Columnist Robert Novak has a reputation for being an aggressive and fast driver. It may now have put him into legal jeopardy. He is accused of hitting a man in his black Corvette who was lawfully crossing in a pedestrian walkway in Washington and then speeding from the scene — only to be stopped a block away by an attorney who chased him on a bicycle. Novak joked in 2001 about his hatred for jaywalkers and the option of running them over. A video of the aftermath is linked below.
The pedestrian was a 66-year-old man but Novak told reporters that “I didn’t know I hit him. … I feel terrible. He’s not dead, that’s the main thing.” Well, maybe not. Novak admits that he was a block away the accident when he was stopped by a bicyclist. However, that bicyclist witnessed the accident and says that he had to chase Novak after he sped from the scene. He would seem a pretty credible witness. He is David Bono, a partner at Harkins Cunningham, who saw the accident and says that Novak “plows into the guy. The guy is sort of splayed into the windshield.” How does one not notice a guy splayed on your windshield?
Bono said that he was outraged by the Novak’s flight: “This car is speeding away. What’s going through my mind is, you just can’t hit a pedestrian and drive away.” It is hard to see how Novak was only charged with failing to yield the right of way. There is at least one eyewitness who believes that this was a hit and run — and another witness supports part of his account with a contemporary statement. Another witness, a concierge named Aleta Petty, said that Bono told her immediately after the accident that he was going to chase a hit and run driver. She quoted Bono as saying “This guy hit somebody and he won’t stop so I’m going to stay here until the police come.” Thus, Bono did not just adopt a harsher view after finding out it was Novak.
Hit and run is obvious a much more serious charge. Section 50-2201.05 states:
Fleeing from scene of accident; driving under the influence of liquor or drugs.
(2) Any operator whose vehicle causes personal injury to an individual and who fails to conform to the above requirements shall, upon conviction of the 1st offense, be fined not more than $500, or shall be imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both; and upon the conviction of his 2nd or subsequent offense, shall be fined not more than $1,000, or shall be imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.
In the meantime, civil litigation could ensue for negligence and other claims by the victim. A trial would be particularly interesting to see if the court would allow the following statement from Novak in a 2001 Washington Post interview: “I really hate jaywalkers. I despise them. Since I don’t run the country, all I can do is yell at ‘em. The other option is to run ‘em over, but as a compassionate conservative, I would never do that.” Now, that would be an intense motion in limine fight to keep that from a Washington jury.
Novak’s hit pieces on folks like Valerie Plame are now notorious examples of his work. However, the alleged expansion to the actual use of a car for a hit and run is a new development.
For a video of Novak after receiving the citation, click here.
For the full story, click here.
I don’t see the professor implying that Civil law constitutes criminal law, or that they would be criminally prosecuting Speed and the Mach 5, in a civil court.
I do see him saying that some of the things Mr Novak did to the victim are considered crimes, and are also actionable, and that he will likely face civil litigation for them.
Crimes are often actionable in the civil courts.
In fact, they’re often the last resort for victims when the criminal courts fail.
😐
Not sure where you’re studying law, but I’d ask if they have an after hours tutoring program.
His animosity towards jaywalkers is irrelevant — the victim had the walk signal, was in the crosswalk, etc. It’s still disturbing, of course.
As for his short flee from justice, didn’t reporters say that he repeatedly tried to get around the cyclist who was blocking him? This speaks volumes to his state of mind. I can understand a moment of panic, but his attempts to flee the scene lasted far longer than that.
Brian
“Civil litigation does not deal in crimes. It deals in contracts and torts, one of which is negligence. Most of us knew all this even before we went to law school.”
**************
I would get that request in for law school tuition reimbursement since every First Year I know understands that crimes can form the basis for tort claims. (See e.g., Simpson, O.J.–two cases) We call them intentional torts if they involve a specific intent to harm , or wanton conduct; negligence if they involve breach of due care by engaging in conduct below the accepted standard of a reasonably prudent person or in violation of a statutory or other prescribed duty. It is undeniably true that intentional acts, such as crimes, are torts too. The difference is in the remedy and the public versus private interest served. While I doubt Novak intended to hit the pedestrian, his actions were likely negligent (thus giving rise to liability civilly), and his attempts at fleeing the scene while not a tort in themselves were most likely criminal.
