However, whether or not a driver is civilly liable for an accident usually doesn't even care about the right of way. For example, if a pedestrian is standing in the middle of the road attempting to block traffic. They have no right to be there, however, it is not ok to run them over.
When you're going to jaywalk, ensure that the next car is far enough away to where it doesn't matter if they stop. That's the correct way that would've saved this person's life without any further analysis.
I'm taking issue with this:
>that person died for no good reason beyond Uber rushing tech out the door before it was ready
Well, no. They died because they lost their gamble on an unguided crossing where the oncoming car did not stop.
We are now analyzing why the car didn't stop, but notice how no charges were pressed.
It's true that jaywalking is a gamble, but so is crossing a street with the light. Leaving the house is a gamble. That doesn't mean we can blame the victim of a collision for leaving the house. It can be simultaneously true that A) jaywalking is not always a great idea, and B) the Uber car should have avoided this collision.
i wonder... if the person crossing had been behind an obstruction and stepped out right in front of the car, would everyone still blame the car or the driver for hitting the person crossing?
If the car was speeding, you might be able to make that argument, but I don't think anyone has made that claim yet.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-...
It's not like the car hopped the curb.