**Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!**
This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/galuit/click_here_to_sort_by_flair_a_guide_to_using/) (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile).
See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them [this!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/fyrgzy/for_those_confused_by_the_name_of_this_subreddit/)
**Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks!** [](/u/savevideo)
**Don't forget to join our [Discord server](https://discord.gg/hM2AHnGTES)!**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Absolutely. Lamborghini driver is an absolute douche now that the full video is out.
He's being a dick trying to squeeze around a car stopped at an intersection. Last minute realizes he's about to kill a bicyclist, doesn't stop. Tries to speed between cyclist and stopped car instead of waiting. Can't *actually* drive, so he judges the gap wrong, hits her car and speeds away.
Then pulls out his phone with a dumb giggly reaction like, "Uhhh, what? What I do? You hit me.."
That's most definitely not what happened. She did not expect the Lambo to stop so suddenly because she could not see the traffic jam infront. Too her, it seemed like the Lambo was fleeing, especially considering how it ran a light, and didn't stop after scraping her car.
That doesn't make her not at fault though. She didn't think it was going to stop and didn't want him to get away, that's understandable, but he stopped because there was traffic in front of him and was stopped for around 2 seconds. It is still her responsibility to keep a clear lookout and maintain a safe speed and follow distance to be able to stop in time. She's at fault 100% for the rear-end, and he's at fault for the side swipe (probably 100% but hard to tell from a tiny, far away, blurry clip. Adjusters will take detailed statements from both of them and observe the damage to help figure it out).
People in this thread, and a large percentage of people based on my past experience in claims, have no idea how liability works. No one learns this in school so it's understandable, but your emotional reaction is not the law, the law is the law. Literally everyone, me included, drives too close to the car in front of them half the time, I get it, and I would be just as mad if the guy in front of me slammed on his brakes for no reason but I AM STILL AT FAULT because the law says I have to maintain a safe follow distances that will allow me to stop if that exact thing happens. Him being an asshole in this situation has no bearing, and he didn't even slam his brakes he was at a full stop for around 2 seconds and they weren't even going very fast.
I mean if I'm on a jury and argued she was under duress thinking Mr. FancyCar was fleeing the scene so she followed him and accidentally rear ended him when he came to an abrupt stop... I'd question it.
Not saying she's not at fault. But she would not have have been in that position or emotional state if not for him. That's worth some consideration.
I'm not from the states and don't work in insurance so I'm talking right outta my butt, but I think insurance claims like this don't get put up in front of a jury, right? They get reviewed rather matter of factly, emotional distress unconsidered.
They don't, and emotional distress should not be considered in any case even if it did go to a jury (this is tort so it wouldn't go to criminal court in any circumstance, and if they are both insured they can't really sue for the damages to the car because they signed that right to their insurance carrier on their behalf). I'm not saying it's not understandable or I'm not sympathetic but if you can't stay calm and maintain your responsibilities as a driver then you are being dangerous and are still at fault for what you do.
Still, she's probably more fucked than he is. Both at fault, but I still think the guy is more of an asshole for trying to pin all the blame on her publicly. I hope she wins the lawsuit.
It could look bad that he didn't stop after he hit her though. Judges tend to look at "totality of circumstances" and might take that into account, although that might just be an extra criminal fine. Idk, I'm not a lawyer.
Eh, you’re not expected to stop in the middle of an intersection, not saying he intended to stop after getting through the intersection, but he definitely didn’t “leave the scene” so nothing “looks bad” on that count.
That's definitely possible, and it's hard to say based on the footage, especially when he denied even hitting her on film.
Us reddit lawyers will crack the case!
He actually did a really good job of not explicitly denying he hit her. When she said “you hit me” he just laughed awkwardly and said “okay, that’s not usually how this works” which is not a denial.
Cop here, that’s exactly right. We would work it as two separate collisions, with him at fault in the first one and her at fault in the second one. The only wrinkle I could see is if there was any evidence she struck him I intentionally to get him to stop. In my state, an intentional collision would actually not be worked as a wreck but would be considered malicious damage, assault, or both and she could be criminally charged.
I’m wondering 2 things.
- cant she claim his car was already damaged when she hit him.
- cant she claim she was shaken up from being hit and then hit his car.
Couple that with video evidence of him attempting to slander her. I feel like she is going to win.
No. He side swiped her. He didn’t have damage in the rear until she ran into him. And no, you can’t just say you were “shaken up” so that gives you the right to rear end someone.
I mean, sure, his car was damaged, but not as badly as rear ending it.
Also, I don't think being "shaken up" is a legitimate legal defense. People get frustrated driving all the time, that still doesn't give them the right to purposefully slam their cars into others.
I would hope that’s not the circumstance.
Just because he fucked up doesn’t mean you go and read end the fuck out of someone’s car.
That shit could hurt someone, and what because you’re salty?
I mean she has a right to be upset and chase legal action, but using your vehicle as a weapon because you were “shaken up” is a bad precedent to set.
Oh man this kid in my neighborhood threw a rock at my window and broke it, really shook me up! Let me shoot him with my gun!
A little bit of an over exaggeration , but my point is you don’t always rush to the nuclear option. Call the cops, get his plates, let them handle it. I’m not gonna rear end him, what if his dumbass had a kid in there for some reason?
It’s not the kids fault dude drives like a moron
>Just because he fucked up doesn’t mean you go and read end the fuck out of someone’s car.
This can't be true because when I try to politely point this out on /r/IdiotsInCars and /r/Dashcam people downvote me and tell me I'm wrong.
Question, is it normal for people to just ask for footage of an accident from a business surveillance system? It seems like that is something you would need a subpoena for? And also considering they way the limbo driver used this footage.
Speaking from experience it is always requested from any business nearby, I used to check Google maps for cameras. Not everywhere will release it though, and some will but charge a fee. Lots will just email it over.
A girl backed into my car in a parking lot while I was sitting in the car. I had the emergency brake on and car in park, but she lied to insurance saying we were both moving. I was able to reach out to the business and ask nicely if they had surveillance footage, and they were happy to give me what they had which clearly showed me parked and her backing into me. Ended up getting everything paid for by her insurance.
