What do you think?Who was in the wrong, the person waiting beyond the white bar at the light to trun left or?

The law -- http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes.xhtm... California all other States will be similar -- and I quote:

21801.(a) The driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left or to complete a U-turn upon a highway, or to turn left into public or private property, or an alley, shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles approaching from the opposite direction which are close enough to constitute a hazard at any time during the turning movement, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to the approaching vehicles until the left turn or U-turn can be made with reasonable safety.

---

Got it? The person making a left turn shall yield the right of way to *any and all* vehicles that are close enough to constitute a hazard. Period. It don't matter if the other vehicle is speeding, breaking the law, whatever. It just says to yield to any vehicle that could be a hazard.

The left turner's fault. They failed to yield. They cause the collision. And it as *NOT* an accident -- it was caused by ignoring the law. The LAW -- not my "opinion", not what I "think."

Sorry, California, but that is a "rule of the road question." While it is true that a left turning vehicle must wait and yield to an oncoming vehicle within an intersection, a vehicle approaching a left turning vehicle waiting to turn may not speed up so as to in any way impede the left turning vehicle ... but must, in fact, actively not speed up or fail to permit the left turn when it is reasonably possible to do so in a safe manner. In the cited situation you have two cars, one going straight and attempting to "defeat" an amber in order to defeat a red light; another already properly in the intersection waiting for traffic to clear (whether it be by mere sparsity of traffic or by changing of traffic signals, in order to safely complete the lawfully initiated act of positioning for turning.

It is more likely than not in the cited incident that the straight-ahead oncoming vehicle will be found at fault for (1) speeding up to enter an intersection under an amber (slow down) light signal; (2) speeding up in such a manner, irrespective of intent, so as to impede rather than concede the left turn; (3) willfully and unlawfully entering an intersection while intentionally failing to permit a car already in the intersection to exit the intersection. BTW, notwithstanding heretofore numerous Federal sanctions for California state failures to comply with national rules of the road standards, the points and violations described here are all documented within the California Vehicle Code at this time. Generally speaking, fault typically resides with drivers resorting to unthinking aggression to resolve their traffic and share-the-road challenges. Here we have a situation in which the greater burden of proper lookout also fell on the straight-ahead, precipitously accelerating driver because (1) a change in speed of an oncoming vehicle is the hardest to judge, (2) because a lower degree of culpability would inure to the driver who, observing the changing of signal from green to amber, could reasonably have anticipated all traffic having cleared, and for a time remaining cleared, to permit his exit from the intersection.

The person who turned left in front of oncoming traffic was at fault.

Under the circumstances you describe, it would be quite obvious that the person going straight was not going to stop before entering the intersection.

Drive defensively.

You are at fault when you turn left across traffic and cause a collision. The straight traffic has right of way. You can complete your turn after there's no oncoming traffic to endanger you. You are unlucky.

Both.