Re:

I'm not saying that this is set in stone, it just should start with the
officer assuming the driver was to blame and making violations based on that
UNLESS the driver can attest to not being at fault. If a witness can
corroborate that the driver was not to blame, or if there's obvious skid
marks far enough in advance of the crash to show that they were trying to
avoid it, then they don't have to start with assumptions. It's ridiculous
that so many people die each year from cars while the driver still drives to
work the next day.

Without these assumptions, as it is now, drivers keep mowing down cyclists
and pedestrians with no repercussions. If you read Streetsblog, is far too
often that drivers that have killed, *even with suspended licenses* got a
slap on the wrist and maybe a small fine. A teenager creamed a bus stop, and
was off the hook because "he had a clean record." Of course he did! He just
started driving!