A JAF (Japan Automobile Federation) rescue vehicle, after being tailgated, stopped just past a railroad crossing — leaving the car behind it trapped inside the crossing. The JAF employee was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder. On 5ch, opinion is split between those who say “the following car shouldn’t have entered the crossing until the car ahead had cleared it” and those who say “the fault lies with the tailgater who closed the gap.”
[Trapped the Car Behind Inside a Railroad Crossing] JAF Employee Arrested for Attempted Murder
A 52-year-old man was arrested on the 19th on suspicion of trying to kill a driver by trapping the car behind him inside a level crossing on the Tobu Urban Park Line
Someone who witnessed the incident right after it happened
A 52-year-old man was arrested on the 19th on suspicion of trying to kill a driver by trapping the car behind him inside a level crossing on the Tobu Urban Park Line
Someone who witnessed the incident right after it happened
If he knew that stopping would leave the other driver with nowhere to go, and kept him stuck on the tracks anyway, there's no excuse for that.
>>3
Couldn't the car behind have just checked it was safe before entering the crossing?
Couldn't the car behind have just checked it was safe before entering the crossing?
>>15
This.
The one who was so busy tailgating that he ignored the traffic laws is the one at fault.
This.
The one who was so busy tailgating that he ignored the traffic laws is the one at fault.
>>15
That's just a way to avoid an accident happening in the first place — it has nothing to do with whether the perpetrator was at fault for what actually occurred.
That's just a way to avoid an accident happening in the first place — it has nothing to do with whether the perpetrator was at fault for what actually occurred.
In a case like this, which side ends up paying compensation to the railway company?
>>4
Probably both.
Probably both.
>>4
They'll probably be held jointly liable.
They'll probably be held jointly liable.
There really are idiots who barrel onto the tracks even with a car right in front of them.
>>6
Guess he really was tailgating, huh.
Guess he really was tailgating, huh.
>>6
You wouldn't normally do that.
He was definitely tailgating.
You wouldn't normally do that.
He was definitely tailgating.
You're taught in driving school not to enter a crossing until the car ahead has cleared it.
So the JAF employee isn't at fault — the idiot who "died" is.
So the JAF employee isn't at fault — the idiot who "died" is.
>>32
Unfortunately, he didn't actually die.
Unfortunately, he didn't actually die.
"I panicked because I was being chased and ended up stopping right after clearing the crossing" — let's go with that story.
>>35
But Mr. Kato got out of his car right after exiting the crossing and confronted the victim, who was stopped inside the crossing.
But Mr. Kato got out of his car right after exiting the crossing and confronted the victim, who was stopped inside the crossing.
Proving intent to kill seems like a stretch.
Even if they can establish he was aware he was damaging the car,
you still can't rule out the possibility that he assumed the victim himself would get out and escape (which is exactly what happened).
Even if they can establish he was aware he was damaging the car,
you still can't rule out the possibility that he assumed the victim himself would get out and escape (which is exactly what happened).
>>37
Is this the type who thinks getting hit by a train is no big deal???
Is this the type who thinks getting hit by a train is no big deal???
"I already felt like the car behind me was crowding me, and when it kept crowding me even at the crossing, I was sure it was deliberate tailgating, so I went to complain" —
that story does hold together to some degree.
that story does hold together to some degree.
>>39
Goes without saying what happens if you leave a car stuck on the tracks in that state, right?
Goes without saying what happens if you leave a car stuck on the tracks in that state, right?
His parents' house is just before the crossing, and he was heading there when he got tailgated! So maybe he got so angry he thought, "I'll trap him on the tracks"?
"From the point in the footage where the gap between suspect Kato's car and the victim's car starts closing, it's about a one-minute drive to the crossing. Suspect Kato's parents' house sits even before the crossing at the scene, so the gap with the victim's car may have closed when he slowed down to turn off toward his parents' place."
"From the point in the footage where the gap between suspect Kato's car and the victim's car starts closing, it's about a one-minute drive to the crossing. Suspect Kato's parents' house sits even before the crossing at the scene, so the gap with the victim's car may have closed when he slowed down to turn off toward his parents' place."
