A few months ago I was involved in an accident as I was making a left turn into a plaza driveway. I was struck by a vehicle as I was making my left turn. It was nighttime and I think it is possible that he did not have functioning headlights. The vehicle who struck me was uninsured and according to his statement in the disclosure request, he was going 60 in a 50 zone. Would the fact that he was uninsured and stated he was speeding help my case in any way? Thanks.

If the other driver was uninsured, he will most likely be facing a serious charge himself for driving without insurance. Regardless though, it doesnt negate your duty to ensure that your turn could be made in safety. The Courts may consider his speed to be relevant if it was such a marked departure from the limit that there was no way you could have seen him (i.e. 150 in a 50), but 10 over wouldn't really make a difference. If it was nighttime and he really had no working lights, that could be a good defence.

Thanks for the response.

I have no witnesses to confirm that he had non-functioning headlights other than my own version of events. Would the justice disregard this as a result? Is it possible to cast reasonable doubt that his headlights were non-functioning through correlating the fact that 1) he was uninsured and 2) it was an old 1994 vehicle and therefore would more likely neglect to change his headlights?

I will also be speaking to a paralegal regarding the matter and appreciate your further thoughts prior to this.

Domainer wrote:

Is it possible to cast reasonable doubt that his headlights were non-functioning through correlating the fact that 1) he was uninsured and 2) it was an old 1994 vehicle and therefore would more likely neglect to change his headlights?

Shadow of a doubt? Yes. But reasonable doubt, no.

Your testimony regarding the condition of his headlights would probably not help much if the street was well-lit. However, if it was poorly lit, then you're on to something.