[CONSOLIDATED] Accident in Tampines: Multiple-vehicle collision at road junction, with 8 individuals sent to hospitals

[cyke69sg]

Bro, this is an accident. Singapore is so peaceful that it is super boring. Hence, our media would report anything even saving a cat. At least we don't have earthquakes like Japan and Taiwan

SG is the safest

 

[eclipsemints]

1) Onus is on the vehicle executing the lane change to do so after making sure it's safe to do so.

2) Speeding up as a defensive maneuver is not uncommon. I do that myself sometimes to make clear that potential lane change is not feasible.

3) You wait till when it goes to trial and see if the defence lawyers will even attempt to cite provocation as a mitigating factor.

Point 1 - Agreed.

Point 2 - Speeding up is NEVER a defensive maneuver. If people lane change without checking or force their way into your lane, the correct and defensive way is to apply brake, slow down your vehicle and allow the other vehicle to lane change safely.

If based on your own self invented method, by closing the gap and not allow others to change lane, not only are you risking an accident with the lane changing vehicle, but also with the vehicle in front with the decreased distance to the front car.

In this case, the merc driver put the motorcyclist at risk by speeding up to catch up with the motorcyclist on the 1st lane in order to block the saab driver from overtaking. Putting the motorcyclist at risk which the saab driver demonstrate by executing a reckless lane change which not only side swipped the merc, but also almost knocked into the motorcyclist.

Never in Singapore's Basic and advanced theory books did it state Speeding up as a type of defensive maneuver.

Like i said, if you ever do this type of thing during TP test to get your license. It's an immediate failure. Where you learn how to drive one?


In fact you just admitted to be one of those selfish drivers who often speed up to prevent others from changing lane.

Point 3 - I already said Merc driver is not responsible for the saab driver's madness in causing the accident. Yet so many others are calling out the Merc driver for his selfish and egiostic antics in preventing the lane change.

 

[it_geek]

same guy meh

Yup, this guy is also a nuisance on the road.
(Not sure if this has already been posted before)

clearly can see he sped up when the saab tried to overtake him LOL

 

[cyke69sg]

Population of Singapore 5.9 million
Calgary 1.6 million

Too many people in SG.
Like it quiet here in Calgary. Is like SG in the 80s population density wise.

 

[Roundtreex]

The merc driver is the one with tattoo on his left arm????

Can help to ban those newly created clone defending the white Mercedes bo?

 

[m0n0n0ke]

More write more guilty. Should have keep quiet..

yaya attitude approved

 

[qhong61]

Merc driver has come out to clarify his actions

Just let the Saab overtake.
Then this will not have happened.
If u behaved this way yesterday, don't think u could be nicer other times.
Don't try to justify ur action.

 

[(^@^)"]

Merc driver has come out to clarify his actions

Ask him lip lai sexplain his fug up actions over here also leh. Why only go to Reddit?

 

[yuzu28]

Yup, this guy is also a nuisance on the road.
(Not sure if this has already been posted before)

From this video,yes, Merc driver is no saint.

My impression of all these power up boom boom car drivers are always ego and chiong speed type. Same for those Simi GTA gtr, luxury sports car, all are nuisance as they create noise pollution

 

[harky]

the speeder still alive....
dont think is merc fault.

u r responsible for ur own action

 

[inmyopinion]

Oh, he already rubbed the white car at the side and didn't stop liao. Then he drove straight through the traffic lights. Siao lang.

This view below is contributed by the white car.


Published 8 hours ago.

GLC43 owner

Hi, I am the driver of SNH7Z. I would like to clear up some misunderstandings.​

 

[wlalala]

I am reminded of a phrase. Something like “accidents don’t just happen. There is a chain of events”. Also called the swiss cheese model. All the holes must line up for the light to go through. As long as something is not aligned, the accident will not happen

What people do to shirk responsibility is to look at what might not be aligned but was aligned and then say it’s not my fault. If only….

Like the SAAB. Maybe the forum if they want to say the Saab driver is innocent, say it’s not his fault. If only the Merc and bike gave way, people look left and right before moving off etc etc. even if it’s shared responsibility, the responsibility has been diverted liao.

It’s a bit like a man goes to a pub, sees a lot of sexy girls then gets horny , goes out and rapes someone and then says if only when I went to the pub people don’t dress so skimpy I won’t be horny and I won’t rape so “not my fault” or “partially must blame the crowd at the pub”

ah yes the swiss cheese model...
point to note though that the slices are supposed to represent layers of defence and I wouldn't say that the merc driver is a layer of defence.
In any case, what the saab driver did was so egregious that it is akin to taking a gun and firing at the cheese.

Now the big question is if the merc driver should shoulder some blame for the accident.

This is what the court of appeal stated in SBS Transit Ltd v Stafford Rosemary Anne Jane[2007]:

the law requires the motorist to act on the basis that there may be negligence and incompetence on the part of other road users and to make allowance for them, but without having to contemplate possibilities that are remote

So yes, the merc dricer has his part to play in keeping the roads safe. But the responsibility does not extend to contemplating possibilities that are remote (i.e. whatever happens at a traffic junction few hundred meters down the road).

In Nickson v PP [2007], CJ Menon went pretty in depth in discussing Causation in an accident.