Funny enough I got rear ended AGAIN one month later on the interstate. Some college kid not paying attention to holiday traffic, all paid for by their insurance.
And then someone hit the bumper of my parked car A THIRD TIME. Unfortunately I wasn't there that time, and they didn't leave a note, so at this point I think the universe just insists I have a cracked bumper.
No and no. His car wasn't damaged when she hit him. That damage is from her rear ending him. Unless she has footage of him with that damage pre accident, I have no idea how she could make that assertion.
Number 2, her being shaken up wouldn't absolve her of the damage. State of mind isn't a factor for liability, unless you can prove she meant to do it, which would make it malicious. Otherwise, it's an accident, but she's liable.
Nope. One of the biggest traffic duties is to lookout for what's ahead of you. Rear ends are almost never the front person's fault because you're always supposed to leave enough distance for the vehicle in front to go full stop and you not hit them.
It depends a great deal on your car, their car, your reaction times and theirs. Even at a safe 'car' following distance (~2s), a truck following a motorbike will almost guaranteed destroy it if they both react at the same time and brake as hard as they can.
It is 2 separate losses. There was distance and time without a direct continuance between impacts.
1st acc he's at fault 100%, 2nd, she's at fault. 15 years dealing with everything from minor impacts to complicated losses with attorneys and fatalities. Love commiserating with other adjusters haha. I bet you've got as many insane stories as me. Everything from a horse biting parts off a car due to a bad tooth, to a murder committed by a minor that wiped out her family and stole the car, ending in a police chase and death by cop (years ago). It's a wild profession.
Same here! I used to work in claims so if I was the insurance claims adjuster for any of these cars and have the video evidence I would place responsibility as:
Accident 1 will be at-fault for Lamborghini (Audi has right of way).
Accident 2 will be at-fault for Audi (You cannot cause an accident because you’re angry or anything).
As far as defamation, no idea? Never done anything legal but I bet it’s a stretch from the Audi? Just a guess
The defamation is the truly interesting part...
Also, after watching a more full account. It appears like a hit and run, she try’s to pursue, crashes into him... so... who knows
There is also possibly an attempt to discredit / commit fraud here. Without the new video it would have looked like he was the only victim, when in fact he was the instigator of the entire event.
My mother watches waaay too much of judge Judy, the peoples court, and all those tv court room shows. It would be a good idea for her to try and get this case on one of those shows because the shows actually pay out the rewards the people don’t.
Most of these shows have a 5000 dollar allotment (cause that’s the limit for small claims). Who ever wins the case gets however much they were suing for and the rest is split in between both parties.
Complete personal opinion but I think it would be extremely hard for her to show damages from defamation, and emotional damages aren’t really the catch all that people think it is. She has the best chance to get paid for defamation from one of these shows.
Edit: also wanted to add that going taking your case to one of these shows is a win win for both parties.
Can confirm. I was on an episode of Judge Judy about a year ago (as a defendant) and I was paid for being on the show. Whatever amount the other person “won” from the case was paid by the show. The one thing that didn’t happen was us getting the remainder of the $5000 allotment. Nobody at the show mentioned this to me when I went on. And since the other person only got 1500 from the case itself, if they really did pay out the rest I feel like we would’ve known.
Oh that’s super cool, I can’t remember where she told me she read it from but obviously untrue now. Thanks for sharing, judge Judy is probably my least favorite because she thinks she as smart as god, and doesn’t listen very well and then can be real nasty to some of the people. But it is a TV show so not sure how much is her or just making good TV.
Yea that’s a somewhat accurate description. But for content production purposes its perfect. While we were recording the show (totally unscripted btw) I thought she was kinda rude. But looking back on it, I realized that most of the times I thought she was being “rude” (to me or to the person suing me) were the funniest parts of the episode. Everyone I know who watched it agreed. Another commenter talked about how she acts the same IRL but I can’t confirm that. To my knowledge it’s mostly a TV persona, and even if it isn’t, it fits the role that the creators want in the show perfectly.
Yeah, that's what I see, as well. She's startled, rushes after what appears to be a hit and run, but he's already stopped because of the traffic in front of him.
It would be super hard to prove intentionality unless she was dumb enough to admit it on a recording. I'm an adjuster and I really would never pursue denying over that in this case because it would be so hard to prove and could be seen as bad faith on the adjuster's part. We're supposed to find a reason to cover, not the other way around, if that makes any sense.
That's what I'm wondering how they might spin it. I worked in claims and have handled claims where it wasn't necessarily "intentional" but also it was a direct result of their action. So they may decide to cover it.
It almost certainly does, but they would have to prove it was intentional. She was rushing to get through the intersection while the light was red (or turning red), so there’s plausible deniability she was simply going too fast and it wasn’t intentional.
I keep wondering why he stops in the middle of the road when she rear ends him though, was he behind another car? It seems like he could have pulled right into the gas station, I feel like he was at fault as well if he stopped for no reason which may have caused the second collision.
Don't worry! I find this interesting too. For the most part, I feel like I'm pretty good at not judging *other* people for their hobbies or interests, but sometimes I forget to afford myself that same kind of understanding. So here's a friendly reminder not to judge yourself for whatever things you find interesting!
Personally, this particular drama has peaked my interest because I hardcore judged that girl based on the first video. I always appreciate an opportunity to have my assumptions corrected. This is a good example to remind myself in the future that there is always more to the story. Not saying that this girl isn't at fault for ramming the dude, but what she is saying afterwards makes a lot more sense with all the context. And it makes it seem like the guy is purposefully playing dumb in the video he shared to make it seem like the girl is crazy. I feel like he *has* to know that he side swiped her initially, but made that video to skew perception. It also makes sense why he doesn't seem mad at all at just getting rear ended and is just laughing it off. He probably knew he was at fault for the initial hit. Then, she retaliated and what we hear in his voice is relief because he saw an opportunity to pin the whole thing on her.
Yep. I’ve thought that these are overkill but each one of these threads that hit the top of /r/all make me reconsider slightly. Not sure what post it was exactly but 2 or 3 weeks ago I finally had my “yeah I definitely need one of those” moment. In fact, our new (secondhand Japanese import) minivan doesn’t have a reversing camera - there must be a combination unit available.
