but there's no damage to the front of her car, it's to the side. He ran into her. Whether or not she pulled in front of him or not is unknown at this time. The facts are that he crashed into the side of this woman's car, and he was riding a bike illegally before doing so.

I guess steeler lovers will see it as not being ben's fault at all. Guy shouldn't have been there at that time. Had he followed the law or even just listened to the many people who told him he shouldn't be riding, he'd be at the playboy mansion this weekend eating shrimp and getting rubbed against by playmates. Instead his mother is feeding him through a straw in his living room.

===================================================
1st paragraph,
I suppose if she would have been sitting still on the street (instead of in the process of trying to beat traffic) he would have had to try a whole lot harder to hit her on the side of the car.
If she pulls out in front of me, turning to the left, and I am doing the speed limit , 35mph as reported, there is no way on earth I could possibly hit the front of the car.
you know the police do this type of thing to figure out how an accident happens ALL the TIME.

2nd paragraph,
IF he were spending time at the Playboy mansion, you guy's would have something else to bitch about with him.
I am tired of it, the kid is what 24 years old, what were you doing at that age ?
Riding bikes and havin fun.....

Might I also mention, he's a damn good football player, and I think there are a lot of jelious people out there that would really like to have a QB as good as he is and hopefully get even better.
Also, he's not stuck on himself like a lot of overpaid atheletes

Jimbo

 

[Purogamer]

Not stuck on himself? He's a walking "take a picture with me" guy for the last year, he's been EVERYWHERE...

If he was at the playboy mansion why would that matter? I'd like to see him get out of pittsburgh once in a while, see what the real world is like.

I know the police in pittsburgh wouldn't possibly throw the steelers qb under the bus unless there was a 3rd party who took video of it and sold it to The Insider and they HAD to admit what really happened. How do you hit someone doing 35mph unless you're not paying attention? That bike has good brakes, 35mph should have taken less than a second to stop, so how did he not see this old lady pulling that boat in front of him? He didn't even have a helmet on to impede his vision...

 

[mikew]

35mph should have taken less than a second to stop

It did take less than a second to stop. As soon as he hit the car, he stopped...

Purogamer...your logic never ceases to amaze me. Get in your car, go 35 mph and slam on the brakes. See what happens.

 

[Peter Parker]

There are a lot of factors that influence braking distance on a motorcycle. Speed is one, so is whether the bike is straight at the time, whether the rear/front/or both brakes are used. pavement conditions etc.

a one second stop at 35 sounds a bit quick for me. But I was not there and have not even seen the crash site So I won't engage in amateur sleuthing passed off as fact.

 

[Jimbo]

I think, everyone here is adding "what if's" to the situation.
Me included...
I hope no one here is taking all of this as definate fact.
Like the Cell phone, I brought that up .... It is a fictisious situation, but most are now having fun with it.

It's claer that I am a Ben and Steelers fan, but I also am looking at the actual accident , no partally....
Purogamer, Is obviously from the Cleveland area, 99% chance a Browns fan, so I can see his side of the story as well.

If Ben doesen't play, the Browns have a chance to beat the Steelers.

Some Non Steelers fans, see it as Ben was definatly at fault, although, it's clear the law states the person that fails to yeild is at fault.

Jimbo

 

[Juan]

Roethlisberger had no motorcycle license..only an expired learners permit. HE SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ON THE ROAD!! He only has himself to blame.

 

[Purogamer]

I think, everyone here is adding "what if's" to the situation.
Me included...
I hope no one here is taking all of this as definate fact.
Like the Cell phone, I brought that up .... It is a fictisious situation, but most are now having fun with it.

It's claer that I am a Ben and Steelers fan, but I also am looking at the actual accident , no partally....
Purogamer, Is obviously from the Cleveland area, 99% chance a Browns fan, so I can see his side of the story as well.

If Ben doesen't play, the Browns have a chance to beat the Steelers.

Some Non Steelers fans, see it as Ben was definatly at fault, although, it's clear the law states the person that fails to yeild is at fault.

