What should she be charged with?

[*michaelsean*]

(07-08-2015, 01:46 PM)djs7685 Wrote: It's not an accident when you hit a stationary object with a moving vehicle.

If you're operating a vehicle, pay attention. If you aren't paying attention for ANY reason, then it's 100% your fault and you should face the consequences of anything that happens as a result of your dumbass-ness.

If she wasn't reacting quick enough to stop in time, it's her fault. If you have "bad depth perception" then you shouldn't be allowed to operate a machine that weighs thousands of pounds capable of reaching high speeds.

This is pretty cut and dry. You don't hit a non-moving object if you're paying attention and are mentally capable of driving a car. Unless she hit a patch of ice in July, there's no legitimate excuse for this.

I don't know that it was a non-moving vehicle that she just came upon and ran over.  In that area at that time it's more like slow traffic that came to a stop, and he stopped quicker than she.

And personally I will maintain that driving a motorcycle involves an assumed risk higher than that of a person in a car.  An everyday ordinary occurence  can be fatal.  I think it would be cool to ride a motorcycle, but I never have because what can be an inconvenience in a car can kill you on a bike.  If a fender bender can land me in prison, then I'd just as soon ban motorcycles.