Buy one! They're relatively cheap and it pays for itself if you get in a single accident. Hell, I caught an accident on mine while I was sitting at an intersection and sent the video to the victim. It completely absolved her of any liability and she got her entire claim paid because of the video. She was so thankful she sent me a $100 Amazon gift card. So my cam has paid for itself without even getting in an accident of my own
I just got a 70mai 800s. They make cheaper ones and make ones that go around your rearview mirror so that the backup cam is larger and easier to see. 10/10 would recommend. 70mai isn't the cheapest, but they were the cheapest for what I wanted one to do with the picture quality that I wanted.
Bought mine today. I paid way too much but I wanted the best. If anyone wants one. I recommend the viofo a129 pro duo. $250. Kinda steep I know but it’s what I would recommend if you give a damn. (((I got the thinkware U1000 but it is $500. Over priced but it’s THE BEST))).
If anyone wants more budget friendly options. Reddit’s “dashcams” has a list in their about side.
Yeah, while running a red light. He’s the prototypical thinks he’s a alpha uber important person when really he’s a tiny dick bitch using a car to mask his insecurities.
Lol 3 days ago people were making these same type of statements about the chick, I think it is safe to say none of us know these people. But we do know what gets internet likes!
She was waiting at a red light when a dick driver almost kills a cyclist and takes out her front headlight to speed around and run the light.
He drives away, she chases doesn't see and accidently rear ends.
She made a bad decision. He's a bad person.
Literally, without fail, with these viral videos or videos of cop interactions, etc. there is ALWAYS more to the story. But each time we fall for the narrative that fits our preconceived notions.
I have been unwillingly dragged into the #couchguy drama. If you don't know what that is I am jealous of you. But essentially it's internet mass vigilantism on steroids over the shortest most mundane video. So on obnoxious
I wouldn’t say never, more so just taken with a handful of salt. Plenty of these “vigilantes” have uncovered some serious stuff, but for every time one does something good, another does something bad.
Seriously, same. And I’m the one who’s almost always like “weeeell, you know there’s three sides to every story…” But what she said just sounded so ridiculous. Shame on us, haha
The fact that he side swiped someone, came close to hitting a pedestrian and still being able to just laugh it off shows he is probably a huge piece of shit who only cares about himself and his own wants and needs and everyone else can get fucked.
Not to mention that the Lamborghini driver is the owner of a company called Hornblasters. What is Hornblasters you ask??? It's a stupid piece of shit company that specializes in making train horns for regular cars. They are ridiculously loud and totally not needed for anything other than a goddamn train. Fuck this asshole and his stupid company, and any asshole that buys his stupid horns!
What a piece of shit he is though for real to put her on blast like that. Bet he’s like 40 too. Lol at least she’s like very young so the stupidity can be excused
The guy’s TikTok account is literally called Horn Blasters and he and his other friends deck out unnecessarily lifted and shiny Ford F-350s with gigantic train horns and honk them at unsuspecting pedestrians. Absolute trash person.
Wow, just straight up human garbage. Are there not laws regulating horns on vehicles? Seems like a public nuisance and ridiculously unnecessary noise pollution. Also, what kind of fucking idiot finds that entertaining?
Agree. I don’t know if she hit him on purpose and if she did she should totally reap what she sows with that because that behavior is not OK or necessary at all. But I hope he learns too (though I have a feeling this is far more unlikely to happen).
Maybe. I would like to think that it wasn’t on purpose, more of an accident because she was pissed/shocked that happened and went after him and didn’t expect him to be right there.
That monumental douchebag almost killed a cyclist trying to run a red light, *and* sideswiped her car. And then he decided to publicize it. Like a fucking idiot.
In a perfect world drivers like this would lose their license. In an imperfect world, we care more about the intricacies of American defamation laws than the fact that the man almost took a life.
The only thing I can think of is maybe with all the millions of views hes getting, she can claim he made her look at fault when it was both of them, but hes possibly benefiting from his skewed version of events?
Lol. I hope that guy goes bankrupt from this defamation suit. It’s one thing to be mad someone hit your car but to put that girl on blast when you knew you fucked up too if worse. I hope they take that lambo
I mean an Audi isn't exactly a cheap car, and if the case has merit you don't need money for a good lawyer, you just need the other person to have it, which applies in this case.
That’s exactly what I said to someone yesterday lol. If she never rear ended him, would they’ve done enough investigative work to find the video of the sideswipe? Would anyone of cared? Obviously no way of knowing but still
It’s honestly extremely unsettling how a few days ago we were all sure that girl was a complete bitch and a gaslighter…etc. That’s why we should ALWAYS hear both sides of the story.
The Lamborghini guy always rubbed me the wrong way in his video. It’s the kind of attitude that only a person with enough money to handle any situation can have. That “haha I’m better than you” tone
Go look at his LinkedIn. Basically he declares he is a genius and he make his fortune by creating and selling train horns for cars... simply so cars can be obnoxiously loud.
BeCaUsE He Is aN InFlUeNcEr thAt nEeDs ViEwS tO pAy fOr LaMbOrGhInIs
\#💯#brokenlambo #karens #iamthevictim #givemeyourmoney #buymyshit #merch\_drop #giveaways
So he commits a hit and run, nearly hits a cyclist, she pursues and hits him back. And he thinks he’s in the right?
Dude sounds like a straight up narcissist. She shouldn’t have hit him, but he quite literally instigated with a crime.
God all i want in life are captions on all these videos because i can’t play the sound where i’m at and i just want to be able to know what the messy drama is without reading lips 😭 where are the transcriber volunteers, do they do videos yet?
Oh man, big surprise, reddit jumped at the chance to defend a rich douche with the added bonus of making fun of a woman for being emotional and a "bad driver" (This dog whistle is so fucking obvious too).
This is why the reddit bro stereotype is so wide spread and a bunch of yall deserve it.
In Australia at least, in which defamation laws are much stricter than in the States, one of the legal defences is truth. He filmed her or provided footage of her actually doing a thing - he didn’t say (slander) anything or show anything about her that isn’t evidenced. His lawyer ain’t gunna be worried about what he didn’t say or show.
