Charges To Come Against Driver Who Crashed into Brooks Patterson

A Royal Oak man failed to yield on a flashing yellow, causing the accident, police say.

The man who drove a car that crashed into one transporting Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson will face charges that could result in jail time, according to reports.

Anthony Prainito, 31, of Royal Oak, will be charged with three counts of moving violations causing impairment of a bodily function, a misdemeanor punishable by 93 days in  jail, according to a report in The Detroit News.  

Prainito will be arraigned sometime this week.

Gerald Poisson, chief deputy County Executive, released the following statement in response to the charges:

“The driver of the other vehicle has been charged with negligent driving causing serious injury to Brooks, Jim, and the passenger in the other car. The Executive Office thanks Auburn Hills police for their professionalism in conducting a thorough investigation. This matter is now in the hands of the courts.” 

Patterson remains hospitalized following the Aug. 10 crash at the intersection of Opdyke and Walton roads in Auburn Hills. Patterson is recovering from serious orthopedic injuries. His driver, James Cram, was also injured in the accident. According to police reports, Prainito when he crashed into Patterson's car. 

Neither Patterson, Cram nor Prainito were wearing seatbelts at the time of the crash, police reports show.

Alan Stamm August 28, 2012 at 11:23 AM
Now we learn, via today's Freep, that retired trooper James Cram (Patterson's driver) was going 54 mph in a 45 mph zone. on.freep.com/RiYaCD Auburn Hills police yesterday issued that finding from the Chrysler 300's stored electronic data. (Yes, cars rat us out now.) Monday's police report answers another question raised here about the annoying chime that normally signals an unfasted seat belt: Patterson's was wrapped around the back of the seat and buckled . . . indicating he rarely uses it, though perhaps he does for highway drives. In any event, I bet he'll buckle up now.
Kristin Bull (Editor) August 28, 2012 at 11:52 AM
Thanks for the update, @Alan. The seatbelt finding is something many speculated about early on. We'll get a copy of the police report today.
Laura Vogel August 28, 2012 at 01:12 PM
amen, that, Nancy. I know a man who was 2x over the legal limit, had his minor child in the car with him, and he ran head-on (actually, had spun around backwards but was still traveling northbound in the southbound lane if you know what I mean) and sent two of the three people in the other vehicle air-lift to UM trauma. Not a day of jail time.
Cheryl Loukinen August 28, 2012 at 01:26 PM
Say that Aurburn Hills Police do not issue seatblet violation tickets to any of the 3 victims, what is the insurance take on this, or does it matter? Obviously injuries were subtained to all involved in this accident, some worse than others. Could the insurance company deny paying for all hospitalizations? Never been in that situtation do I do not know. Can any one give an opion
Mr. Creasoat August 28, 2012 at 01:29 PM
Brooksey is caught bouncing off curbs blind drunk and the cops give him a taxi ride home and deliver his car, this poor chump has an accident with Oakland County's overlord and it is off to the gulag for him.
Mr. Creasoat August 28, 2012 at 01:31 PM
He has a driver because he is stewed by noon most of the time.
Christopher August 28, 2012 at 01:39 PM
And the Democrat party weighs in on the issue.
Christopher August 28, 2012 at 01:42 PM
Is the premise of your question that an automobile insurance carrier could or would deny a claim based on your failure to wear your seatbelt? If so,what is this based on?
Christopher August 28, 2012 at 01:45 PM
Maybe if Detroit had someone managing their finances like Patterson they'd have money for that training?
Mr. Creasoat August 28, 2012 at 01:49 PM
Christopher, There is no such thing as a Democrat party there is a Democratic party, home schooling and dope fiend talk radio hosts have obviously polluted your thought process.
Laura Vogel August 28, 2012 at 01:55 PM
I agree, "Mr. Creasoat", that one is left to question whether there would be as much publicity and whether there would also be as much prosecutorial interest in a similar crash involving two vehicles full of unbelted passengers. One also wonders whether none of the unbelted, albeit innocent as far as "causing" the crash, victims would escape nonetheless having a ticket issued for failing to wear a seat belt. As I mentioned in my remarks in response to Nancy's post, seeming inconsistencies in the level and zeal of criminal punishment often leave us all shaking our collective heads.
Cheryl Loukinen August 28, 2012 at 02:24 PM
