Another Driver Kills Another Pedestrian

by Staff | Jan 15, 2020 3:20 pm

(19) Comments | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author

Posted to: Transportation, The Hill

The latest fatal car crash involving a pedestrian occurred Tuesday night on — no surprise — Ella T. Grasso Boulevard. Cops responding to the scene at 7:03 p.m. found a 50-year-old man lying in the street at around 695 Blvd., according to police spokeswoman Lt. Shayna Kendall. The man was transported to Yale New Haven Hospital, where he later died from his injuries. The driver remained on scene. The police department’s Accident Reconstruction Team has launched an investigation. Motorists killed nine pedestrians in New Haven in 2019, including five within one month, prompting cries for emergency action by the city. At the state level, State Reps. Pat Dillon and Roland Lemar last week said they’re seeking to pass legislation requiring traffic-calming and safety work on three deadly state thoroughfares in town — including the Boulevard. (Click here to read about that.) “There’s no way to cross the road without getting pancaked,” Dillon said about the Boulevard. Last Aug. 10, a 43-year-old pedestrian named Lony Bosquet died after two cars struck him while he was crossing the Boulevard. Another pedestrian was struck (not killed) at the Boulevard and South Frontage on Sept. 24.

Share this story with others.

Post a Comment

Commenting has closed for this entry

Comments

posted by: ElmCityAle on January 15, 2020 5:37pm This is a terrible tragedy, but I fail to see how the potentially misleading title and article on an important topic helps save lives. A more honest, comprehensive report would include how many of the pedestrians were hit while legally crossing vs. otherwise, how many times the drivers remained on the scene and what the facts indicate about their driving legally and safely, etc. There is a good reason many drivers in these situations were not charged with a crime. NHI should stop pushing an agenda and present a more balanced view, with the facts, about this matter, which would likely lead to a variety of ideas and understanding of responsibilities to help prevent the loss of lives.

posted by: CityYankee on January 15, 2020 5:39pm But please, let’s not enforce things like speeding, tail-lights, failure to signal, left turn on red, or that could violate someone’s rights. It’s easier to scrape up another body in New Haven; isn’t it?? Unless it’s a Yalie that gets hit. Then we get the speed humps, rotaries, land swales, and a visit from the media. Remember the broken windows theory???

posted by: nero on January 15, 2020 7:23pm Sarcasm aside, CityYankee, Broken Windows Theory has proven to be ineffective. Fixing up deteriorated neighborhoods reduces crime, but zero tolerance law enforcement was found to be counterproductive and in invariably led to arrest patterns exhibiting deep racist bias. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory

posted by: William Kurtz There’s nothing misleading about the headline. Another pedestrian has, in fact, been killed by yet another driver. “Remaining on the scene” is the lowest possible bar for acceptable behavior after the fact. Unless they’re intoxicated, it gives a speeding, distracted, or otherwise negligent driver an opportunity to control the narrative while their victim is bleeding or dying. Believe it or not, I have sympathy for killer drivers. They’ve been conditioned all their lives to think of driving as normal and to ‘other’ people who use any other means to get around. Of course they’re shocked and horrified when their action have consequences; after all *everyone* just takes a quick look at their cell phone, or speeds up a little to get through a ‘pink’ light, or rolls a stop sign here or there, right? And windshield bias is so pervasive that the police gyrate themselves into contortions to avoid assigning blame to drivers. Remember how they played a full game of Twister to avoid assigning any fault or blame to the woman who killed an elderly pedestrian on Olive St.? A “minimum” of 24.07 mile per hour, in a 25 mph zone? (https://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/cops_clear_confrancesco/) This has to change. Hopefully the new mayor will provide some real leadership instead of lip service. #VisionZero

posted by: Ch H on January 15, 2020 8:18pm If I’m not mistaken, the accident happened near or at the god-awful intersection of Boulevard and Route 1/Columbus Ave. I went to Google Earth to get a ground view of the intersection. The view labeled September 18, 2018, shows well-painted crosswalks but NO PEDESTRIAN CROSSING LIGHTS. It also looks as though there’s only one street light at the intersection. I stand ready to be corrected by anybody with a better knowledge of that intersection.

posted by: Esbey on January 15, 2020 9:58pm It is an accurate headline. A driver ran over and killed a pedestrian. The question of who is most at fault for that is a different question. Is it the driver, the pedestrian, or the road designer, or the rest of us for tolerating road carnage and not demanding change. Is it our fault for saying “accidents happen” when referring to repeated scenes of death?

posted by: okaragozian1 on January 16, 2020 1:17am Nero is suggesting that arrest of traffic violators has a racist component - essentially, Nero is making a reverse argument without realizing it. Specifically, if minorities (as Nero is suggesting) are predisposed to engaging in traffic violations then such conduct is plainly of their own making isn’t it? Now to the factual:. If minorities are predisposed to engaging in violations of law, must we stop enforcement of laws simply because the violations are being done by minorities? If minorities can not subdue their tendencies to violate vehicular laws then minorities need to be punished for their violations of vehicular laws. I’m not advocating that minorities should be punished for being minorities. Nobody should get a free pass from the enforcement of vehicular laws simply because they are a minority. The enforcement of the law should be color-blind - if minorities commit a crime they should be arrested and punished and if non- minorities commit a crime they should be arrested and punished.

posted by: CityYankee on January 16, 2020 5:58am @ nero—- so you wish for no laws to be enforced? I never said zero tolerance. How about enforcing any laws at all. It’s a free-for-all on area streets. No headlights, no rules of road, reckless driving. It seems like your fear of what you call racism would have us toss all laws out the window. Should there be no law? Please explain what you feel is worthy of being enforced to insure public safety.

