How Fast Was the Other Vehicle Going to Launch Me 25 Meters in a T-Bone Crash?

[JaredJames]

the reason i say may is because i do not remember anything from the crash but the witnesses said they "heard" me speeding. however the bike was extremely loud.

"May" implies you do all / some of the time. So there is immediate doubt and you very well could have been speeding, if not probably were.

 

[Borg]

Here's the picture from chrisso's earlier link.

Keep in mind that the OP is in Australia where they drive on the left. The van was making a right turn which is the equivalent of a left turn in the US and many other places.

Also, the driver side is the side that was impacted and is damaged.

 

[JaredJames]

Wow, so not even a T-bone.

The OP needs to really evaluate the explanation, especially before taking it to court.

Assuming the van has little to no motion in the direction of the freeway (so pulling out of a t-junction style), it would be easy to know if the biker is speeding looking at how far he is thrown on impact with the van.

 

[chrisso]

ok when the wife got home i got out of the house to take a few measurements. so have attached a quick rough drawing i have made up

and i said may because, yes, i sometimes did speed and whilst i like to believe he was at fault i want to be certain before i go any further with it..

i had not asked for anyones opinion (jj and mender) on whether i was at fault or not. i simply asked if anybody knew of a website that might help me make this calculation. thanks for your help dalespam.oh, and yes i realize it wasn't 25m i traveled after the crash - i had been told (what a surprise, media exaggerated) it was and i didnt know otherwise till i actually got the tape measure out and measured it myself

 

[xxChrisxx]

Threads like this really shouldn't be allowed, or a be made to have a stupidly large disclaimer.

It's all speculation with absolutley no hope of aquiring the level of detail required for an accurate answer. The OP clearly intends to try and use that 'information' to 'defend' something or as some kind of evidence. Not only would none of this idle chit chat be admissible as evidence, but it has the potential to make the OP look like an idiot.

We also can't say who is at fault, as we simply don't know. Surely this could be argued to be an 'overly speculative thread'.

 

[JaredJames]

i had not asked for anyones opinion (jj and mender) on whether i was at fault or not.

1. What mender and myself have said is correct, whether you like it or not. If we can tear your defence apart here, they'll destroy you in court.

2. This is a public forum, you will get opinions whether you like it or not (and regardless, everything here is opinion anyway). Especially when you are asking us to prove the van is at fault and ignore the fact there must be a reason to doubt the van isn't at fault (by default in this situation, if you are legally driving, the van is at fault).

3. As above, either the van didn't stop (he's at fault) or he didn't check properly (he's at fault). It's only if you are not legally driving that puts you at fault, so what have you done to inspire said doubt?

4. You mentioned that they had a team of experts out to analyse it. What was their conclusion?

5. Based on your drawing, the van would have had to hit you at one hell of a speed to get that resultant path (I'd even go so far as to say it would have to be greater than 60kmh). Not to mention the fact it was driving into the oncoming traffic.