Yes, when i wrote that i was thinking along those lines. What if they were wearing seatbelts and the possibility of inury was minimum to nil, could it have been because of their lack in judgment that the injuries occured. Like I said I had never been in that situtation. Maybe I will ask my insurance company, based on this scenerio. Thank you for making me think through this a little more.
Haulin T Male August 28, 2012 at 02:28 PM
sorry first time I heard where patterson was sitting, then by all means the law is clear, all front seat passengers, (not so for older cars) if he was in the back, they would of been opt.
Jim Sparks August 28, 2012 at 03:00 PM
And there it is... I knew somewhere in this thread there'd be a reference to how all of this points back to the hated Obama. Anything bad happens, and these people contort themselves to an astonishing degree to make a connection to their boogeyman. Give us all a break.
Jim Sparks August 28, 2012 at 03:07 PM
Christopher: What is your point? Fact is, Patterson WAS caught driving under the influence, and cops took him and his car home for him. If Mr. Patterson was a Democrat, you'd be all over that like white on rice. But, seeing as he belongs to your favorite party....anything said is just partisan claptrap? Please.
Marty Rosalik August 29, 2012 at 02:38 AM
From The Oakland Press. "Data retrieved from Patterson’s 2011 Chrysler 300 shows it was traveling at 54 miles per hour one-tenth of a second before the accident,..." 45 speed limit. Normal human response time from light or signal to brake pedal two-tenths of a second. Very high probability of more than 50 mph impact speed. They all were lucky! FYI, your car can testify against you. http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2012/08/28/news/doc503d2c161f887813634559.txt
Lianne Mathie August 29, 2012 at 04:06 AM
Wow, I'm so sorry, but sadly, not surprised by your story. I have been screaming for years about insurance companies.We pay gazzillions a year, for what? profits. I do hope you recover. The insurance lobby is far too powerful. This is a systematic problem that has not been addressed, you paid for coverage, you should receive it,period.The sad fact is that you need to pay more for your lawyer, then you do for insurance. Be it , auto or medical.You need a lawyer to enforce the policy.A very good lawyer.
Whatever August 29, 2012 at 04:46 AM
"Prainito, 31, of Royal Oak, has been charged with three counts of a moving violation causing serious impairment of a bodily function; each charge is a misdemeanor punishable by up to 93 days in jail and/or a $500 fine. Prainito, an employee of CBS Radio Detroit, works as a sales manager at 104.3 WOMC. “The issue is one of causation,” said Chief Assistant Oakland County Prosecutor Paul Walton. “The speed of the other vehicle was not the cause of the collision.” " Isn't the cause of any crash two cars hitting each other? Isn't speeding a moving violation? Has a speeding ticket been issued to Patterson's driver?
Kristin Bull (Editor) August 29, 2012 at 11:43 AM
The crash data from the car shows a speed of 54 mph just before the crash. Here is the latest on the investigation. http://patch.com/A-xtTP @Whatever, a speeding ticket has not been issued.
Beth Ayers August 29, 2012 at 02:03 PM
So speeding and no seat belts. Speeding is a factor, if Cram was going the speed limit then the accident would not have occurred. Mr. Paul Walton of the Oakland County Prosecutors office is playing more corrupt political games. seriously, Mr. Walton would put the prosecutors office in a shameful position just to avoid giving a speeding ticket and properly giving Mr. Cram credit for causing the accident. Political games every which way you turn in Oakland County! Sickening!
Christopher August 29, 2012 at 02:43 PM
Jim, My point is that those who want more government spending, insider deals...Kwame Politics, hate Patterson for not doing that stuff and any time you can rant and bring up a decade old story you will because you're hoping that the next guy will be your kind of criminal.
Christopher August 29, 2012 at 02:49 PM
How many democrats with substance abuse problems do you call dope fiends? None. Kennedy was a hero, right?
Christopher August 29, 2012 at 02:51 PM
All of you Democrats would complain if you got pulled over and ticked for 54 in a 45, especially on that stretch of Walton where the road is new and wide and most people are going 50 plus, but when a Republican does it, it's a capital crime.
Haulin T Male August 29, 2012 at 03:36 PM
