In a First, NYPD Precinct Officer Charges Driver Under New Right-of-Way Law

street_justice2

The Law Office of Vaccaro & White is representing the victim in what may be the first case of a precinct-level charge for violating NYC Administrative Code Section 19-190, also known as the Right-of-Way Law.

The Right-of-Way Law provides for criminal misdemeanor penalties for a driver who strikes and injures a pedestrian or cyclist with the right of way. The law was designed to allow precinct-level officers to charge sober but reckless drivers who stay at the scene — something that for years, only a tiny, specialized group of officers assigned to the NYPD Collision Investigation Squad were permitted to do in a handful of the most serious cases.

The crash involved a 70-year-old woman attempting to cross East 96th Street from north to south at the eastern leg of the intersection with Second Avenue, walking from home to the Stanley Isaacs Senior Center. A cab driver who was proceeding westbound on East 96th Street ran a red light and struck her in the crosswalk while she had the walk signal. The victim suffered serious but not life-threatening injuries. The cab driver admitted that his light was red, but claimed that he obeyed the red light and never made contact with the woman. According to the report, the police officer from the 23rd Precinct responding to the crash interviewed an “independent witness” at the scene, concluded that the driver’s account was false, and charged the driver with violation of the Right-of-Way Law.

The charge is significant because it may reflect an end to NYPD’s “observed violation” rule, which prevents precinct cops from issuing citations for motorist violations they do not personally witness, as well as other limits on precinct-level investigation and enforcement against reckless driving.

NYPD crash investigations have until now proceeded along one of two tracks. Only the worst crashes — causing fatalities and critical injuries — are investigated by a 20-member Collision Investigation Squad (CIS), while the other 90 percent of serious crashes are investigated by precinct-level officers.

Under this two-track system, CIS officers can interview witnesses, gather videotape and other forensic evidence, and issue charges against sober drivers who stay at the scene. In contrast, precinct officers responding to non-life-threatening crashes are not permitted to issue summonses for reckless acts not observed by police — in keeping with the so-called “observed violation” rule — and often ignore criminality other than DWI offenses, even hit-and-run cases.

The Right-of-Way Law was designed to remove the limits on precinct-level traffic crash investigation and enforcement and to make precinct officers, who respond to 90 percent of serious crashes, the vanguard for street safety. Two features of the Right-of-Way Law make this possible. First, by defining a driver’s violation of a pedestrian or cyclists’ right of way as a misdemeanor — a crime — instead of a traffic violation, the law eliminates application of the “observed violation” rule (which apparently only applies to traffic violations). Officers no longer have to randomly observe a traffic violation that causes injury in order to take enforcement action against it.

Second, the Right-of-Way Law allows a criminal charge based only on evidence of specified conduct, rather than requiring proof of the driver’s recklessness or intention to do harm.  This feature of the law bridges a critical gap between two types of criminal laws: conduct-based laws, such as DWI and fleeing the scene of a crash, and culpability-based laws, such as reckless endangerment and criminally negligent homicide. Guilt under conduct-based laws is proven with evidence that a driver unjustifiably engaged in certain specified conduct, while guilt under culpability-based laws requires proof that the driver was subjectively aware of the risks he or she created, or was otherwise “morally blameworthy.”

The crash report
The crash report indicates that the responding officer relied on witness accounts to charge the driver for violating the victim’s right of way.

In the case of the woman who was hit crossing 96th Street, a precinct-level officer was able to charge a driver for violating the Right-of-Way Law based on reliable evidence that the driver struck a pedestrian with the right of way, without inquiry into the driver’s mental state.

This is exactly the type of enforcement action that proponents of the Right-of-Way Law sought. NYPD has been remarkably tight-lipped about enforcement of the law, refusing to publicly state whether precinct officers would receive any training or information after it took effect on August 22. This instance suggests that precinct-level officers have been notified of the Right-of-Way Law and given guidance in its use by NYPD.

The statement in the MV104 report that “independent witness concurs with pedestrian” is striking and bespeaks a critical, investigative type of inquiry by the officer, rather than the uncritical and passive “report what you see and hear” narratives more typical of such reports. The officer responsible deserves praise from safe streets advocates, and officers in other precincts should be encouraged to follow this promising example.

  • Komanoff

    Thrilled to read this. But I’m confused by the statement in the 3rd graf that the cab driver “claimed that he obeyed the red light.” Explain? Thanks.

  • As a non-attorney, non-policy expert, mostly pedestrian, I’m also confused, because I thought that the pedestrian always had right of way?

  • SteveVaccaro

    Driver claims he never moved, sat stationary at the red light, that he never struck the pedestrian, and that she made up a story about being hit. (Believe it or not, I have heard this whopper from several drivers before, and I even once saw a jury buy it). But in this case, there are a number of witnesses who saw him hit her.

    It’s like two siblings in the back seat of the car. ‘I did not hit him/her!’

  • SteveVaccaro

    Pedestrians don’t always have the right of way. But this pedestrian did, and the driver went through a red light and hit her anyway.

  • Keegan Stephan

    Is this also the first known 19-190 charge in a non-fatal crash?

  • walks bikes drives

    I believe pedestrians always have the right of way in an unsignalized crosswalk as long as they do not step out in front of a vehicle without that vehicle having a reasonable time to react. Otherwise, I believe, they have to have stepped off the curb while the white walk signal is showing or, without a walk signal, have the green light. A pedestrian technically is jaywalking, which gives up the right of way, if they are not in the crosswalk or if they step off the curb while the dont walk signal is illuminated or flashing. The last part is quite annoying because, at 96&Broadway, for example, the white walk signal is illuminated for about ten to fifteen seconds, and then the flashing don’t walk signal is shown for about 30 seconds before the light changes. It is virtually impossible to legally cross Broadway on a single light phase.

  • SteveVaccaro

    As far as I know.

  • Ian Turner

    When I first saw this headline I thought it said “charged”, rather than “charges”. ????

  • Mark Walker

    Thank you, Officer Withers, if I’m reading that correctly!

  • Jesse

    So if you give the cops a lie that’s stupid enough to insult even their intelligence they might apply the law out of spite. I’ll still take it.

  • red_greenlight1

    Why do I fear this is probably a one off thing?

  • neroden

    Good for the 20th precinct!

    Last I heard, *some* precincts were taking “vision zero” seriously… and others were driving their police cars on the sidewalk. I think it’s worth keeping track of the situation on a per-precinct basis.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

City Hall and TWU Reach Settlement in Suit Over Right-of-Way Law

|
The de Blasio administration has reached a settlement with TWU Local 100 over the union’s lawsuit against the Right-of-Way Law, ostensibly bringing an end to a rancorous political fight that sapped energy from the city’s street safety efforts for the better part of a year. On its face, the settlement maintains the integrity of the law, which was intended […]

Will the City Council Press NYPD to Enforce the Right of Way Law?

|
NYPD is barely enforcing a key Vision Zero law more than a year after it took effect, and it seems the City Council isn’t planning to do anything about it. The aim of the Right of Way Law, also known as Administrative Code Section 19-190, was to give NYPD precinct officers a tool to penalize motorists who injure or kill. […]