"The concept of a reasonable person cannot be a wholly objective one. In defining a 'reasonable person', the court must imagine what it would be reasonable for a person in the position of the defendant to foresee. This means taking into account any relevant knowledge, capacity for care, and foresight that the particular defendant had.
In the present case, the defendant knew about the hidden intersection. This knowledge must be attributed to the 'reasonable person' when deciding what harm was foreseeable. On this basis, a reasonable person would have foreseen that failing to slow down on that part of the road was likely to cause harm of some kind."