posted by: AverageTaxpayer on January 16, 2020 10:15am @ Nero — are you suggesting that an “anything goes” atmosphere is somehow fairer or preferred to New Haveners? Or that our local police are incapable of ticketing and reigning in rogue behavior in an unbiased manner. Sure, there are drawbacks to actual enforcement, (who likes parking tickets), — but isn’t the upside of restoring some social norms and sanity to our streets, somehow worth it?

posted by: Mike Melanson Cheers to the Independent for calling it what it is, and not merely another “accident”. https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2015/09/why-we-say-car-accident-and-why-we-need-to-stop/403144/

posted by: William Kurtz There’s a difference between the overpolicing of petty offenses inherent in ‘broken windows’ and the systematic and aggressive enforcement of behaviors that are causing carnage on American streets. There should be a zero-tolerance policy on things like red-light running and failing to yield to pedestrians.

posted by: nero on January 16, 2020 11:48am @CityYankee: You never said “zero tolerance,” but that is the very essence of “Broken Window Theory,” which you cited and I addressed. I never advocated or implied not enforcing laws. I merely point out that the inevitable result—nationwide—of municipalities using Broken Window Theory and hence promoting zero tolerance has racist outcomes. You can disagree with that, but empirical evidence proves that this is true. So, AverageTaxpayer, no, I never suggested “anything goes.” I only proposed that applying Broken Window Theory leads to biased, racist enforcement and results. Once again, let me reiterate that I never advocated not enforcing New Haven statute. @ okaragozian1: I pointed out that Broken Window Theory has a racist component—this is virtually undisputed. I never suggested or implied that evenhanded enforcement of traffic laws is a bad thing. Your assertion that “minorities are predisposed to engaging in violations of the law” is more than a little problematic. I sincerely hope that you have no position in any part of law enforcement or our judicial system. Please people, read posts carefully before putting words in writers’ mouths, or constructing straw men who advocate lawlessness.

posted by: CityYankee on January 16, 2020 3:44pm Nero—- zero tolerance has racist outcomes….. how come?

posted by: nero on January 16, 2020 6:43pm @CityYankee: “. . . disorder doesn’t look the same to everyone, Harcourt said. [Bernard Harcourt, a Columbia Law School professor who has conducted two major studies on the impact of Broken Windows] “Definitions about what is orderly or disorderly or needs to be ticketed, etc., are often loaded — racially loaded, culturally loaded, politically loaded.” https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/the-problem-with-broken-windows-policing/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4397655/

posted by: okaragozian1 on January 17, 2020 8:08am Truthfully it is not I who is claiming that rigerous enforcement of existing laws has racist outcomes - it is you and all the reference to national trends you are referencing. I’m not claiming that minorities commit the majority of crimes - it is you who is making that claim in your writing. Because of your claims you are presenting, that rigerous enforcement of laws has racist outcomes, I point out that your statement is in reverse and inopposite to your argument. I was stunned that you would point-out and keep pushing a theory that minorities cause most of crime. Consider, you did not say that police are wrongly enforcing laws, but that the rigerous enforcement of laws is showing that a disproportionate amount of crimes are committed by minorities. Wow, what a racist thing to say! You are basically confirming that most crimes are committed by minorities and then pushing the idea because this true then we should give minorities a free pass to commit crime so the police don’t appear racist in enforcement of laws. Unbelievable!!! Again, read what you wrote: “rigerous enforcement of laws has racist outcomes” You are pushing the idea that minorities commit most crimes and, because this is so, we should not rigerously enforce laws. I would have never said anything you said, and specifically I did say, “The enforcement of the law should be color-blind”. I’m still stunned by your insistence that rigerous enforcement of laws has racist outcomes! This position you take affirms that minorities commit a lot of crimes and I would not have made such a statement - I can assure you - and was stunned when you did. Then you went on to explain that we should not enforce laws rigerously because it would prove that minorities actually do commit most crimes. I’m still stunned by your insitance that most crimes are committed by minorities and we should reduce enforcement of laws to cover up this fact you keep insisting exists. Wild, absolutely wild!!!!

posted by: Kevin McCarthy on January 17, 2020 8:24am ElmCityAle, the NHI reports on fatal accidents shortly after they happen - it’s a newspaper. Several of the data you seek normally aren’t available at that point. It would be irresponsible for the NHI to speculate on these points. In contrast, the NHI routinely reports whether the driver stayed at the scene or fled, as it did in this story. Ch H, part of the problem is that Boulevard is not designed for pedestrians but is used by them (including my wife’s students at NH Adult Education). I thought the city announced it was going to install sidewalks along part of the road. Paul, any word on how that is proceeding?

posted by: DerbyRam54 on January 17, 2020 4:01pm By any reasonable stylistic analysis this is not an objective report and to pretend otherwise is just silly. From the information available an objective statement would read along the lines “A pedestrian was struck by a motor vehicle driven by an as-yet unidentified driver, and later died from the injuries sustained. The driver remained on the scene. The police are conducting an accident investigation.” (It ought to continue with a promise to publish more facts as they become available, but that would probably only happen if it turned out to be wholly the driver’s fault.) That’s not how the above article represents the situation and it is disingenuous in the extreme to pretend otherwise. The agenda of the NHI and of many residents of the city towards motorists (usually assumed to be from the suburbs) is well-established and this merely continues that agenda. Little is ever done to provide an objective analysis of the reasons for these traffic fatalities or injuries but then it’s easier to just conclude it’s always the driver’s fault. Sadly that gets us nowhere as far as developing a reasonable program to try to improve matters. It’s interesting but hardly surprising that the author remained anonymous.