[wilson1010]

The myth that smaller, more "agile" cars are safer is just that - a myth. Drivers in large cars are much less likely to have an accident where there are injuries, period. And when there is a serious accident, drivers in small cars are a whole lot more likely to be ejected and/or killed. The NTSB has enough stats on this subject to scare the hell out of anyone, but because of the environmentalist movement for better fuel consumption there is not much publicity regarding the dangers of small cars. I've had three friends killed in car crashes and I don't have all that many friends to begin with. :)

As for the police riddle about "too fast for conditions," it goes like this: if there is a collision, that means that someone did something wrong. Its the classic "Catch 22" logical fallacy. Because there was a collision someone must be at fault, you were the only driver, therefore it was you.

I think courts are sympathetic to the "black ice" situation since the point of black ice is that it is not apparent from visual observation.

I'd plead not guilty and go to court and tell the judge that it was black ice and see what he says. The cop didn't see the accident and there won't be any witnesses other than you and the cop. Of course, there is the possibility (no offense sarge) that the cop will lie, which they do more frequently than you might think, and say that there were icy conditions that he observed at the scene that you should have been aware of. But, nothing ventured, nothing gained.