>>56
So 400m before the scene, there was a normal amount of following distance.
> A car believed to be suspect Kato's, traveling about 400 meters before the scene.
Ten seconds later, a car believed to be the victim's can also be seen.
So 400m before the scene, there was a normal amount of following distance.
> A car believed to be suspect Kato's, traveling about 400 meters before the scene.
Ten seconds later, a car believed to be the victim's can also be seen.
I think they should toughen the penalties for tailgating.
You see it practically every day.
You see it practically every day.
>>57
The penalties are already fairly harsh — it's proving it that's hard.
The penalties are already fairly harsh — it's proving it that's hard.
When he got trapped,
he should have just called JAF.
Then they'd have come back and helped him out. (Ironic, since the perpetrator himself was a JAF employee.)
he should have just called JAF.
Then they'd have come back and helped him out. (Ironic, since the perpetrator himself was a JAF employee.)
>>63
But this JAF employee knew the accident had happened and still fled home to his parents' place.
If his parents' house is just before the crossing, maybe he saw the tracks turn into a major accident scene, thought "oh no," and went home anyway.
But this JAF employee knew the accident had happened and still fled home to his parents' place.
If his parents' house is just before the crossing, maybe he saw the tracks turn into a major accident scene, thought "oh no," and went home anyway.
Why couldn't he just drive out past the crossing barrier?
You'd think a tailgating scumbag would just try to push the car ahead out of the way.
You'd think a tailgating scumbag would just try to push the car ahead out of the way.
>>71
Doesn't a safety feature bring the car to a stop?
Doesn't a safety feature bring the car to a stop?
This one's on the tailgater.
You can tell from the video — there's basically no following distance at all.
You can tell from the video — there's basically no following distance at all.
>>78
This guy sounds like he's got real talent for it.
This guy sounds like he's got real talent for it.
Wait, about that crossing barrier getting stuck and trapping him… wasn't it supposed to snap easily so you could still get out even if you got trapped?
>>86
It's built so it's hard to break going in, but easy to break going out.
It's built so it's hard to break going in, but easy to break going out.
>>86
He got out of the car because with the way blocked ahead, he thought he'd be killed if he stayed.
Only after seeing that did the JAF car move.
By then there probably wasn't time for him to get back in and move his own car.
He got out of the car because with the way blocked ahead, he thought he'd be killed if he stayed.
Only after seeing that did the JAF car move.
By then there probably wasn't time for him to get back in and move his own car.
Either way, isn't the one who pushed forward with no space to spare the one at fault?
>>101
That's true.
Everyone has a duty to avoid causing an accident, after all.
That's true.
Everyone has a duty to avoid causing an accident, after all.
>>101
What kind of logic is that???
Are you the type who can't be satisfied unless it's entirely one side's fault?
What kind of logic is that???
Are you the type who can't be satisfied unless it's entirely one side's fault?
The people defending him are tough on tailgating, but they're conveniently ignoring that stopping near a crossing is a clear traffic violation — it's a no-stopping zone.
>>122
If you're going to say that, then you absolutely can't stop inside the crossing either.
If you're going to say that, then you absolutely can't stop inside the crossing either.
>>124
But the car ahead stopped right at the crossing exit and blocked the way out — isn't that just unavoidable?
But the car ahead stopped right at the crossing exit and blocked the way out — isn't that just unavoidable?
>>128
If you're going to say that, then you shouldn't force your way forward when the way ahead is already blocked.
If you're going to say that, then you shouldn't force your way forward when the way ahead is already blocked.
>>128
Situations like that can happen (breakdowns, accidents, etc.), which is exactly why the rule is: you only enter a crossing if you're sure you can make it all the way across.
Situations like that can happen (breakdowns, accidents, etc.), which is exactly why the rule is: you only enter a crossing if you're sure you can make it all the way across.
*This article is compiled from excerpts and a summary of the 5ch (Nanでも実況G) thread “JAF Employee: “I noticed I was being tailgated and stopped — turned out it was right after crossing the tracks” ← Well, that’s fair enough then.”
Leave a Reply