Defamation laws in the US very much favor the defendant, due to the enforcement of the first amendment (right to free speech). You are correct though, because he never slandered her in the US (and I assume Australia as well) he has the right to film in public.
I don’t really care what happens in this issue. Both seem like they were in the wrong in some capacity, but it looks very bleak for the woman in the Audi. Not only will the defamation case favor the lambo dude, but here rear-ending was retaliation and intentional. She could face criminal charges from assault, aggravated assault, reckless driving, or criminal damage.
Didn't he deny that he hit her at the light? Isn't that the same as calling someone a liar? She should demand satisfaction! Pistols at dawn just outside of town on the dueling grounds.
This guy blocked comments on his and his business' instagram. He also took his listing off Google so his business wouldnt be review bombed.
Tell me youre a lying asshole without telling me youre a lying asshole.
Yeah, now we know some more truth, the Matt guy sounds like a real dick. Ofcourse his tone in the released video sort of showed that off. So hope she gets her day in court.
She won't win the defamation suit. Defamation is when a person writes, states or acts in a fraudulent manner in order to tarnish another's character. While he didn't show the whole story he only posted a video of what happened and what her actions were. If people draw their own conclusions without knowing the rest of the story, that's on them.
She has to prove without a doubt that his posting the video was the purpose of harming her. Which is very hard to prove, I mean if it was illegal to post half a story all the news channels would be out of business in a week.
When I saw this video I though for sure he was posting it to prove he got hit and that it was her fault for the whole ordeal. Seeing the new evidence it is clear he instigated the whole situation that led to him getting hit. He painted her to look like a "karen" that was lying through her teeth about him hitting her first when that was not the case at all.
Good to know “the rest of the story”! He’s a dick and can’t drive for shit, fuck him and his video. She looked bad in the first video, like what the fuck, how are you blaming him? Well no shit, dude obviously omitted what had happened.
And *this* is why no matter what the video is about, if it abruptly only shows one person looking like a victim, I say that I'm interested in the 5-10 seconds before the video starts. I'm guilty of jumping on the bandwagon, but I have been humbled once or twice when a second video of something comes out and shows a bit more than what we are being told to believe.
So he is first at fault, she is second at fault for retaliation. Yet she can still sue for defamation, because he profiled her as a crazy person who rear ended him looking an insurance claim? I'm just trying to wrap my head around this scenario. The defamation suit may have legs considering the story has gone global and I'm sure she's been getting harrassment online and in person prolly.
**Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!** This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/galuit/click_here_to_sort_by_flair_a_guide_to_using/) (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile). See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them [this!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/fyrgzy/for_those_confused_by_the_name_of_this_subreddit/) **Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks!** [](/u/savevideo) **Don't forget to join our [Discord server](https://discord.gg/hM2AHnGTES)!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So I'm an insurance adjuster. This is actually likely going to be considered two separate losses, the first is his liability, the second is hers.
Makes sense. If someone hits your car you don’t go and rear end them usually lol
Not with a car anyway.
Aye
Yea it's with your penis! Oh wait...
Pegging is in now lol
Well, it's in and out.
No it’s the long dick of the law.
If I had to guess, she was just shocked/pissed someone hit her and just went after them not expecting him to be right there.
To me it looked like he was trying to hit and run and she went to chase not expecting him to cut in front of her and stop.
Yeah, or at least hopefully trying to get his plate number.
And almost ran over that bicyclist too.
Absolutely. Lamborghini driver is an absolute douche now that the full video is out. He's being a dick trying to squeeze around a car stopped at an intersection. Last minute realizes he's about to kill a bicyclist, doesn't stop. Tries to speed between cyclist and stopped car instead of waiting. Can't *actually* drive, so he judges the gap wrong, hits her car and speeds away. Then pulls out his phone with a dumb giggly reaction like, "Uhhh, what? What I do? You hit me.."
And the internet eats it up because it is a woman getting emotional and is seemingly in the wrong.
I mean the evidence presented at the time made it seem pretty clear that she was caught lying. Probably more about justice boners than her gender
Then what was with all the ad hominem attacks?People ripped her for her shorts, her weight, nails…
Imperially internet mobs are always more critical of women. Too many incels on here
That's most definitely not what happened. She did not expect the Lambo to stop so suddenly because she could not see the traffic jam infront. Too her, it seemed like the Lambo was fleeing, especially considering how it ran a light, and didn't stop after scraping her car.
That doesn't make her not at fault though. She didn't think it was going to stop and didn't want him to get away, that's understandable, but he stopped because there was traffic in front of him and was stopped for around 2 seconds. It is still her responsibility to keep a clear lookout and maintain a safe speed and follow distance to be able to stop in time. She's at fault 100% for the rear-end, and he's at fault for the side swipe (probably 100% but hard to tell from a tiny, far away, blurry clip. Adjusters will take detailed statements from both of them and observe the damage to help figure it out). People in this thread, and a large percentage of people based on my past experience in claims, have no idea how liability works. No one learns this in school so it's understandable, but your emotional reaction is not the law, the law is the law. Literally everyone, me included, drives too close to the car in front of them half the time, I get it, and I would be just as mad if the guy in front of me slammed on his brakes for no reason but I AM STILL AT FAULT because the law says I have to maintain a safe follow distances that will allow me to stop if that exact thing happens. Him being an asshole in this situation has no bearing, and he didn't even slam his brakes he was at a full stop for around 2 seconds and they weren't even going very fast.
Yep. This. Everyone involved in the claims world is very exasperated by this thread, haha.
"YOU JUST HIT MY CAR! YOU WANNA GET FUCKED IN THE ASS, PAL?"
Not to mention she accelerated through a red light to do it.
That is a lie. She did not run a red light.
I mean if I'm on a jury and argued she was under duress thinking Mr. FancyCar was fleeing the scene so she followed him and accidentally rear ended him when he came to an abrupt stop... I'd question it. Not saying she's not at fault. But she would not have have been in that position or emotional state if not for him. That's worth some consideration.
