[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

First and foremost how is it perjury, I'm just laying out possibilities.

If the goal is to be able to drive through a group of people impeding your path to your house, and your later concocted story is "well there was ice and I didn't think stopping was safe", I call BS. Cmon now, you just wanted through the blockade. This woman wanted through the blockade too. I don't blame her. The police should have arrested those people. But if she later comes up with some story about fear of road safety, I'm not buying.

where this whole thing gets scetchy to me is that she has the legal right to passage on that highway. The minute that the protesters went from standing in the road to actively pushing back on her vehicle and trying to use another truck to block her off it became a threatening environment for her, and the Natives accepted the risk of injury due to their actions and not hers.

No they didn't. No one accepts the risk of being hit by a car. There is no legal concept that says anyone even has the capacity to accept the risk of being hit by a car and thereby absolves anyone who runs them over of legal responsibility. Hell, if I signed a contractual agreement under seal that said, "Captaincrunch, I'm a go stand in the road over thurr, and if you hit me with your truck, well, so be it, I do not hold you responsible in any way", and you then hit me with your truck, you would still be liable for my injuries and would be guilty of a number of offenses under the MVA and probably the criminal code. Would it affect damages? Absolutely. But you'd still have that liability.

Like I said I don't blame a girl in a truck for not wanting to stop when a bunch of people are physically trying to stop her vehicle and blocking her off with the road.

I don't either, I'm just saying it's not worth doing and she probably didn't think through what the possible consequences could've been for her.

By Rights as soon as she indicated that she was going through at a slow speed the Natives should have stepped out of the way and let her proceed.

Ideally, but there was no guarantee they'd do that. Mobs of this sort are not given to rational, sober thought. Occupy should be ample evidence of that.

She made reasonable motions to slow down against an illegal blockade to give them a chance to move out of the way, instead they physically tried to obstruct her vehicle with force and then used another vehicle. I think any court charges would be dubious.

You can think what you will but I think you're wrong. Hell, most motor vehicle offenses are absolute or strict liability anyway, and I'm sorry but if you do something intentionally that can forseeably hurt someone, you're pretty much all the way there to negligence.

This all of course misses the point, which was not about whether you'd win if this got in front of a judge - I don't think you'd win as much as you'd like to win but that's not the point. The point is, there would be repercussions, they would be costly and inconvenient and really not worth the risk.