Dad acquitted in drunk drivers death

[airdvr 210]

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/crime/2014/08/28/ac-panel-toobin-omara-dad-acquitted-in-drunk-drivers-death.cnn.html

I'm conflicted on this one.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[wmw999 2,593]

It took the collusion of the witnesses, because their story all along was that no one saw the dad with a gun, just that all of a sudden there were shots and the guy was dead.

I'd've much rather seen a not guilty due to extreme mental distress. This all happened about 20 miles from where I live.

The guy deserved to go to jail for a long, long time. But I'd probably give the dad a serious pass on the extreme mental distress thing.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[kallend 2,156]

The jury heard the evidence. ALL the evidence.

You didn't, and neither did I.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 226]

kallend

ALL the evidence.

I think likely that statement is untrue.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lawrocket 3]

turtlespeed

***
ALL the evidence.

I think likely that statement is untrue.

All the admissible evidence. Of which I understand there was not much. No murder weapon. No witnesses to ID him. Not even any gunshot residue on the guy.

The prosecutors, I think, wanted the jury to just infer his guilt.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[GeorgiaDon 381]

wmw999

It took the collusion of the witnesses, because their story all along was that no one saw the dad with a gun, just that all of a sudden there were shots and the guy was dead.

I'd've much rather seen a not guilty due to extreme mental distress. This all happened about 20 miles from where I live.

The guy deserved to go to jail for a long, long time. But I'd probably give the dad a serious pass on the extreme mental distress thing.

Wendy P.

I'd agree with this.

There's another part to the story, I think, that hasn't gotten much discussion. If I understand things correctly, the dad and his sons were driving and ran out of gas when they were close to home. Dad and the boys were pushing the truck, at night on a dark road with no lights on the truck or the boys, no one behind them with a flashlight to warn oncoming drivers. The guy who hit them happened to have been drinking, but it seems to me any one of us could have been driving there that night and hit those kids. Perhaps if the guy had not been drinking he would have been able to react fast enough to swerve around the car, but if your first indication that there is an (essentially) stopped car in the middle of the road is when it comes within range of your headlights it's unlikely you'll be able to brake to a complete stop in time to avoid hitting it, even if you are completely sober. I think the dad was reckless and also shares some of the blame for his kid's death, frankly.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[normiss 900]

Cop glances around. No, no gun here.
Extend your hand for a GSR swab, cops swabs desktop, nope, no GSR.

Correct police work?
meh..sympathy because he just murdered the guys two boys?
All damn day long.

My best friend was killed by a drunk stripper with weed and illegal prescription drugs and only received probation.

One extreme to the other. What a long strange trip it's been.

[BillyVance 35]

I for one, believe he probably did it. An empty holster and ammunition matching the bullet fragment from the victim were found in the house. However, given the circumstances, I believe he flipped out and in a rage went to get his gun and executed the drunk. I'd give him a pass.

There was a guy in the Cullman area of Alabama who shot and killed a convicted rapist who had raped his daughter (I think), and the jury found him not guilty as well.

Vigilante justice is never a good idea, but given the state of mind of these people who commit such acts, I can't totally blame them.

Now, the onus of the circumstances that led to the drunk crashing into the car being pushed, falls on the dad. What he should have done was just push the vehicle off the road to the side and walked his boys home and deal with the vehicle in the morning.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[freethefly 6]

Quote

Perhaps if the guy had not been drinking he would have been able to react fast enough to swerve around the car, but if your first indication that there is an (essentially) stopped car in the middle of the road is when it comes within range of your headlights it's unlikely you'll be able to brake to a complete stop in time to avoid hitting it, even if you are completely sober.

I clipped the rear end of a stopped car on HWY 70 in St. Louis, shortly after dropping of Tamara Koyn. The guy stopped in the outside lane thinking he was on the shoulder. He was drunk. By the time I realized that a car was stopped in the my lane (no lights on and car turned off,) I barely had time to make a move to the other lane. Shit happens fast at 65mph. Fucked up the bumper and grille on my 1980 El camino SS. They blamed me for the rear end hit. His insurance refused to fix my car.

This guy is just as much at fault for the death of his children. How sad. It's a case of 'just didn't see it coming'.
Always think ahead and envision what may happen. It could save a life.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[rehmwa 2]

airdvr

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/crime/2014/08/28/ac-panel-toobin-omara-dad-acquitted-in-drunk-drivers-death.cnn.html

I'm conflicted on this one.

You shouldn't be.

We don't have all the info. But I assume this is from an assumption that the dad shot the drunk driver. And I'll comment from that assumption....


1 - Sympathizing with the Dad shouldn't be confused with thinking his actions were legal. Even if I were to think I might just do the same thing, doesn't mean I should assume I should get away with it. We'd all sympathize. So what.

