Opinion: When speeding becomes reckless

Doug Dahl of The Wise Drive explains when speeding crosses the line into reckless driving in Washington state.

Target Zero Manager Doug Dahl addresses a question about speeding

Q: At what point does speeding go from an infraction to a crime? 20 over? 30 over? Double the posted speed limit?

A: Are you ready for a Latin lesson? Don’t worry; I don’t know Latin either, except for a few terms in the Revised Code of Washington. And we’re only going to look at one: prima facie. It means, “at first sight” or “based on first impression.”

If you’re a fan of TV legal dramas, you may have heard a character talk about prima facie evidence as if it means they have a slam-dunk case. And if that’s your understanding of prima facie evidence, you’d be forgiven for being concerned about a particular Washington law about speeding.

This law, called “Exceeding speed limit evidence of reckless driving” states, as you might expect from the title (and edited for brevity), “The unlawful operation of a vehicle in excess of the maximum lawful speeds shall be prima facie evidence of the operation of a motor vehicle in a reckless manner.” That makes it sound like speeding automatically makes you guilty of reckless driving, a serious criminal violation.

But legal experts would say that prima facie evidence doesn’t have to be conclusive or irrefutable. It should be understood as something that appears true when first examined but could be disproved. If you walk into the kitchen to find an empty Oreo cookies tray and see a dusting of chocolate crumbles on your spouse’s lips, you have prima facie evidence that they finished off the cookies. If your spouse says the dog ate the cookies and then licked their face, and the dog has even more cookie crumbles on its mouth, well, now you have to weigh the veracity of the testimony. (If I were your lawyer, I’d argue that your spouse shared one cookie with the dog to misdirect the blame. Also, you don’t want me for your lawyer.)

And in a real court case (Schwendeman v. Wallenstein), evidence indicated that in addition to speeding, Schwendeman drove impaired, swerved to hit potholes, and disregarded the pounding on the window and shouts from one of the four passengers in the bed of his pickup begging him to slow down. He crashed into a telephone pole, seriously injuring one of the passengers. The jury was instructed that speed alone was sufficient to convict Schwendeman of reckless driving. The US Court of Appeals disagreed, saying that while there was plenty of other evidence to reach that conclusion, it couldn’t be reached from speeding alone.

Speeding is a high-risk behavior. It decreases time to react, increases stopping distances, and makes collisions more deadly. About a third of traffic fatalities in Washington include speed as a factor. But speeding itself isn’t proof of reckless driving. While it often contributes to reckless driving, it’s possible that a driver could engage in high-risk behavior without reaching the threshold of recklessness. To meet that threshold a person must drive with willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.

Recklessness requires intent. if you were driving ten over the speed limit and, with no other contributing factors, were arrested for reckless driving (and I can’t imagine that would ever happen) your defense might be that you didn’t realize you were speeding because you hadn’t looked at your speedometer in a few miles. That doesn’t make it right, but without willful disregard it doesn’t meet the definition of reckless driving.

Ultimately though, physics doesn’t care if you’re speeding because you’re reckless or you’re oblivious. Impact force is the same either way. So take it easy out there.

TheWiseDrive is hosted by Doug Dahl, a Target Zero manager for the Washington Traffic Safety Commission.

Target Zero Manager Doug Dahl addresses a question about speeding

Also read:

share