Crist: yep ....... Not sure if an on board computer (not witnessed by PD can be ticketed) remember a ticket is given when it will stand up in court, other wise it is a waste of man hr's. an atty would have a field day with the on board. Same way most atty do with radar, and the w's in calibration etc. after it was calibrated on site, was it dropped, was it ... was it......... think where we are headed, with GPS yall can't live w/o....... PD plugs in the cords, and sat. picks up all veh. and there speed, with car description........ just the same as A I S, and Marine Location, does now with boats on the water...... it gives the speed down to .1 uh
G-Money August 29, 2012 at 04:10 PM
I think one of the reasons for these crashes is because sometimes when you approach a blinking yellow, and you haven't been staring at the light as you approach it, your mind gets tricked into thinking that it's a yellow that's about to turn red, rather than blink yellow again. In the past, before they had these blinking yellow arrows, I remember that a few times upon approaching a plain blinking yellow light (indicating caution) I found myself slowing down to stop. Then I would be like, "DOH! Its just a blinking yellow". It could be that some people think that the light is about to turn red, and presume that most likely it is turning red to on-coming traffic. And in cases where a collision occurs, the oncoming car is further from the intersection, and thus it is assumed by the driver that is turning, the other car will not try to beat the red light. The outcome in this assumption would have been made worse by the fact that the on-coming car was driving at a speed reportedly 20% greater than the posted speed limit. Thus, the extra cushion of space and time the turning driver may have anticipated was not really there. Either way, the turning driver's presumption that he had the right of way was still wrong, and he would still be found at fault for that. There does come a point however that the excessive speed of an on-coming driver could be found to reasonably affect the decision sight distance, or perception reaction time of the turning driver. TO BE CONTINUED.
G-Money August 29, 2012 at 04:28 PM
If it is the case that he thought the light was on its way to turning red (i.e in a progression from green to yellow to red), I wonder if this could be considered a design flaw. Are the collisions just a statistical inevitability, in that eventually some people will see that blinking yellow at just the right time to come to the wrong conclusion of, "it was just green, and will soon be red for both him and on-coming traffic"? In addition to these collisions, how many near-misses are there that don't get counted? Maybe the fix is just a matter of making the yellow blink faster so that people are more likely to see the blink during the time that they look at the light. Or, if these new signals weren't confusing enough already, use a new color for this blinking portion of the light.
Haulin T Male August 29, 2012 at 06:45 PM
perhaps the speed limit is not set right, I have heard it is new, wide open, " police will tell you if a % of the ppl drive x over posted, then the comparability to do so, has to be taken in consideration......... it is also based on # of drive ways etc in the area, they just raised the limit on a mile rd by me, cause ????? 40 % of the cars were safely traversing the area, with little to no issue....... now those are my words, but the criteria is the same....... you don't issue a citation on guessing what the other driver thought, he turned in front of an oncoming car, that had a green light, the fact that you know the on board computer says......... 54 mph, would be tossed out at a jury trial, based on not avail at the time, and you have a right not to incriminate your self..........
Deborah Kita September 15, 2012 at 04:54 PM
I would think the insurance company could give Patterson and his driver a hard time about paying the medical expenses seeing they broke the law by not wearing their seatbelts.
Christopher September 17, 2012 at 02:16 PM
Why? It's amazing to me how many people are clueless about their insurance. Maybe this is how Obamacare passed. Read your policy and tell me where it says that driving slightly over the speed limit, not wearing your seatbelt and hitting a car running a red light prevents you from getting paid.
Laurel Wisniewski September 18, 2012 at 07:12 PM
I would dispute your statement that "anyone else would have been discharged days ago". According to published reports, Mr. Patterson suffered fractures of a hip, leg, ankle, both wrists, and several ribs. These are major injuries, especially for a man of his age, and the surgical repairs necessary for the hip fracture alone would have required inpatient services, not outpatient. Hospitals do not keep patients in for no reason- in most cases, they are paid a flat rate for treating the patient, not a per diem rate. Keeping a patient in beyond what is necessary offers no financial incentive to the hospital.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »