Hit-and-run councilwoman’s pre-trial hearing set for Jan. 10 in Essex County court

Submitted by SoundMachineJC t3_zr17p7 in jerseycity

(free article as of 5:00 pm)

Hit-and-run councilwoman’s pre-trial hearing set for Jan. 10 in Essex County court

Updated: Dec. 20, 2022, 3:38 p.m.|Published: Dec. 20, 2022, 3:33 p.m.

By Ron Zeitlinger | The Jersey Journal

The Jersey City councilwoman who sent a cyclist flying through the air and drove away is a small step closer to having her day in court.

A pre-trial hearing on the status of discovery evidence and other details related to the hit-and-run charges against Amy DeGise has been scheduled for Jan. 10 in the Essex County Special Remand Court, court officials told The Jersey Journal Tuesday.

DeGise, 37, is charged with two motor vehicle summonses, leaving the scene of an accident and failure to report an accident, in the July 19 incident in which a man making a food delivery at 8 a.m. was struck by DeGise’s SUV at the intersection of Martin Luther King Drive and Forrest Street.

https://www.nj.com/hudson/2022/12/hit-and-run-councilwomans-pre-trial-hearing-set-for-jan-10-in-essex-county-court.html

71

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Blecher_onthe_Hudson t1_j118owu wrote

I didn't know there were 'pre-trial hearings on the status of discovery evidence' for misdemeanors, most of us mortals just show up and get ground up. Do you think it means they are trying to get the videos excluded from evidence?

34

BeMadTV t1_j11e4md wrote

Should have had it in Cape May County if they're worried about conflicts of interest.

23

Rube777 t1_j11i0pn wrote

What’s all this nonsense about a trial? She got 2 summonses for traffic violations… There’s no way on earth she’ll claim that she didn’t hit the cyclist, she could only offer a defense of why she didn’t stop…

5

edk5 t1_j11mpnr wrote

I wonder how the cyclist running the red light will impact things here. They seem to be separate issues (and really shows how stupid it was of her to leave as she'd likely get off scott-free as the cyclist did clearly run the light).

1

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_j123cgc wrote

Replying to edk5 (#989,271)

If they’re going by the law it’s irrelevant.

Every vehicle operator has a legal obligation to prevent collisions. There’s no exceptions for other drivers mistakes, weather etc.

You’re not in less trouble because there was ice on the road either. You’re still responsible for the collision.

You have an obligation to not operate the vehicle in a way that these external factors can be a problem.

11

edk5 t1_j126cw8 wrote

Replying to pixel_of_moral_decay (#990,538)

Thanks. I remember in torts class in law school learning about contributory negligence but like much of what is learned in class not surprised it is not relevant in the real world!

1

CaptBrett t1_j145ww8 wrote

Interestingly I don't see any updates in the online case system.

3

mattoz85 t1_j1467sl wrote

Replying to Mindless-Budget9019 (#995,316)

Right, because every man on the city council has also run someone over in their suv and then driven away, only to report it 6 hours later for some mysterious reason. We’re just choosing to give Amy shit about her hit and run because she’s a woman.

11