If there had been a 2 - 3 second delay, you are correct, there would not have been an accident. What I would like to see is a 3 - 5 second countdown like the ones the newer pedestrian signals show. How nice would it be to know that in 3 seconds, the light is going to turn yellow? You could really plan your actions appropriately.
If it happened as you just described it, your mistake was going to court with an incompetent lawyer, not entering the intersection on a yellow. The person who drove into the intersection while you were legally in the intersection was in the wrong.
I'll say this very slow, and be watchful of my grammar as well. Key word in my previous reply - rear-ended. ie the (innocent) driver turning was rear-ended-by the (inattentive) driver going straight. So your prior statement that the driver turning is always at fault is incorrect. The rear-ender is typically always at fault. Your statement as written is still incorrect. Re-read my post and check your drivers manual. It's like black and white.
You wre incorrect read the post above you. Anyone turning has to yield to someone going straight. Just like all cars must yield to pedestrians, regardless how reckless the pedestrian is, the driver will still be at fault because he didn't have the right of way. But no you're absolutely right people turning have the right of way against someone driving straight. So I'll be sure to stop before entering any intersection to yield to the right turners to avoid hitting the, even though the light was green.... Rofl
In at least some of the jurisdictions I have lived in it is illegal to be in the intersection if the light is red for you, not just enter it. In one case the law was changed to reflect that in a specific response to the commonly held belief that as long as you could get into the intersection before the light changed you were okay. The law for yellow lights was much like the law you quoted for DC, which is to say it is illegal to enter an intersection on a yellow unless you were unable to safely stop. As I mentioned before, in my opinion when faced with a yellow light drivers should be thinking "is there a reason I can't safely stop?" rather than "can I make it to the intersection before the light goes red?".
when you sped up, were you over the speed limit? if you were, most likely, you share the fault also, were there any witnesses? if there were, who's side were they on, very important, because the judge takes that heavily in account.
just because you have the right of way doesnt mean it was the others guys fault... having the right of way doesnt mean you're allowed to drive into him and say "I had the right of way so its his fault". You are responsible in all (except other guy running a red light or stop sign) situations to not drive into things in front of you. try that with a bicycle rider.. "yea I saw him, but that guy on the bike had a yield sign, it was his fault I ran him over, I had the right of way!
Depends on the circumstances. If someone or something ends up in front of you in a manner that doesn't allow for you to have enough time to respond, then no it isn't your fault. In fact in your example I don't see any difference between whether the sign was a stop sign or a yield sign. If you think that a bike running a stop sign is at fault, why would the bike running a yield sign not be at fault? Under the circumstances both require that the bike rider stop and wait for cross traffic.
It doesn't work that way in the real world. Bikers who fail to yield to stop signs have successfully sued for damages when hit by a car and really, how many bikers have you seen that actually follow the laws, stopping at every cross streets like cars? All of them I've seen just blow through stop signs.
ok then 4 way stop sign two cars approach going in opposite directions arrive and stop at the same time. your going straight the other car is making a left. You have the right of way you both go at the same time and you drive into him... his fault?
If you slam on the brakes going fast enough and turn the wheel, ABS just won't be enough to compensate. I can live without ABS but thats me. Back to the original question, I think both are at fault. But that is MY opinion and probably won't hold up in court.
