The driver was acquitted for jogging on the footpath

The policeman came behind. But the judge sided with the car driver.

A 50-year-old female motorist appeared in Hordaland District Court on Thursday after she refused to pay a fine.

As a pedestrian crossing at Ascoy, she had to brake suddenly for a jogger. According to police, she was unable to stop before the car hit the sidewalk, “resulting in a pedestrian stop.”

– thus she did not comply with the duty to yield to the pedestrian, the submission states.

NOK 12,900

At the district court, the police demanded a fine of NOK 8,900 and the driver to pay NOK 4,000 in court costs. So a total of NOK 12,900.

The driver explained to the court that he knew a joker was running in his direction on the opposite side of the road. She described her pace as running at a “good pace”. She said she didn’t realize Jogger was crossing the street.

– Alas

Thus, explained the driver, it was surprising that it still happened. But she explained that she was able to break up before the crosswalk.

– Braking was still not as smooth as she would have liked because she was running too fast due to the jogger. Joker also ran, throwing her arms out when she saw her, a reproduction of the driver’s description says.

Coincidentally, a policewoman driving three cars came behind. She testified in the case and explained that she had seen the Joker. A police witness said he initially saw Jagger crossing the road.

– This is because she pulled to the right and turned her head back before running down the sidewalk.

The witness explained that Jogger initially entered the pedestrian zone – and maintained his speed.

– The defendant had to brake suddenly. The running girl looked surprised, put out her hand, saw the suspect’s car, and she jogged around the car, according to the policewoman’s description.

The police witness believed that the car entered the pedestrian lane and the driver was in breach of duty. So the driver was stopped, the verdict said.

Doubt

The court comes to the conclusion that the driver undoubtedly had a duty to yield, but decides that the driver should be acquitted.

The judge believes that it has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt that Jogar stayed obstruction or disturbance In the corridor.

The judge doubted that the police witness could have seen with certainty whether the defendant had entered the corridor or not.

– The court must rely on the defendant’s explanation that she suddenly slowed down slightly, but that she slowed down before entering the pedestrian crossing.

The district court also emphasized the incidental explanation that Joker maintained his speed despite having to cross the road.

The court believed that since the accused’s car was so close to the pedestrian crossing, the driver could not have clearly sensed the jogger’s intention to cross the road, as the policewoman did.

– Pedestrian stopped suddenly and struck with one hand, in the opinion of the court, the pedestrian himself was not aware of the defendant’s car, but still ran into the crosswalk. She ran away when she saw the car, the verdict said.

The trial was held without co-judges.