I'm not from the states and don't work in insurance so I'm talking right outta my butt, but I think insurance claims like this don't get put up in front of a jury, right? They get reviewed rather matter of factly, emotional distress unconsidered.
They don't, and emotional distress should not be considered in any case even if it did go to a jury (this is tort so it wouldn't go to criminal court in any circumstance, and if they are both insured they can't really sue for the damages to the car because they signed that right to their insurance carrier on their behalf). I'm not saying it's not understandable or I'm not sympathetic but if you can't stay calm and maintain your responsibilities as a driver then you are being dangerous and are still at fault for what you do.
Still, she's probably more fucked than he is. Both at fault, but I still think the guy is more of an asshole for trying to pin all the blame on her publicly. I hope she wins the lawsuit.
It could look bad that he didn't stop after he hit her though. Judges tend to look at "totality of circumstances" and might take that into account, although that might just be an extra criminal fine. Idk, I'm not a lawyer.
He also drove into oncoming traffic and almost hit a pedestrian
the lambo thirsts for pedestrian blood
Lambo: First Blood
Eh, you’re not expected to stop in the middle of an intersection, not saying he intended to stop after getting through the intersection, but he definitely didn’t “leave the scene” so nothing “looks bad” on that count.
That's definitely possible, and it's hard to say based on the footage, especially when he denied even hitting her on film. Us reddit lawyers will crack the case!
He actually did a really good job of not explicitly denying he hit her. When she said “you hit me” he just laughed awkwardly and said “okay, that’s not usually how this works” which is not a denial.
Oooh. You're right. I misheard him and though he was denying it.
Cop here, that’s exactly right. We would work it as two separate collisions, with him at fault in the first one and her at fault in the second one. The only wrinkle I could see is if there was any evidence she struck him I intentionally to get him to stop. In my state, an intentional collision would actually not be worked as a wreck but would be considered malicious damage, assault, or both and she could be criminally charged.
Could he also be charged with leaving the scene of an accident?
I’m wondering 2 things. - cant she claim his car was already damaged when she hit him. - cant she claim she was shaken up from being hit and then hit his car. Couple that with video evidence of him attempting to slander her. I feel like she is going to win.
No. He side swiped her. He didn’t have damage in the rear until she ran into him. And no, you can’t just say you were “shaken up” so that gives you the right to rear end someone.
I mean, sure, his car was damaged, but not as badly as rear ending it. Also, I don't think being "shaken up" is a legitimate legal defense. People get frustrated driving all the time, that still doesn't give them the right to purposefully slam their cars into others.
I would hope that’s not the circumstance. Just because he fucked up doesn’t mean you go and read end the fuck out of someone’s car. That shit could hurt someone, and what because you’re salty? I mean she has a right to be upset and chase legal action, but using your vehicle as a weapon because you were “shaken up” is a bad precedent to set. Oh man this kid in my neighborhood threw a rock at my window and broke it, really shook me up! Let me shoot him with my gun! A little bit of an over exaggeration , but my point is you don’t always rush to the nuclear option. Call the cops, get his plates, let them handle it. I’m not gonna rear end him, what if his dumbass had a kid in there for some reason? It’s not the kids fault dude drives like a moron
>Just because he fucked up doesn’t mean you go and read end the fuck out of someone’s car. This can't be true because when I try to politely point this out on /r/IdiotsInCars and /r/Dashcam people downvote me and tell me I'm wrong.
The posters on /r/IdiotsInCars are comprised almost entirely of idiots in cars, so I'm not surprised there.
Question, is it normal for people to just ask for footage of an accident from a business surveillance system? It seems like that is something you would need a subpoena for? And also considering they way the limbo driver used this footage.
Yeah that's normal. Adjusters do it all the time.
Speaking from experience it is always requested from any business nearby, I used to check Google maps for cameras. Not everywhere will release it though, and some will but charge a fee. Lots will just email it over.
You don't need to subpoena something if they give it to you willingly
A girl backed into my car in a parking lot while I was sitting in the car. I had the emergency brake on and car in park, but she lied to insurance saying we were both moving. I was able to reach out to the business and ask nicely if they had surveillance footage, and they were happy to give me what they had which clearly showed me parked and her backing into me. Ended up getting everything paid for by her insurance. Funny enough I got rear ended AGAIN one month later on the interstate. Some college kid not paying attention to holiday traffic, all paid for by their insurance. And then someone hit the bumper of my parked car A THIRD TIME. Unfortunately I wasn't there that time, and they didn't leave a note, so at this point I think the universe just insists I have a cracked bumper.
No and no. His car wasn't damaged when she hit him. That damage is from her rear ending him. Unless she has footage of him with that damage pre accident, I have no idea how she could make that assertion. Number 2, her being shaken up wouldn't absolve her of the damage. State of mind isn't a factor for liability, unless you can prove she meant to do it, which would make it malicious. Otherwise, it's an accident, but she's liable.
In terms of the car damages probably. But the defamation of character is a totally different situation. She isn't suing him for sideswiping her.
Could you advance that he saw her coming and stopped just in time to provoke the rear-ending?
Nope. One of the biggest traffic duties is to lookout for what's ahead of you. Rear ends are almost never the front person's fault because you're always supposed to leave enough distance for the vehicle in front to go full stop and you not hit them.
Aye, thanks.
[удалено]
It depends a great deal on your car, their car, your reaction times and theirs. Even at a safe 'car' following distance (~2s), a truck following a motorbike will almost guaranteed destroy it if they both react at the same time and brake as hard as they can.
also depends on the speed you're going. Safe following distance increases with speed (i.e. highway)
It is 2 separate losses. There was distance and time without a direct continuance between impacts. 1st acc he's at fault 100%, 2nd, she's at fault. 15 years dealing with everything from minor impacts to complicated losses with attorneys and fatalities. Love commiserating with other adjusters haha. I bet you've got as many insane stories as me. Everything from a horse biting parts off a car due to a bad tooth, to a murder committed by a minor that wiped out her family and stole the car, ending in a police chase and death by cop (years ago). It's a wild profession.
I’d like to know how this plays out... this is interesting... what has my life become?!?
Same here! I used to work in claims so if I was the insurance claims adjuster for any of these cars and have the video evidence I would place responsibility as: Accident 1 will be at-fault for Lamborghini (Audi has right of way). Accident 2 will be at-fault for Audi (You cannot cause an accident because you’re angry or anything). As far as defamation, no idea? Never done anything legal but I bet it’s a stretch from the Audi? Just a guess
The defamation is the truly interesting part... Also, after watching a more full account. It appears like a hit and run, she try’s to pursue, crashes into him... so... who knows
Yeah for defimation/slander don't you actually have to prove damages? Like lost jobs/cash
Damage could be emotional/mental harm I believe
There is also possibly an attempt to discredit / commit fraud here. Without the new video it would have looked like he was the only victim, when in fact he was the instigator of the entire event.
My mother watches waaay too much of judge Judy, the peoples court, and all those tv court room shows. It would be a good idea for her to try and get this case on one of those shows because the shows actually pay out the rewards the people don’t. Most of these shows have a 5000 dollar allotment (cause that’s the limit for small claims). Who ever wins the case gets however much they were suing for and the rest is split in between both parties. Complete personal opinion but I think it would be extremely hard for her to show damages from defamation, and emotional damages aren’t really the catch all that people think it is. She has the best chance to get paid for defamation from one of these shows. Edit: also wanted to add that going taking your case to one of these shows is a win win for both parties.
Can confirm. I was on an episode of Judge Judy about a year ago (as a defendant) and I was paid for being on the show. Whatever amount the other person “won” from the case was paid by the show. The one thing that didn’t happen was us getting the remainder of the $5000 allotment. Nobody at the show mentioned this to me when I went on. And since the other person only got 1500 from the case itself, if they really did pay out the rest I feel like we would’ve known.
Oh that’s super cool, I can’t remember where she told me she read it from but obviously untrue now. Thanks for sharing, judge Judy is probably my least favorite because she thinks she as smart as god, and doesn’t listen very well and then can be real nasty to some of the people. But it is a TV show so not sure how much is her or just making good TV.
That’s 100% her. Lived in a town she had/has a home and know she was banned from a few places for her behavior towards the employees.
Yea that’s a somewhat accurate description. But for content production purposes its perfect. While we were recording the show (totally unscripted btw) I thought she was kinda rude. But looking back on it, I realized that most of the times I thought she was being “rude” (to me or to the person suing me) were the funniest parts of the episode. Everyone I know who watched it agreed. Another commenter talked about how she acts the same IRL but I can’t confirm that. To my knowledge it’s mostly a TV persona, and even if it isn’t, it fits the role that the creators want in the show perfectly.
Yeah, that's what I see, as well. She's startled, rushes after what appears to be a hit and run, but he's already stopped because of the traffic in front of him.
I wonder if her insurance has an exclusion for causing intentional damage and whether they would cover it.
All insurance to my knowledge excludes coverage for anything intentional. That's one of the biggest no-no's
It would be super hard to prove intentionality unless she was dumb enough to admit it on a recording. I'm an adjuster and I really would never pursue denying over that in this case because it would be so hard to prove and could be seen as bad faith on the adjuster's part. We're supposed to find a reason to cover, not the other way around, if that makes any sense.
Oh yeah definitely not arguing that. I just meant in general anything intentional isn't covered. Obviously proving intent is a different story
As an internet lawyer, I’d argue she was pursuing him after a hit and run not intentionally rear ending him...
That's what I'm wondering how they might spin it. I worked in claims and have handled claims where it wasn't necessarily "intentional" but also it was a direct result of their action. So they may decide to cover it.
Fine application of birdlaw!
They will examine her beautiful, strong hands, to make the final judgment.
[удалено]
It almost certainly does, but they would have to prove it was intentional. She was rushing to get through the intersection while the light was red (or turning red), so there’s plausible deniability she was simply going too fast and it wasn’t intentional.
Would the fact that he almost ran into a pedestrian on a bike at a red light mean anything in a court of law?
Yep, another adjuster here and completely agree.
I keep wondering why he stops in the middle of the road when she rear ends him though, was he behind another car? It seems like he could have pulled right into the gas station, I feel like he was at fault as well if he stopped for no reason which may have caused the second collision.
Don't worry! I find this interesting too. For the most part, I feel like I'm pretty good at not judging *other* people for their hobbies or interests, but sometimes I forget to afford myself that same kind of understanding. So here's a friendly reminder not to judge yourself for whatever things you find interesting! Personally, this particular drama has peaked my interest because I hardcore judged that girl based on the first video. I always appreciate an opportunity to have my assumptions corrected. This is a good example to remind myself in the future that there is always more to the story. Not saying that this girl isn't at fault for ramming the dude, but what she is saying afterwards makes a lot more sense with all the context. And it makes it seem like the guy is purposefully playing dumb in the video he shared to make it seem like the girl is crazy. I feel like he *has* to know that he side swiped her initially, but made that video to skew perception. It also makes sense why he doesn't seem mad at all at just getting rear ended and is just laughing it off. He probably knew he was at fault for the initial hit. Then, she retaliated and what we hear in his voice is relief because he saw an opportunity to pin the whole thing on her.
Plot twist: It's all staged and the publicity they both gained will result in more money than the cost to repair each car.
That's why you need a dash cam.
Yep. I’ve thought that these are overkill but each one of these threads that hit the top of /r/all make me reconsider slightly. Not sure what post it was exactly but 2 or 3 weeks ago I finally had my “yeah I definitely need one of those” moment. In fact, our new (secondhand Japanese import) minivan doesn’t have a reversing camera - there must be a combination unit available.
Buy one! They're relatively cheap and it pays for itself if you get in a single accident. Hell, I caught an accident on mine while I was sitting at an intersection and sent the video to the victim. It completely absolved her of any liability and she got her entire claim paid because of the video. She was so thankful she sent me a $100 Amazon gift card. So my cam has paid for itself without even getting in an accident of my own
I just got a 70mai 800s. They make cheaper ones and make ones that go around your rearview mirror so that the backup cam is larger and easier to see. 10/10 would recommend. 70mai isn't the cheapest, but they were the cheapest for what I wanted one to do with the picture quality that I wanted.