Jimbo

^Most absurd post of the week.

So I'm to believe that a steeler fan is telling the truth that he's being unbiased in regards to this, but I as an assumed browns fan is not? Thanks for the credit...

The facts don't lie. You can twist them all you want, but they still don't lie. He has absolutely ZERO business on the road, and the dummy wasn't even wearing a helmet. So despite the fact that he shouldn't be on the road, he crashes INTO a car (the car didn't hit him, he hit it), which should mean that HE was the person who didn't yield.

But assuming she just recklessly pulled in front of him because she didn't see him (like bikes don't reflect light and his hair wasn't flapping in the wind), why didn't he stop? Did he not see her? Are his brakes inactive? There's so many unanswered questions but steeler fans have all the answers somehow.

I guess if he had hit a light pole, the light pole would be at fault for being too close to the road...

 

[Peter Parker]

Maybe people are having fun with this. Or maybe it isa bit more serious to some. At this point the police have done threir investigation and that would seem to be the end of it. Although I suppose that both operators have the right to challenge the findings.

 

[Purogamer]

Is either of them challenging anything? I haven't heard anything about this in at least a week, just the poking that's going on in this thread. I would imagine ben is focused on getting healthy so he doesn't miss anymore of the offseason than he needs to.

 

[Peter Parker]

to the best of my knowledge no they are not. Which might mean that both accept the findings. In any event they are the ones that would have some basis for doing it. Uninformed internet speculation is unlilely to produce much of value.

It is absolutely true that Roethlisberger should not have been operating the motorcycle without a valid license or permit. No one has ever disputed that. But that does not mean that he is legally responsible for the accident. As for a light pole---well they seldom write citations to light poles but if someone placed a light pole in the road that person might be judged responsible when someone hit it.

As for him stopping I don't know whether he hit the brakes or not. As I said above a lot of factors influence the ability to stop within a given distance. A google search shows several sites that indicate that the ideal stopping distance for a bike going at 30 (he was going slightly faster) would be 45 feet. Perhaps he did that but it was simply too late.

 

[Jimbo]

^Most absurd post of the week.

So I'm to believe that a steeler fan is telling the truth that he's being unbiased in regards to this, but I as an assumed browns fan is not? Thanks for the credit...

The facts don't lie. You can twist them all you want, but they still don't lie. He has absolutely ZERO business on the road, and the dummy wasn't even wearing a helmet. So despite the fact that he shouldn't be on the road, he crashes INTO a car (the car didn't hit him, he hit it), which should mean that HE was the person who didn't yield.

But assuming she just recklessly pulled in front of him because she didn't see him (like bikes don't reflect light and his hair wasn't flapping in the wind), why didn't he stop? Did he not see her? Are his brakes inactive? There's so many unanswered questions but steeler fans have all the answers somehow.

I guess if he had hit a light pole, the light pole would be at fault for being too close to the road...

Amazing I guess is the correct wording...
If you look back at my post you will find that I am n NOT being BIASED.....

OK, lets see, since we cannot draw on the computer without adding an attachment. we will look at this like this.

IF I am driving in a straight line (down the road thru the intersection) and you pull into MY side of the road trying to turn and we collide....

Q. Who pulled into the other lane ? A. The person turning of course.

I was trying to go straight thru.....

That was the basis for the accident.
Remeber, the accident happened regardless,wheather either driver had the right to be there.

The lack of an updated license, did not CAUSE the accident.

I am acually sorry I even bothered with this thread.

 

[Purogamer]

So the fact that someone made a legal left turn and a bike that had no business being there hit it, is the woman's fault? If the bike wasn't there like it legally should not have been, this thread wouldn't exist and ben would be on the football field like he's supposed to be.

The woman is allowed to make a left turn when her light is green. She did nothing illegal. Reckless? Perhaps. But it's hard to say she is at fault when she was hit by someone who shouldn't be on the road. If someone pulls in front of you, you stop. You don't keep going because you believe you have the right of way, you stop. That didn't happen here for whatever reason that we don't know.