Generally, causation consists of causation in fact and causation in law. As explained by the Court of Appeal in Sunny Metal & Engineering Pte Ltd v Ng Khim Ming Eric [2007] 3 SLR(R) 782 (“Sunny Metal”) at [52] (albeit in the context of the tort of negligence), causation in fact “is concerned with the question of whether the relation between the defendant’s breach of duty and the claimant’s damage is one of cause and effect in accordance with scientific or objective notions of physical sequence.” The test is often framed as a counterfactual and the question to be asked is this: but for a particular event (A), would the result (B) have occurred? This is referred to as the “but for test”. However, to take the but for test as the sole indicia of causation can lead one to draw absurd conclusions. The example provided in Sunny Metal (taken from Harvey McGregor, McGregor on Damages (Sweet & Maxwell, 17th Ed, 2003) at para 6-008)) is that of a mother who gives birth to a son who commits murder when he grows up. Applying the but for test, the mother may be said to be a cause of the murder because if she had not had that child, the murder would not have happened.

In the context of the offence of causing death by a rash or negligent act under s 304A of the Penal Code, it has been held that in order for liability to attach, the act must not only be the cause without which the death would not have occurred, but it must also be the causa causans, or the proximate and efficient cause of the death (see Lee Kim Leng v Regina [1964] MLJ 285 at 286C-286D). In Ng Keng Yong v Public Prosecutor and another appeal [2004] 4 SLR(R) 89 (“Ng Keng Yong”), the appellants were two officers who served on a Republic of Singapore Navy Ship (“the Navy Ship”) who were charged under s 304A of the Penal Code. It was established that certain negligent actions they took in the course of navigation resulted in a collision between the Navy Ship and a merchant vessel (“ANL”). Four crewmembers of the Navy Ship lost their lives as a result of the collision. The appellants were convicted by the district judge and appealed only against their conviction. On the facts, it was established that ANL, too, had been negligent in making a series of small alterations to its course to avoid collision, instead of making a large alteration, as was required by the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (“Collision Regulations”).

The fact stands that the merc driver is not the proximate and efficient cause of the accident.

I've seen some comments saying that the merc driver is partly to blame because the saab driver was trying to run away and was focusing on his mirror. Which I think is complete nonsense.
Firstly, it's completely speculative. The saab driver was driving like a maniac in the first place. We don't know what really happened.
Secondly, the accident was such a remote possibility that it's simply not reasonable for the merc driver to foresee. It's just absurd to think so.

 

[Godeau]

same guy meh




clearly can see he sped up when the saab tried to overtake him LOL

Same guy, he already tried to justify his actions from the reddit post shared by fellow edmwer above

 

[ZaiNan]

More write more guilty. Should have keep quiet..

Chao advisor doing damage control for the sake of his portfolio lah

He should have engaged a professional instead

 

[qhong61]

Saab driver is on a death wish, no doubt about that.

I'm just thinking why can't the mercs not speed up or even slow down and just let the Saab overtake when he can see the Saab beginning his manoeuvre and there was a motorcycle just ahead in the other lane. His lane in front was already clear of traffic, practice some defensive driving shouldn't be of any issue.

Agreed.
He should have been more gentleman.
And kinder.

 

[tomsss]

Saab driver is on a death wish, no doubt about that.

I'm just thinking why can't the mercs not speed up or even slow down and just let the Saab overtake when he can see the Saab beginning his manoeuvre and there was a motorcycle just ahead in the other lane. His lane in front was already clear of traffic, practice some defensive driving shouldn't be of any issue.

there would likely be an incident before the saab tried to aggressively overtake the merc that started all that

indeed, no reason real for the merc to speed up. Merc was in front and he just wanted to stay in front.

Everyone should start asking the merc why he speed up, very interested to hear his response

 

[it_geek]

Same guy, he already tried to justify his actions from the reddit post shared by fellow edmwer above

the justification doesn;t sound like a justification at all frankly

if u are really a defensive driver and u see a joker doing this kind of dangerous **** (clearly exceeding 60kph on a road like that), immediately should have slowed down

instead he sped up. really cannot smell any thing other than the ******** of his ego

i also don't believe his explanation of trying to overtake a road hogging motorcyclist. the speed on that road is 60 and the motorcyclist wld have been doing quite a similar speed. the guy forgot his highway code ah. overtaking on the left has been traditionally more dangerous. if that explanation is to be believed, he really lacks situational and/or road awareness. or is he so clouded by the ego/blinded to the fact a damn large vehicle is passing him...? he should just get off the road. any insurer looking at his dashcam (now that it has been publicised) will question why he sped up also and will defo want to disclaim liability, if not lower the recoverable damage for his front side panel

 

[qhong61]

same guy meh




clearly can see he sped up when the saab tried to overtake him LOL

Put him in jail too.

 

[ninja99]

Becuz he tried to engage the Saab driver with silly theatrics, accelerated his vehicle and tried to prevent the Saab from cutting into his lane. Put the biker on his right at risk and further agitated the Saab driver.

Before that, the Saab driver was reckless but not totally irrational or he would have run over the biker. But the Merc driver antics flipped the "Ki-Siang" switch, and the Saab driver became completely irrational... In short the Merc driver made a bad situation even worse..

Still the fault primarily lays on the Saab driver, this fcukhead is too emo and should be sued into bankruptcy...

Merc has blood in his hand for this that for sure. If merc is not an egoistic driver the out come could be different on that day.

 

[Asphodeli]

Last night so many defending him…. See e way he poke the cam driver where is a single slow down lane shows e same ego driving pattern …..

Cause no video of provocations before the big accident was released what duh