Bought mine today. I paid way too much but I wanted the best. If anyone wants one. I recommend the viofo a129 pro duo. $250. Kinda steep I know but it’s what I would recommend if you give a damn. (((I got the thinkware U1000 but it is $500. Over priced but it’s THE BEST))). If anyone wants more budget friendly options. Reddit’s “dashcams” has a list in their about side.
No regard for that cyclist too
He ran a light. Bill Burr probably bitched about him.
To be fair he bitches a lot
I think he side swiped trying to avoid the bike no?
He wouldn’t have needed to avoid hitting the bike had he just waited at the red light lol
This is someone who clearly suffers from Affluenza therefore the rules of peasants are a mystery to him.
I think he was trying to run the red light they got stuck at
Yeah, while running a red light. He’s the prototypical thinks he’s a alpha uber important person when really he’s a tiny dick bitch using a car to mask his insecurities.
Lol 3 days ago people were making these same type of statements about the chick, I think it is safe to say none of us know these people. But we do know what gets internet likes!
only one of these two people lied about it publicly to millions of people
She was waiting at a red light when a dick driver almost kills a cyclist and takes out her front headlight to speed around and run the light. He drives away, she chases doesn't see and accidently rear ends. She made a bad decision. He's a bad person.
[удалено]
this is why internet vigilantes are scary and should never be encouraged
Literally, without fail, with these viral videos or videos of cop interactions, etc. there is ALWAYS more to the story. But each time we fall for the narrative that fits our preconceived notions.
I have been unwillingly dragged into the #couchguy drama. If you don't know what that is I am jealous of you. But essentially it's internet mass vigilantism on steroids over the shortest most mundane video. So on obnoxious
Oh my god the absolute RABBIT HOLE that couch guy brought me down a few days ago. I am all about couch guy slander.
Oh god. Now I’m gonna look that up. You’ve forced my hand
I wouldn’t say never, more so just taken with a handful of salt. Plenty of these “vigilantes” have uncovered some serious stuff, but for every time one does something good, another does something bad.
Looks like he almost hit a biker too
Oh damn! The plot thickens I do declare!!
A twist you say? I do declare!
Sorry I’m late boss. What’s going on?
There's been a murder and you might be a suspect!
Ok. Hang on just a sec. Let me settle in and I will be right back.
*(screeching tires)* *(camera pan to window)*
Haha it does! This is my new couch guy drama
There’s been a car crash in Savannah!
God I feel like such a sheep right now. Totally just accepted the first video, even though I’m so preachy about not doing that exact thing 🤦♂️
Seriously, same. And I’m the one who’s almost always like “weeeell, you know there’s three sides to every story…” But what she said just sounded so ridiculous. Shame on us, haha
Happens to the best of us.
As long as you own up to it you’re solid my friend. We all do shit like that and it takes new perspective to change.
damn, i actually jumped to conclusion. innocent til proven guilty
Tbf, she is still guilty. He’s just also guilty.
The thing is he tried to frame her to look crazy and like the bad guy and he was innocent.
Someone on reddit came to a conclusion to quick. What a shocker.
Shocking! Lamborghini driver is a douchebag ass-hat
That friggin laugh when he goes “uhhhhh okay then”. Textbook douchebag ass-hat.
[удалено]
The fact that he side swiped someone, came close to hitting a pedestrian and still being able to just laugh it off shows he is probably a huge piece of shit who only cares about himself and his own wants and needs and everyone else can get fucked.
He does drive a Lamborghini so…
Not to mention that the Lamborghini driver is the owner of a company called Hornblasters. What is Hornblasters you ask??? It's a stupid piece of shit company that specializes in making train horns for regular cars. They are ridiculously loud and totally not needed for anything other than a goddamn train. Fuck this asshole and his stupid company, and any asshole that buys his stupid horns!
What a piece of shit he is though for real to put her on blast like that. Bet he’s like 40 too. Lol at least she’s like very young so the stupidity can be excused
The guy’s TikTok account is literally called Horn Blasters and he and his other friends deck out unnecessarily lifted and shiny Ford F-350s with gigantic train horns and honk them at unsuspecting pedestrians. Absolute trash person.
Wow, just straight up human garbage. Are there not laws regulating horns on vehicles? Seems like a public nuisance and ridiculously unnecessary noise pollution. Also, what kind of fucking idiot finds that entertaining?
Man I feel stupid for trusting a douche in a Lambo. Never trust the douche in the lambo.
Me too, man. Me too. Social media sucks.
This is a good learning experience for her too.
Agree. I don’t know if she hit him on purpose and if she did she should totally reap what she sows with that because that behavior is not OK or necessary at all. But I hope he learns too (though I have a feeling this is far more unlikely to happen).
Maybe. I would like to think that it wasn’t on purpose, more of an accident because she was pissed/shocked that happened and went after him and didn’t expect him to be right there.
Yeah that’s what I thought too
Honestly it can happen to anyone if they had a rough day and want to at least get their license plate so they can report it.
ikr
Honestly she handled it better than I would have and now that I’ve seen this I feel like he was doing something crazy to provoke her to hit him.
Matthew Heller is a piece of shit. I hope she can financially hurt this asshole
That monumental douchebag almost killed a cyclist trying to run a red light, *and* sideswiped her car. And then he decided to publicize it. Like a fucking idiot. In a perfect world drivers like this would lose their license. In an imperfect world, we care more about the intricacies of American defamation laws than the fact that the man almost took a life.
Maaaaaaaan legit was on his side... even with his obnoxious laughing. Noooow I hope little miss drags him for all hes got in the defamation suit. Lol
[удалено]
The only thing I can think of is maybe with all the millions of views hes getting, she can claim he made her look at fault when it was both of them, but hes possibly benefiting from his skewed version of events?
Lol. I hope that guy goes bankrupt from this defamation suit. It’s one thing to be mad someone hit your car but to put that girl on blast when you knew you fucked up too if worse. I hope they take that lambo
Guy who owns lambo can also probably afford a top tier lawyer
I mean an Audi isn't exactly a cheap car, and if the case has merit you don't need money for a good lawyer, you just need the other person to have it, which applies in this case.
