NEW BRIGHTON -- A 12-year-old borough boy was injured after being hit by a car Thursday night.
New Brighton Area Police said the boy was on a bicycle crossing Penn Avenue at the intersection with Allegheny Street at 7:10 p.m. when he was hit by a car driven by a 20-year-old New Brighton man. The driver initially fled the scene, but later returned, police said.
The boy was taken to Heritage Valley Beaver hospital and then transported to UPMC Children’s in Pittsburgh, police said. The last update police had on the boy’s condition was that he had a broken leg and had to undergo surgery.
Police did not release the name of either the driver or the victim.
Police said the investigation is ongoing, and charges had not yet been filed as of Friday morning.
Please don't call it hit and run when the driver initially flees then comes back. It's misleading.
Looking at the map, there's a middle school on that corner. Totally normal intersection. Stop light, crosswalks, bar across the street.
Being very dark at 7:10 p.m. does not help matters for either party.
Jon, for discussion among friends: isn't it a hit-and-run if the driver hits the cyclist and leaves the scene, then comes back in an hour? My simplistic understanding is, when the driver flees the scene it's a hit-and-run.
to explore it: When they come back in say a half-hour, is it still a hit-and-run or otherwise, fleeing the scene and returning later is just an "oopsie", a gimme, a mulligan - and there's no crime in the fleeing?
Going further: If the driver comes back in two hours after they've dropped off the passenger that's NotTheirSpouse, is it still a gimme?
Does it matter if the victim died/suffered because the driver didn't stop and render aid, or if it's only a broken leg and surgery (as in this case) is it a freebie?
If the driver comes back in 8 hours after they've sobered up, is that still a freebie?
To me (but perhaps only to me, and I'm frequently and predictably wrong) when you hit a person with your car and then flee the scene, it's a hit-and-run. When you come back 15 or 30 or 45 minutes later, that's a good after-the-crime behavior but it doesn't mitigate the fleeing - but maybe it does?
Policy-wise I don't see a social benefit to giving somebody who flees a "gimme" if they come back later. Could returning promptly possibly mitigate punishment? I'm good with tempering punishment in that situation - but the crime of hitting and fleeing would seem to persist.
(looking forward to hearing more about this)
Stu, the cyclist killed three weeks ago was at 7:15 pm.
I'd definitely call it a hit&run if the driver leaves, seeing as the driver may be attempting to beat out a DUI or something similar. Granted, putting in the title of a thread does have an effect on how I react to the thread even before I start reading.
Calling it something other than a hit and run is misleading, because that is exactly what it was as soon as the driver left the scene. If the kid had died after lying in the street bleeding for 30 minutes it wouldn't seem so innocuous.
@v, I know, but it's not as bad, right? The Banks family has to live with this uncertainty. All I'm saying is, a kid getting their leg broken in front of their school is bad enough.
The police need to treat it as a hit and run. If any charges are filed (haha!), a judge can decide if coming back after mitigates any punishment. That's what judges are for.
If I "take" a car from a lot, then come back in an hour and return it or buy it, how do you think that goes for me?
I agree that returning is better than not returning, and returning soon is better than returning later. And the story doesn't quantify, did the driver return in 10 minutes or 3 hours, so that's unknown.
I think the crime remains, and the after-crime punishment is mitigated by the return.
But if we don't call it a hit-and-run, we lose the ability to count: "How many hit-and-runs this year", we lose the public focus on "this is deplorable", and it becomes unspoken, unrecognized, unpunished and therefore tolerated and acceptable.
This is a good discussion and I appreciate it, not because teh interweb is a good place for back-and-forth but much more because "we here" are a leading edge of awareness, and as our thoughts and process evolve we're improving our advocacy.
Overton Window n'at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
To me, it's hit-and-run if they do anything but slow to a stop within sight of the point of contact.
It is definitely a hit and run. It is good that he came to his senses and returned, but you don't leave someone lying in the street.
Vannevar you continue to impress me with your calm, rational responses. Some people enjoy splitting hairs.
that's very kind of you, I'm much less impressive in person.
to me, everybody on here is a fellow cyclist, a teacher and my ally. #MyTribe
My friend Vannevar is right. We are really all on the same side here. There is no doubt that what this driver did, technically, is hit and run (AKA leaving the scene of an accident). But for some reason the story didn't say that. We don't know why. It could well be pro-car bias, as we seem to think. But there might be something else going on. I think we are better off not reading more into the story, unless we have some additional information.
And my friend Jon is absolutely right.
What I get out of the conversations here is different perspectives from informed people, and I have changed my mind on topics because of it. Which doesn't happen often.
The most specific example for me is protected bike lanes. I remember having written snarkily about Vehicular Apartheid and being challenged and somebody wrote, "what about the 12-year olds, do they have to ride in the lane too?" and suggesting that bike lanes aren't necessarily for the strong cyclists who are happy to ride in traffic and capable of maintaining 18 mph; they're for others, and the others who want to ride yet don't want to ride in heavy traffic. And we all benefit from growing the population of riders.
And that changed my mind and moved me to a better spot, and a forum and conversation that can do that is a precious commodity in these days of too much shouting.
Sorry to rant on. I am glad to have this place to come to.
Also, to give a shout-out, Jon is one of the instigators of the Pgh Bike Wiki and I really appreciate that.
I see that the "hit-and-run" versus "tragic accident where the driver left and then returned" is coming into play in a Baltimore cyclist's death.
^ the driver returned after she was confronted by a second cyclist who followed her to her gated community. So at that point she knows she is caught. So yea, lets say it's good of her to return and "take responsibility" - after
Another article that's a little easier to follow & a pic of her car
Wait a sec, so she was texting AND under the influence? No amount of hi-vis, blinkies, rear view mirrors, street smarts, or on street infrastructure is going to protect you from that.
in the baltimore case - 45 minutes is more than enough to go somewhere private to puke out any remaining liquor, clear out evidence from the car, sober up a bit, and come back looking like Joe GoodCitizen.