Driver Who Killed Phil O’Reilly Had a History of Speeding and Red Light Tickets

Union Turnpike at 175th Street, where Phil O’Reilly was killed by a driver in January. Image: Google Maps
Union Turnpike at 175th Street, where Phil O’Reilly was killed by a driver in January. Image: Google Maps

When a motorist killed Phil O’Reilly as he crossed Union Turnpike outside Carnesecca Arena in January, NYPD filed no charges and said O’Reilly was crossing against the light. Police cited no evidence to back up the claim that the driver, who hit O’Reilly with a Nissan Altima, was not at fault.

But the city’s open data portal shows that the same Nissan was cited for speeding five times in less than two years and a red light violation two months before O’Reilly was killed.

The history of dangerous moving violations raises questions about NYPD’s crash investigation and reinforces the need for new measures to keep habitual reckless drivers off the streets.

A popular ride leader for the Five Borough Bike Club, O’Reilly, 71, was struck at around 11 p.m. on January 23 on the westbound side of the turnpike at 175th Street, on the border of the St. John’s University Queens campus, where he’d just watched a basketball game.

Union Turnpike is a divided four-lane road conducive to speeding. Two people were injured in crashes at 175th Street in 2017, according to city data.

Days after the crash, the NYPD public information office provided no details on how fast the driver was going, and didn’t say if the driver’s phone was checked for evidence of distraction. While sharing no information about the motorist’s behavior, police felt comfortable telling the public O’Reilly was at fault.

“Police said the driver had the right of way and that the victim, though in the crosswalk, was going against the red light,” the Daily News reported.

As is typical when a motorist is not charged or ticketed after taking a life, NYPD withheld the driver’s name, identifying him or her only as 47 years old.

Violations attached to the car that struck Phil O’Reilly. Image: NYC OpenData
Violations attached to the car that struck Phil O’Reilly. Image: NYC OpenData

Streetsblog searched for the Nissan’s plate number, visible in a Daily News photo, in the city’s traffic violation database. Since late 2015, the car has been ticketed by traffic cameras five times for speeding in school zones and once for running a red light. In addition, the database shows numerous parking violations and summonses for expired or missing registration and inspection stickers. All violations that indicate a location occurred in Queens.

When a motorist kills someone walking or biking, NYPD often adopts the driver’s story as the official version of events without talking to other witnesses. In cases where other people’s testimony or video evidence comes to light, NYPD’s findings are frequently discredited.

The public doesn’t know why NYPD thinks Phil O’Reilly caused the crash that killed him. Since the car is routinely operated in a reckless manner, and NYPD has a record of allowing drivers to guide investigations into fatal collisions, skepticism is warranted.

Like last week’s crash that ended the lives of two children in Park Slope, this case is also an example of how deadly traffic violence might be curbed if repeat traffic camera tickets resulted in a loss of driving privileges, not just a $50 fine.

Responding to the Park Slope crash, last week state lawmakers announced bills that would suspend registrations of vehicles tagged for multiple camera violations.

  • Vooch

    Another case of multiple photo violations & zero human written tickets. professional courtesy ?

    This killer is likely also a member of a protected class like Marty Golden & others.

  • com63

    He probably was crossing against the light, but underestimated the speed of the approaching car. The car driver bears partial responsibility and should still be charged with something.

  • Andrew

    He probably was crossing against the light,

    Maybe. Maybe not. He’s already been killed for whatever crime he may or may not have committed, so in the end it doesn’t really matter much.

    but underestimated the speed of the approaching car. The car driver bears partial responsibility and should still be charged with something.

    This, this, this. Speeding is illegal, whether or not a pedestrian was crossing against the light. And speeding increases the likelihood of killing a pedestrian.

    If the anonymous driver was speeding, then he was at least partially at fault, regardless of what O’Reilly was doing.

  • Ken Dodd

    What is your basis for concluding that he “probably crossed against the light”? There is currently not a shred of publicly available evidence to support this.

  • MatthewEH

    Not to come down on you too hard here, but:

    Oh look! Someone’s playing CSI comments section.

  • MatthewEH

    Eh, I think Occam’s Razor applies here. As follows:

    It’s completely plausible that the driver had so many photo violations and zero human-ticketed violations simply because so few violations are issued by officers compared to the deluge of violations out there.

  • Just wanted to commend Streetsblog & Brad for regularly including traffic violation data (free for all to access via the NYC open data portal) in reporting about these awful crashes. I read Streetsblog daily as well as NYDN and NYP and others and maybe it’s me, but I find that the tabloids are now pulling in these traffic violation data as well when reporting on these crashes. NYDN’s Dan Rivoli did an analysis recently of drivers who racked up many speeding tickets. It’s great to see context.

    Knowing that these drivers have a history of recklessness, documented with real tickets, not anecdotes, makes it much harder for casual observers to shrug and say “eh, it was the cyclist’s/pedestrian’s/kid’s fault, it’s dangerous out there…”.

    There are 140 traffic cams. Yet there are 12,000 lighted intersections. When you know the driver in question has been caught speeding multiple times before *just at the spots with traffic cams* and *only when they’re turned on*, then you have to reason that this driver *frequently speeds*.

    Once you can connect the dots and establish the driver’s behavior, it’s not hard to fit this into the context of the crash. Driver was speeding, as usual, probably running a red light, gunning for the next light, whatever. That’s the kind of behavior that kills. That’s the kind of driver we need removed from the road. They don’t get the privilege of driving in NYC near children, parents, people, cyclists, pedestrians or other drivers.

  • Vooch

    possibly but unlikely 🙂

  • MatthewEH

    Heck, moving violations aside, even the parking tickets suggest lack of conscience.

  • strangemonkey

    Exactly correct, I see so many cars speeding, driving aggressively, disregarding the safety of others, never using turn signals, going through stop lights (often treating them like stop signs), etc. with impunity. With only 140 cameras, they know it’s tacitly OK, because there are no consequences.

    We need ENFORCEMENT, COPS ON BIKES, MORE CAMERAS, and NEW LAWS, making patterns of reckless behaviour (behind the wheel of any motor vehicle) punishable with time in prison.


The Weekly Carnage

The Weekly Carnage is a Friday round-up of motor vehicle violence across the five boroughs and beyond. For more on the origins and purpose of this column, please read About the Weekly Carnage. Fatal Crashes (18 killed this week, 39 this year, 3 drivers charged*) Brooklyn: Private Sanitation Truck Kills Pedestrian at Broadway and Myrtle; […]