Hope everyone is having a good weekend.
Here is the situation. Schoolbus driving down a one-way highway (one lane eastbound and one lane westbound) in a no passing zone. An suv comes behind, starts tailgating and then continues to pass the bus on the left. The busdriver looks in the left-view mirror and just that quickly the suv is off the road in a ditch and sever a telephone pole. Bus is not involved and incident is considered a one vehicle accident. Later to find out the suv driver was fine but the car, of course, totalled. The driver of the suv said in his statement that the bus ran him off the road by 'swerving' and another truck driver coming the other way who was ready to hit the suv head-on said that the bus was in the "middle" of the road (which is impossible if the truck almost hit the suv, for it would have hit the bus first). The bus driver also gave a voluntary witness statement and denied all accusations.
School buses in the state of PA have audio and video survelliance in the buses (but this is controlled by the school district). The video tape shows the suv passing the bus and according to the timer, it took 3-4 seconds from the time the suv starts passing to the time for the suv to crash. There is no swerving action observed by the bus and is, in fact, straight as an arrow. The police department have seen the video and have not contacted the bus driver to let them know wether they are not part of the investigation anymore or wether they will be cited.
My question is, there is physical proof in the video that the bus driver had nothing to do with the accident. Then you have one witness who's story makes no sense and then the driver of the suv who caused his own destiny who is trying to validate his illegal action of passing a school bus. Is there a statutue of limitations as to how long during an investigation the police have to cite the driver? This accident took place exactly 10 days ago. In this situation, doesn't physical proof (via audio/video) supersede what is said by a witness?
I guess what I am getting at is the police only have what the suv driver is saying (who of course is looking for some validation) and one witness compared to video proof of the bus driver not doing any of the acts suggested.
Thanks for your help and I will be awaiting any/all replies
Here is the situation. Schoolbus driving down a one-way highway (one lane eastbound and one lane westbound) in a no passing zone. An suv comes behind, starts tailgating and then continues to pass the bus on the left. The busdriver looks in the left-view mirror and just that quickly the suv is off the road in a ditch and sever a telephone pole. Bus is not involved and incident is considered a one vehicle accident. Later to find out the suv driver was fine but the car, of course, totalled. The driver of the suv said in his statement that the bus ran him off the road by 'swerving' and another truck driver coming the other way who was ready to hit the suv head-on said that the bus was in the "middle" of the road (which is impossible if the truck almost hit the suv, for it would have hit the bus first). The bus driver also gave a voluntary witness statement and denied all accusations.
School buses in the state of PA have audio and video survelliance in the buses (but this is controlled by the school district). The video tape shows the suv passing the bus and according to the timer, it took 3-4 seconds from the time the suv starts passing to the time for the suv to crash. There is no swerving action observed by the bus and is, in fact, straight as an arrow. The police department have seen the video and have not contacted the bus driver to let them know wether they are not part of the investigation anymore or wether they will be cited.
My question is, there is physical proof in the video that the bus driver had nothing to do with the accident. Then you have one witness who's story makes no sense and then the driver of the suv who caused his own destiny who is trying to validate his illegal action of passing a school bus. Is there a statutue of limitations as to how long during an investigation the police have to cite the driver? This accident took place exactly 10 days ago. In this situation, doesn't physical proof (via audio/video) supersede what is said by a witness?
I guess what I am getting at is the police only have what the suv driver is saying (who of course is looking for some validation) and one witness compared to video proof of the bus driver not doing any of the acts suggested.
Thanks for your help and I will be awaiting any/all replies

Comment