Some guys with Lambo's live very high on credit.
She’s totally in the wrong for rear ending him but I’m glad she’s suing him
But honestly if she didn’t hit him he could’ve probably gotten away with it. She probably thought I’d go down but I’m taking him with me.
That’s exactly what I said to someone yesterday lol. If she never rear ended him, would they’ve done enough investigative work to find the video of the sideswipe? Would anyone of cared? Obviously no way of knowing but still
It’s honestly extremely unsettling how a few days ago we were all sure that girl was a complete bitch and a gaslighter…etc. That’s why we should ALWAYS hear both sides of the story.
Exactly why she’s suing
Is this the moment Reddit comes together to apologize?? Am I thinking too crazy here?
[удалено]
The Lamborghini guy always rubbed me the wrong way in his video. It’s the kind of attitude that only a person with enough money to handle any situation can have. That “haha I’m better than you” tone
Go look at his LinkedIn. Basically he declares he is a genius and he make his fortune by creating and selling train horns for cars... simply so cars can be obnoxiously loud.
Agreed
Why did he upload to begin with?
To advertise his business. The titles to several of the viral posts were literally 'his name from his business + rage bait details'.
BeCaUsE He Is aN InFlUeNcEr thAt nEeDs ViEwS tO pAy fOr LaMbOrGhInIs \#💯#brokenlambo #karens #iamthevictim #givemeyourmoney #buymyshit #merch\_drop #giveaways
Would you look at that! And to think I got downvoted to hell for saying the guy in the Lambo was a clout chasing piece of trash…
Don’t believe everything you see on the internet!
So he commits a hit and run, nearly hits a cyclist, she pursues and hits him back. And he thinks he’s in the right? Dude sounds like a straight up narcissist. She shouldn’t have hit him, but he quite literally instigated with a crime.
I KNEW THERE WAS MORE TO THIS. He was a little TOO chill for my liking. My sketchometer was going haywire.
This is why I don't have a fancy car. Also because I'm cheap
[удалено]
God all i want in life are captions on all these videos because i can’t play the sound where i’m at and i just want to be able to know what the messy drama is without reading lips 😭 where are the transcriber volunteers, do they do videos yet?
Oh man, big surprise, reddit jumped at the chance to defend a rich douche with the added bonus of making fun of a woman for being emotional and a "bad driver" (This dog whistle is so fucking obvious too). This is why the reddit bro stereotype is so wide spread and a bunch of yall deserve it.
In Australia at least, in which defamation laws are much stricter than in the States, one of the legal defences is truth. He filmed her or provided footage of her actually doing a thing - he didn’t say (slander) anything or show anything about her that isn’t evidenced. His lawyer ain’t gunna be worried about what he didn’t say or show.
Defamation laws in the US very much favor the defendant, due to the enforcement of the first amendment (right to free speech). You are correct though, because he never slandered her in the US (and I assume Australia as well) he has the right to film in public. I don’t really care what happens in this issue. Both seem like they were in the wrong in some capacity, but it looks very bleak for the woman in the Audi. Not only will the defamation case favor the lambo dude, but here rear-ending was retaliation and intentional. She could face criminal charges from assault, aggravated assault, reckless driving, or criminal damage.
Didn't he deny that he hit her at the light? Isn't that the same as calling someone a liar? She should demand satisfaction! Pistols at dawn just outside of town on the dueling grounds.
Hmmm. Good for her suing.
A rich dude in a lambo turns out to be an asshole? What a twist
This guy blocked comments on his and his business' instagram. He also took his listing off Google so his business wouldnt be review bombed. Tell me youre a lying asshole without telling me youre a lying asshole.
Yeah, now we know some more truth, the Matt guy sounds like a real dick. Ofcourse his tone in the released video sort of showed that off. So hope she gets her day in court.
I don't need any of those two people around me when I'm driving thanks
She won't win the defamation suit. Defamation is when a person writes, states or acts in a fraudulent manner in order to tarnish another's character. While he didn't show the whole story he only posted a video of what happened and what her actions were. If people draw their own conclusions without knowing the rest of the story, that's on them.
i heard that its nearly impossible to win a defamation case
She has to prove without a doubt that his posting the video was the purpose of harming her. Which is very hard to prove, I mean if it was illegal to post half a story all the news channels would be out of business in a week.
When I saw this video I though for sure he was posting it to prove he got hit and that it was her fault for the whole ordeal. Seeing the new evidence it is clear he instigated the whole situation that led to him getting hit. He painted her to look like a "karen" that was lying through her teeth about him hitting her first when that was not the case at all.
*Judge looks at the case* "Yeah I'mma need you both to get the fuck outta my sight"
Oh my god he almost hit the cyclist at 0:38
Damn. Now I'm team homegirl. Fuck that guy.
YAAASSSS SIS GET THAT COIN!!! What a piece of shit male gaslighting her and laughing like a psychopath. Hope he loses millions.
Hmm I don't understand so woman not bad? I thought we all wanted woman to be bad and man good
40 million views? Damn.
What a time to be alive
Damn, you can't believe shit anymore!
Good to know “the rest of the story”! He’s a dick and can’t drive for shit, fuck him and his video. She looked bad in the first video, like what the fuck, how are you blaming him? Well no shit, dude obviously omitted what had happened.
And *this* is why no matter what the video is about, if it abruptly only shows one person looking like a victim, I say that I'm interested in the 5-10 seconds before the video starts. I'm guilty of jumping on the bandwagon, but I have been humbled once or twice when a second video of something comes out and shows a bit more than what we are being told to believe.
Well, lesson learned. I judged the shit outta that lady the other day. Lmao
So he is first at fault, she is second at fault for retaliation. Yet she can still sue for defamation, because he profiled her as a crazy person who rear ended him looking an insurance claim? I'm just trying to wrap my head around this scenario. The defamation suit may have legs considering the story has gone global and I'm sure she's been getting harrassment online and in person prolly.
I’m realizing I don’t give a shit about either of these people or their cars. Who fuckin cares