Pages

November 20, 2014

After 47-Second Hearing, Driver Who Ran Over 3-Year-Old Is Found ‘Not Guilty’

As traffic deaths go, the case of 3-year-old Allison Liao may be one of the saddest. On October 6 of last year, the little girl was crossing Main Street in Flushing, with the light, in a crosswalk, holding her grandmother's hand. The two were about half way across the street when a black Nissan SUV made a left turn, sucked Allison under a tire and knocked her grandmother, Chin Hua, to the ground.
What makes this traffic death particularly disturbing is that the incident — just one among the nearly 300 that occur in New York City every year — was captured on video, by chance, by a dashboard camera on a passing vehicle.
The entire left turn, and the death and serious injury it caused, took about two seconds. The 44-year old driver, Ahmed Abu-Zayedeh, has suffered no official consequences from his action. The Queens D.A. declined to prosecute because the driver wasn’t impaired. But he did receive two tickets: failure to yield to a pedestrian and failure to use due care.
In July, those tickets arrived in traffic court, before Administrative Law Judge William Lee at Queens North, an employee of the state Department of Motor Vehicles.
It took 47 seconds to dispose of the case, according to the official recording.
Play
00:00 / 00:00
The first thing you hear is the judge puzzling over the spelling of the defense lawyer’s name.
“Mr. Truck? Turck? K-C. T-U-R-C-K. All right, make your appearance counselor.” That takes 13 seconds.
Shawn Turck states his name, the driver’s name, and his law firm address.
Then the judge says: “This is an accident investigation? No personal observation?" A police officer, never identified on the tape, says “That’s right.” Then the judge asks “No videotape?" But before the officer can get beyond the word “Um—“ the judge stamps the tickets. That takes all of six seconds.  Then: “Not Guilty.”
The judge doesn’t ask the police officer to state what happened, or ask for any official documents or investigations. The police officer doesn't protest that YES, there IS a video tape.
State sources said it was up to the police to present their case. Police sources say they’ve been complaining to the DMV for a long time that it’s wrong, legally, for judges to require a “personal observation” in traffic fatality cases —but the DMV hasn’t responded.
None of this is consoling to Hsi-Pei Liao, who didn’t even learn of the hearing until earlier this month, because the DMV has no mechanism to notify families of these hearings — or even to make sure the judge knows a fatality occurred. When Liao and his lawyer sat down to depose the driver in the Liao’s civil case, it was the first time Liao had ever seen Abu-Zayedeh. Then they learned the driver had been cleared of even a traffic violation. 
“I just ended up putting my head down, shaking, asking how could this happen," Liao said last week. "There’s so much evidence that’s there. What irritates even more — the driver still believes that it was not his fault whatsoever.”

13 comments:

  1. The driver, and his lawyer, needs to have an accident, a fatal accident.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Get a contingency "ambulance chaser" sue the drivers insurance for $100 million, get publicity and if defendant claims "not guilty" show tape and call judge as witness. Do an OJ Simpson.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well then, do the right thing and hunt the driver down, where you can personally explain to him how it is his fault. Bring some duct tape and a ball bat.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thats why it's called an ACCIDENT. There was no mal intent, no impairment, no negligence.


    But lets lock this guy up for the rest of his life!


    Pathetic. It's horrible that somebody was killed, but that doesn't mean somebody else should automatically be punished. Sick society.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What is wrong with that judge? A child got killed, and the grandmother injured as well! And he just let's this Abu character off with a slap on the wrist? Good grief, what has happened to the justice system? It's corrupt and negligent to the core!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. The driver was negligent, the pedestrians were with the light and in a crosswalk like they were supposed to be. Accident or not this guy was not paying attention, probably talking on his phone or going to fast. He should get involuntary manslaughter at the least, especially as it was captured on videotape. How can you say the man was not at fault, are you not supposed to pay attention to the road in front of you. I hope they sue his ass in civil court. They should also revoke his license and make him watch the video over and over and over. If it was my child, this man would become dog food, and maybe the judge also.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Man, are you ever off base!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. One of if not the worst judicial system in the world and you expect justice. Your entire system from top to bottom is corrupt, owned and operated by satan and his little minions.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hmmm
    You can rest assured that in the city of New York if that child had been Jewish the driver would have gotten life.

    ReplyDelete
  10. sooo if you're walking down the street somebody in apartment knocks a potted plant off their window sill, while mopping the floor, the pot lands on and kills you.... That person should be thrown in jail? lol


    Americans are fucking morons. No wonder your country is approaching third world status and your citizens are scoring in the lowest on test scores accross the board from "developed" nations.

    ReplyDelete
  11. IF he was speeding/texting/impaired/running a light or breaking any other law, yes. If the guy was driving and simply didn't see the people. It's a tragic ACCIDENT. If he didn't break any laws (not yielding for something you didnt' see isn't "negligence") Negligence is when they prove he didnt' see the people BECAUSE he was doing something ILLEGAL, like SPEEDING. simply "not seeing them" is not Negligence... but thanks for showing your ignorance. Good thing you're ll never be in a position of power.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Negligent homicide implies that a law was broken, leading to the homicide.


    If the driver was speeing, or ran a red light, aka BREAKING A LAW that led to the accident, that would classify as NEGLIGENCE.


    Simply not seeing something and hitting it, without breaking any laws, is called AN ACCIDENT. Only in the USA are the idiotic Americans ALWAYS looking for somebody to punish.

    ReplyDelete