Check out some similar questions!

sweetdream2 · May 12, 2012, 07:33 AM

I was backing up my car into a parking spot and I have a back up camera as I was reversing into a spot I hot a lady, there is no crosswalk where I was parking and she was coming from the opposite direction who is at fault>?? nyc

Fr_Chuck · May 12, 2012, 07:44 AM

You hit her, so you will be considered at fault. You can of course agrue the point, but I would say you will get the ticket and the claim will be against your insurance

sweetdream2 · May 12, 2012, 07:46 AM

But there's no crosswalk!!

Fr_Chuck · May 12, 2012, 07:57 AM

Does not really matter, they could have been crossing a street illegally and that does not take away your fault to watch, in fact since you had a camera and honestly one of the worst things in my opinion since you watch it and no not really look backwards, they are only good to see little kids or toys that may be sitting behind you when parked, not to use to actually back up.

But the court will most likely say,if you had a camera and was looking, then you should have seen them.

I know it does not seem right or fair, but this is what over my many years as a police officer I have seen simuliar cases decided

ballengerb1 · May 12, 2012, 08:37 AM

Just to be clear, " into a spot i hot a lady" means you hit a lady. Was she walking or in another car? If walking you will be at fault 99.99% of the time. Pedestrians have the right away and you must be in control of your vehicle at all time to avoid an accident. Cars dent, people don't so the law sides with the pedestrians.

AK lawyer · May 12, 2012, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

... camera and honestly one of the worst things in my opinion since you watch it and no not really look backwards, they are only good to see little kids or toys that may be sitting behind you when parked, not to use to actually back up.
...

Oh. So that's what they are for!

It's a matter of perephreal vision. The Human eyes have a field of view of something like 180 degrees. The rear-camera only shows you what's directly behind you. So she could have been walking at 90 degrees to OP's direction of travel, and OP might not have seen her until the second she walked into OP's path. But that would be a good argument that the pedestrian failed to exercise due care.

Side view mirrors are better, but they have blind spots too. My daughter failed her driver's test the first time she took it because the examiner insisted she should have done a "Linda Blair" while backing up. I believe that attitude is so 1920's (when cars didn't have any rear-view mirrors), but I do see the point now that I think about it.

By the way, what is this question doing in the "Criminal Law" forum?