Luckily, the bus was equipped with a camera which will provide invaluable evidence about how the accident occurred.  It was unknown whether the man was crossing at a marked or unmarked cross walk.  Although the fact that the man may or may not have been in a cross walk is not always determinative when it comes to assessing liability for the accident, it is often the first such question that police investigators ask.

I previously wrote about pedestrian accident cases.  A pedestrian who’s hit in a cross walk does not always mean that the driver is at fault.  Similarly, a pedestrian who’s hit while crossing the street outside of a marked cross walk does not always mean that the pedestrian is at fault.

Washington law imposes a duty of care upon both the driver and the pedestrian.  A pedestrian cannot cross the street, even in a cross walk, in such a manner so as to make it impossible for the driver to stop.  Also, a driver has the obligation to avoid causing a collision with a person even if that person is crossing the street outside of a cross walk.  Thus, whether each person satisfied their duty of care will depend on the individual facts involved.  Witness testimony is usually extremely important.  So is the results of a police investigation that collects physical evidence at the scene, and often includes measurements taken of skid marks, debris, etc.

I hope this man makes a speedy recovery.  He may be lucky in the sense that the video footage will show how this incident occurred.