SCC trustee strikes child in crosswalk with vehicle

Full story: Vallejo Times-Herald

A Solano Community College trustee struck a 2-year-old boy with his vehicle as the youngster walked in a crosswalk near Highland Elementary School on Friday morning, Vallejo police reported.
Comments
1 - 20 of 23 Comments Last updated May 23, 2008
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Grumpy

Mountain View, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
May 20, 2008
 
Wow Tony, way to set an example.
Lifetime V

Dixon, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
May 20, 2008
 
Thank God the child was not seriously hurt! I know the Rev. Ublade, he is a fine man. He was obviously driving very slow and cautious. This incident could happen to any one of us when a child darts out into the road. Best wishes to the child and family, get well soon.
I agree

San Leandro, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
May 20, 2008
 
Rev Ubalde is a very caring and wonderful person. This clearly was an accident and bad judgement on the child who darted into the path of drivers. I drive that way everyday...thank God the child wasn't hurt!
Be blessed, Rev. Ublade.
Margo

Daly City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
May 20, 2008
 
The guy should be cited, I know someone that got a ticket when you drive pass when someone is in crosswalk , who cares if he is some College Trustee You should be safe if your in crosswalk and others where there two. They should seek compensation for his pain and suffering ...My daughter goes to that school the cars are always driving too fast.
DKRC

San Leandro, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
May 20, 2008
 
The tile of this article angers me! Does it matter what the Man's position or title was or is? It almost eludes to his positon being a reason for this accident. Give me a break let's not be so judgemental or accusatory I have seen this man bring smiles to the faces of children by bringing pastries to the Continental of Omegas Boys and Girls Club. Let's talk about his time and gas and energy spent ensuring that they would be able to recieve some type of light refreshment afterschool.....Let's write about that!!!!
shame

San Rafael, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
May 20, 2008
 
An adult should be holding the 2-year-old's hand while crossing at all times. Cite the parent as well.
Margo

Daly City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
May 20, 2008
 
You shouldn't be driving by a school if you don't have any children to drop off, there is other ways to go around. And I hope the Parents get a lawyer and sue, am sure he has insurance.
Vallejo Mom

El Cajon, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
May 20, 2008
 
I agree wrote:
...bad judgement on the child who darted into the path of drivers.
excuse me?? A 2-year old showed bad judgment??? Are you serious?

Obviously this was an accident and the driver didn't mean to hit the child. But if the entire family was IN THE CROSSWALK, as the article indicates, he should NOT have entered - the law says vehicles yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk. The little boy was IN THE CROSSWALK. His family was IN THE CROSSWALK. The driver clearly violated the law. I don't care who he is, and I don't care if the mother was holding the child's hand or not. C'mon people!! Did you 2 year old always do the 'right thing'? Did your 2 year old never get away from you so you had to run after him/her? A toddler was struck by a car, and you all act like the driver is being unfairly victimized. I'm not saying the driver is a demon, but according to the law, he WAS at fault.
from Vjo

Castro Valley, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
May 20, 2008
 
Margo wrote:
You shouldn't be driving by a school if you don't have any children to drop off, there is other ways to go around. And I hope the Parents get a lawyer and sue, am sure he has insurance.
WoW! because there is a school you need to change your whole route to your destination!? I don't think so! You need to be EXTRA cautious because of the area you are in but you have every right to drive where you want to. That was a lame comment. The baby, a two year old, should have been holding the hand of its guardian not running in the street. That was an accident I'm sure the man did not intentionally hit the little child. May karma hit you where it hurts for that comment you just made!
Cisco Kid

Sunnyvale, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
May 20, 2008
 
I emphatically agree that if any part of the group was in the crosswalk, you must by law stop. Too many times I have seen close calls because the driver figured he/she could clear the pedestrians before they intersected the path of the car. I am not impressed either with the story pumping anecdote of the driver being a trustee, devotee, butcher, baker, or indian chief. The person was a driver at the time and should be cited as anyone else would have been. It's only a $340 fine or so, but the law is the law! Whether he is a good guy before or after the event is immaterial.

Since: May 08

San Francisco

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
May 20, 2008
 
Obviously you all haven't seen someone hit by a car before. It may have not been the driver's fault. You can't stop a car on the drop of a dime and this child DARTED out into the street. It could have been that the mother and the child were merely approaching the crosswalk before making it obvious that they were crossing.

Not to mention, the car wasn't going that fast. If it had - the child would be in much more serious condition.
Cisco Kid

Sunnyvale, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
May 20, 2008
 
Legal Babel wrote:
Obviously you all haven't seen someone hit by a car before. It may have not been the driver's fault. You can't stop a car on the drop of a dime and this child DARTED out into the street. It could have been that the mother and the child were merely approaching the crosswalk before making it obvious that they were crossing.
Not to mention, the car wasn't going that fast. If it had - the child would be in much more serious condition.
By the accounts of this story, the driver entered a crosswalk with pedestrians in it by not even observing what was in front of his car. Add to this the advice of his insurance company to just shut up until the investigation is over. So what if he was driving slow? He knew it was a school area and should have been extremely vigilant with visible children walking around. NO EXCUSES!
rescue vallejo

Fresno, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
May 20, 2008
 
The mother was at fault too, for not properly supervising her 2 y.o.
Once again- VTH corrected

Mountain View, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
May 20, 2008
 
Yeah-Tony is a good man, just ask him. I'm surprised his insurance company was ABLE to get him to SHUT UP. It doesn't necessarily make any difference what title the driver of a vehicle who strikes a child in a cross walk holds, but Tony is a sanctimonious, self serving bigot.
Lifetime V

Dixon, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
May 20, 2008
 
Just got off the phone with a teacher friend at Highland. She told me the little child is “always” in the street. The parents seem to have a problem controlling the child.
Amused

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
May 20, 2008
 
You "experts" need to shut up, before all the facts are known.
Former Volunteer

Vallejo, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
May 20, 2008
 
rescue vallejo wrote:
The mother was at fault too, for not properly supervising her 2 y.o.
You are right; I carry my two year old across the street and hold my four year old's hand. Big mistake for the parent.
BOB

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
May 20, 2008
 
Hit anyone in a CROSSWALK and not be cited? Maybe they should be renamed crossmark.
An accident

San Leandro, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
May 21, 2008
 
Vallejo Mom wrote:
<quoted text>
excuse me?? A 2-year old showed bad judgment??? Are you serious?
Obviously this was an accident and the driver didn't mean to hit the child. But if the entire family was IN THE CROSSWALK, as the article indicates, he should NOT have entered - the law says vehicles yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk. The little boy was IN THE CROSSWALK. His family was IN THE CROSSWALK. The driver clearly violated the law. I don't care who he is, and I don't care if the mother was holding the child's hand or not. C'mon people!! Did you 2 year old always do the 'right thing'? Did your 2 year old never get away from you so you had to run after him/her? A toddler was struck by a car, and you all act like the driver is being unfairly victimized. I'm not saying the driver is a demon, but according to the law, he WAS at fault.
Clearly because you aren't the driver, you have this stupid comment; but clearly, any fool can see that he wasn't driving fast....the Parent should be holding the hand of a 2 year old....you and I both know the 2 year old ISN'T A STUDENT!!
An accident

San Leandro, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
May 21, 2008
 
My reply was to MARGO

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Mariposa Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Mariposa Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Mariposa People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Mariposa News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Mariposa
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••