Senior Fatally Struck After Exiting Car During Traffic Dispute


View Larger Map

The crash site at North Avenue and the Kennedy Expressway.

Kim Kyeyul, 72, died Saturday morning after he got out of his car to talk with a truck driver following a traffic crash and was then run over by the driver of another semi.

Around 6:45 a.m., Kyeyul, a resident of west-suburban Riverside, was traveling west on the 1400 block of North Avenue in Chicago in his 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer, according to Officer José Estrada of News Affairs. The driver of the first truck, a 32-year-old male, had slowed down in order to safely pass under the viaduct for the Kennedy Expressway, when the Kyeyul rear ended his vehicle, Estrada said. Polices sources said that, had Kyeyul survived the tragic crash, he likely would have been cited for failing to reduce speed to prevent a crash.

Kyeyul stepped out of his car and walked up to the trucker, who was stopped in the outside lane of the four-lane roadway, Estrada said. The confrontation became heated and Kyeyul stepped back into traffic. He was then struck by the second trucker, a 38-year-old male, who was attempting to pass.

Kyeyul suffered severe injuries to his upper body and pronounced dead at the scene, Estrada said. Neither truck driver was cited; their names have not been released.

Fatality Tracker: 2014 Chicago pedestrian and bicyclist deaths

Pedestrian: 8 (3 were hit-and-run crashes)
Bicyclist: 0

  • CL

    Wow — what a terrible story. I feel like I see a lot of dangerous driving when people are attempting to pass a stopped vehicle — they often swerve without looking, in order to sneak into the other lane during a brief gap. Not saying the trucker did anything wrong here, because I wasn’t there, but the combination of an obstructed view and drivers’ haste to pass is often bad. I’ve seen many pedestrians almost get hit because one driver stopped to let them cross, and the cars behind them immediately swerved to pass them — probably not seeing the pedestrian at all.

  • alexfrancisburchard

    My friend at IIT got hit because of someone doing that a week ago. He was crossing in a crosswalk, and one car stopped for someone coming the other way, so he crossed as well, and some other driver tried to go around the stopped car as my friend made it into the open lane, and hit him, my friend ended up on his roof for a while I guess, and when he realized the driver only sped up he decided to let go and roll.

  • Social_werkk

    I often WANT to stop for pedestrians, but I worry about the other cars behind me-if they’ll be patient enough to not swerve around.

  • oooBooo

    Never, ever ever cross in front of someone who stopped for you in the near lane when nobody is stopped in the far lane and there is other traffic. Doesn’t matter if you are walking, driving, or biking, someone is going to drive through the open far lane and not see you because of the stopped vehicle in the near lane.

    I almost think these ‘do-gooders’ are trying to kill people when they stop and wave people through when there is no legal requirement to do so.

  • The above incident was in a crosswalk, so there was a legal requirement to stop.

  • oooBooo

    Yes, I read that. The principle still holds. Just because there is a crosswalk doesn’t me the driver in the far lane sees you.

  • what_eva

    Common problem with crosswalks at unsignaled intersections on 4-lane roads. I’ve stopped for peds only to have them wave me on because nobody’s stopping in the other lane.

  • Alex_H

    Any interest in admitting that your statement “there is no legal requirement to do so” was incorrect?

  • oooBooo

    LOL. you folks are a riot.

    Read the second paragraph again. Figure out it is a general statement regarding people who think they are doing others a favor by stopping where there is no legal requirement to do so. Hence the term ‘do-gooders’. Of course you already knew that. Anyone who bikes or walks anywhere has encountered the do-gooders who stop somewhere unexpectedly and wave them through where the far lane is still free for traffic and blind.

    Just to be clear I will put it in CSB form: There was one particular stop sign where I made a left on to Milwaukee ave. Due to traffic I would usually have to two stage the left turn. While waiting in the middle some do-gooder would stop in the left lane of north bound traffic and wave me in… I had to make the next immediate right. Guess what traffic in the right lane was doing? full speed ahead. Guess what was nearly blind to me and what was totally blind to drivers in the right lane? The movement I was being waved through to make.

  • Fred

    There’s a difference between car+car do-gooding and car+pedestrian. A driver who stops at a crosswalk to let me cross on foot has the legal responsibility to do so, and the car passing on the right of that car does also. That responsibility does not exist in the scenario you mentioned.

  • oooBooo

    I guess I should have specified I was biking in my example story, but it is identical for walking and driving. I’ve had the exact same thing happen with all three.

    What about when they stop mid block with no crosswalk? That’s the appropriate scenario for what I wrote. Even with a crosswalk one must be aware. I’ve been in crosswalks looking right at a driver, I watch the drivers, they move before the cars do, only to have them drive right into me from a dead stop. I’m 6’4″ tall and right in front of them with right of way… now try it when the view is blocked. Now you can trust that paint will protect you, but I don’t.

    People here have unreasonable expectations of paint, rules, and enforcement. Complexity and punishment will never ever replace competency and good design. Because this society has relied on government, we have gotten a complexity and punishment model while competency has been allowed to decline resulting in the need for greater complexity and more enforcement/punishment. You can argue all you want that you should be able to rely on the paint, or you can be aware enough not to get injured or dead. Your choice.

    If I wanted to discuss the specifics rather than the general, I would have. I know the IIT campus very well. I can even guess that his friend probably got hit crossing state street where 32nd used to be. If not there, the number two possibility is probably state where 34th used to be.

    Anyway, if you’re going to be hit and killed by the state street CTA bus, be sure to do it very early in the semester to get a full tuition refund. :) Then again, maybe the death clause has been removed…

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Man Dies 3 Days After Bike-Truck Crash in Archer Heights

|
View Larger Map The crash site, looking northeast on Archer. A 55-year old man died Thursday afternoon, three days after a truck driver struck him on his bicycle in the Archer Heights neighborhood. The Cook County medical examiner’s office identified the man as Leopoldo Rodgriguez, of the 5000 block of South California in the Gage […]

Drivers Killed Four Pedestrians in Chicago This Month

|
August has been one of the deadliest months for pedestrians in Chicago this year, with four fatalities so far. However, with 16 pedestrian deaths so far this year, the fatality rate is down from last year, when there were 20 deaths by this time, according to the Chicaog Department of Transportation. Here’s a summary of […]