Brian
1, July 23, 2008 at 9:35 pm
Civil litigation does not deal in crimes
Really?
😐
So what did they sue OJ for?
“In the meantime, civil litigation could ensue for negligence and other crimes by the victim.”
You’re a smart guy, Prof. Turley, except when you’re not.
Civil litigation does not deal in crimes. It deals in contracts and torts, one of which is negligence. Most of us knew all this even before we went to law school.
Mespo,
That would be one extra large utility belt. And the thought of Novak in tights makes me a little woozy!
Novaks response?
😐
Define “never”
Informational only:
“Politico notes that in a 2001 interview with the Washington Post, Novak said, “I really hate jaywalkers. I despise them. Since I don’t run the country, all I can do is yell at ‘em. The other option is to run ‘em over, but as a compassionate conservative, I would never do that.”
I guess my only question would be how would this case be charged?
I mean, its sort of a hit and run, or at least leaving the scene, however, a passing witness convinced him to return to the scene, and he wasn’t far from it, merely one block.
So I wonder how they’ll charge it? Is it hit and run, leaving the scene, failure to yeild?
hmmm..no…wait a second.
We’re talking about Bob Novak, and actually being charged with something.
😐
bawahahahahahahaaahahhahahahhaaa
You have to see the interview on ABC…it’s posted on sites already.
He clearly regrets…that he got caught.
“He’s not dead [laugh], that’s the main thing [feigned seriousness].”
The victim is in worse condition than first thought.
What an infuriating story.
This ones easy.
Novak thinks ordinary people are insects. Bugs.
Therefore, how could one consider it odd that he didn’t notice a splayed bug on his windsheild?
That’s the criminal penalties. There are also administrative penalties on the driver’s license. I suspect it’s an automatic suspension for a hit-and-run in most states.
Can New York amend the traffic citation at a later time? Or is it something where the state only has one bite of the (big) apple — the DA can plea bargain down, but can’t later file additional charges? It would also seem to depend on the condition of the (alleged) victim. It would be far harder to play down if he suffered broken bones, for instance.
BTW: “civil litigation could ensue for negligence and other crimes by the victim.” I’m still trying to figure out what crimes the victim committed. 🙂
He probably feels entitled to vette’ern’s benefits. What a rat bastard! I’m sure Buttercup is right. He feels really bad, about being caught.
rafflaw:
Do you think Novak has a utility belt too? He is the dark knight after all. Who knows maybe the black ‘Vette is the Batmobile. Wham! Pow! Kazamm!
rafflaw:
Touche’
Mespo,
The reason why Novak drives a Corvette because he needs all the help he can get.
Isn’t the world a strange, wonderful place–excepting maybe yesterday for the pedestrian. The fact that character always seems to emerge despite reputation is very gratifying though I am sorry for the plight of this victim. As others here have noted, anyone hitting someone in a ‘Vette knows it given its closeness to the ground and the road feel. Maybe of more psychological interest is why our good commentator felt the need to operate such an obvious phallus symbol around the Nation’s capital. Aren’t there enough of them already?
I’m sure he “feels terrible” because he was caught. If your victim is “sort of splayed into the windshield,” you knew what you did.
The penalties for hit and run sound puny. If you merely scrape somebody with your car, that’s hit and run, right? What if you ram them against a tree and break their arms and legs…same penalty? What if you kill them, but it’s your first offense?
Novak should be glad it wasn’t me. I hate hit-and-run drivers more than traitors to our country, and he’s both.
rafflaw,
You made me laugh! You’re right. It’s not the story of the Princess and the Pea, it’s the one about the midlife crises and the knat! God may know the fate of every sparrow but the corvette driver hears the sound of dents before they occur through precognition!!! He didn’t see the guy on his windshield? That explanation is inoperative! I’m with you, hope the guy recovers fully and wins his suit.
Jill
I can’t imagine how anyone driving a Corvette wouldn’t realize that he had hit anything, let alone a man on a bike. Of course, we are talking about that infamous beacon of truth, Bob Novak! I hope he has some good insurance because it sounds like the witness just might be a good on the witness stand. I hope the victim recovers fully and gets some serious change out of Novak.