Can a jury reasonably conclude that a pedestrian was in a position of danger as a result of her own negligence in crossing?

Here the jury could have reasonably concluded that decedent was in a position of danger as a result of her own negligence in crossing [1 Cal.App.3d 747] the street in the manner and at the place she crossed, that she was unaware of the approach of defendant's vehicle, that immediately prior to the accident defendant knew decedent was in a position of danger even though he testified to the contrary, and that defendant had the last clear chance to avoid the accident by the exercise of ordinary care. Although California follows the doctrine of discovered peril and requires defendant to have had actual knowledge that the decedent was in a position of danger (Brandelius v. City

Page 147