Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
She should have just let the guy drive away.

I guess she wanted the last word, really, really bad.

I can see a windshield wiper company hiring this woman to do a commercial promoting their blade durability. Whether it's money or dirt, either way she'll be rolling in it :)

Most vehicles have a windshield well, as part of the hood, which provides a nice handle to grab on to.
 
When was the last time you tried to jump off the front of a moving vehicle?

I have better sense than to jump up there in the first place.

I believe in people taking responsibility for their actions. The guy should have stopped. The woman should never have jumped up there. But I'm afraid of establishing a legal precedent that says it's okay to put yourself into a bad situation and then blame someone else for how it turns out.
 
I have better sense than to jump up there in the first place.

I believe in people taking responsibility for their actions. The guy should have stopped. The woman should never have jumped up there. But I'm afraid of establishing a legal precedent that says it's okay to put yourself into a bad situation and then blame someone else for how it turns out.

Isn't that the basis of the modern legal system in the US? It's always some else's fault. Preferably someone with deep pockets.
 
I have better sense than to jump up there in the first place.

I believe in people taking responsibility for their actions. The guy should have stopped. The woman should never have jumped up there. But I'm afraid of establishing a legal precedent that says it's okay to put yourself into a bad situation and then blame someone else for how it turns out.

What if he had been pointing a gun at her and she had stood her ground? Would it be her fault if he pulled the trigger?
 
What if he had been pointing a gun at her and she had stood her ground? Would it be her fault if he pulled the trigger?

No, but then your analogy is one where he's hostile toward her from the beginning.

This story is about a guy trying to get away. She made a major mistake by going after him in the first place; this whole thing could have been avoided.

One more time: yes, I think the guy should have stopped, but I think she bears as much blame as she does. He tried to diffuse a hostile situation by leaving; her actions indicated that she insisted it continue.
 
One more time: yes, I think the guy should have stopped, but I think she bears as much blame as she does. He tried to diffuse a hostile situation by leaving; her actions indicated that she insisted it continue.
Hostile situations where the person on the hood of a car is the aggressor might happen in action movies, but this incident seems like the result of some domestic dispute. Even if she might be crazy, I'm not sure you can argue this guy is in any danger inside the minivan and is actually trying to get away.

There is no other reason for him to drive a car through another person. This is murder.

On a side note, when I read the article I think of this:
american-minivan.jpg


I think it would be hard for me to hold on with a wiper..
 
Hostile situations where the person on the hood of a car is the aggressor might happen in action movies, but this incident seems like the result of some domestic dispute.

Of course it was a domestic dispute.

But regardless of whether it was a domestic dispute or not, let's consider it generically: two people are involved in a fight. Perhaps it's physical, perhaps it's not, but they're fighting. One person has enough and decides to leave. Why in the WORLD would the other person go after him/her?
 
Of course it was a domestic dispute.

But regardless of whether it was a domestic dispute or not, let's consider it generically: two people are involved in a fight. Perhaps it's physical, perhaps it's not, but they're fighting. One person has enough and decides to leave. Why in the WORLD would the other person go after him/her?
Again, this is the point: you do not know. You are prejudging her, when the natural assumption of guilt would lie with the driver.
 
Do you have any evidence that the car was moving? Much more likely that she jumped on to prevent it moving. In these circumstances, the moment the husband started moving forward, he was potentially committing a crime, and if he did not stop, she had little option but to cling on: jumping off the hood of a speeding minivan is highly likely to result in death or serious injury.
That's empty speculation. You weren't there.
You have no idea what transpired.
You have no idea what happened.
 
That's empty speculation. You weren't there.

You have no idea what happened.
Sure, it's all speculation, apart from the fact that he drove off with her clinging to the hood, and continued for 35 miles, reaching very high speeds. This is more than enough by itself to qualify as attempted murder.
 
Sure, it's all speculation, apart from the fact that he drove off with her clinging to the hood, and continued for 35 miles, reaching very high speeds. This is more than enough by itself to qualify as attempted murder.
Sure. Doesn't mean she's not a dumbass.

I'm just pointing out that you speculate as much as everyone else, yet you act like it's okay when you do it.
 
The dude has issues, and took off with his wife clinging to the hood of his car. If she tried to roll off she may could have been killed! But hey, let's go ahead and blame the victime here.

you mean, the woman has issues... the way i see it, she was clinging under the influence... which person would voluntarily cling on a car's windshield wiper... i mean, if somebody wants to leave, then let the person leave.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.