2 - "justice" should be dispensed by the courts. It CANNOT be dispensed by an individual, especially in the heat of the moment. That's not justice, that's revenge. It's not even right vs wrong. It's still wrong as well as illegal.

3 - So the driver (under the assumptions I stated anyway) just killed two people. A third killing, not condoned by the courts (DP) is not the right answer.

If the Dad did shoot the driver. then I think two scenarios are in play:
1 = He understands it is not justified but he doesn't care and he considers he's above the law therefore he's not fit for society.
2 = Alternately, if he actually thinks the killing is justified, then he's a hypocrit and he should man up and admit his actions and take the consequences. "Yes, I killed that driver. I'm ready to go to jail"



Anyone that thinks the Dad was justified and should get off should equally be very content if the driver's wife then came along and shot the Dad too. I mean she wouldn't have a court case, she'd be outraged over the death and act immediately and without the support of law.


(I can't repeat this enough - all this comment would be under the assumption that the Dad killed the guy and even had the most rational-seeming scenario to back it up)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

BillyVance

Vigilante justice is never a good idea, but given the state of mind of these people who commit such acts, I can't totally blame them.

my point too - as long as they own their actions, admit to them, and go to jail. As soon as they try to rationalize the act or try to get off, then I blame them, and have zero sympathy.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wmw999 2,593]

The only way you get the extreme mental distress out is if it happens right away. If you have to go home and get your gun, or you wait until the next day then it's arrest, court, and judgment.

We have a court system. It's not perfect, but it beats the shit out of having each person considering themselves as being equally able to administer punishment

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rehmwa 2]

wmw999

The only way you get the extreme mental distress out is if it happens right away.

I don't think we give a pass to a murderer that claims he 'blacked out from rage/grief/jealousy/outrage/social righteousness/etc' and then killed the victim.....why is 'extreme duress' any different?


"I'm sorry judge, I was under extreme duress. I was overwhelmed with feelings of 'I really need to kill this guy'. That means I lost control and couldn't help it. Pretty please, I'd like to go home now."

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wmw999 2,593]

That's what "temporary insanity" really is. But as soon as people start talking about how the guy needed killing and it should be OK, it isn't.

People are funny and contradictory, aren't they

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Rick 67]

rehmwa

***The only way you get the extreme mental distress out is if it happens right away.

I don't think we give a pass to a murderer that claims he 'blacked out from rage/grief/jealousy/outrage/social righteousness/etc' and then killed the victim.....why is 'extreme duress' any different?


"I'm sorry judge, I was under extreme duress. I was overwhelmed with feelings of 'I really need to kill this guy'. That means I lost control and couldn't help it. Pretty please, I'd like to go home now."


good point here

and since he had his kids in the road at night with no lights how much responsibility does he assume

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[rehmwa 2]

wmw999

That's what "temporary insanity" really is. But as soon as people start talking about how the guy needed killing and it should be OK, it isn't.

People are funny and contradictory, aren't they

Yup - IMO - if the guy 'really needed killing' (I believe there are people that do....), then it's the courts that have to do it. The only reason for a citizen to kill is if it's the last resort of defense of self or others.

Or for insurance money.
Or for baggage stowage conflicts.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Rick

and since he had his kids in the road at night with no lights how much responsibility does he assume

People are responsible for their actions: therefore

he assumes 100% responsibility for killing the driver. whatever that means

(you mean for the kids....he is responsible for creating specific conditions that led up to the accident... which would have been an mitigating factor in the court case of the drunk if it would have gotten to that point

just like the drunk was responsible for driving the vehicle, not avoiding the car, driving drunk, etc etc etc)

big difference in directly killing someone vs a terrible terrible accident

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[normiss 900]

What caused them to be in the road pushing the vehicle?
Was the father negligent in any way?
Was it merely a breakdown?

I can appreciate all teh other details, but I don't see how the father gets any blame or fault because they were pushing their car on a dark road.

[lawrocket 3]

This is weird. The prosecution didn't even prove that the dad shot the drunk guy. The dad didn't even have to go the route of justification or lack of culpability for it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rehmwa 2]

normiss

What caused them to be in the road pushing the vehicle?
Was the father negligent in any way?
Was it merely a breakdown?

I can appreciate all teh other details, but I don't see how the father gets any blame or fault because they were pushing their car on a dark road.

who said 'blame' or 'fault' I just said he's responsible for whatever he decided to make a decision on. If anything. Stuff like not choosing to turn on hazzard lights, choosing to push instead of wait, etc etc etc are actions they chose for themselves - they simply help define the narrative. As far as fault or blame, that's about verdict or opinion, I won't speak to that. We have plenty of people doing that already.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

lawrocket

This is weird. The prosecution didn't even prove that the dad shot the drunk guy. The dad didn't even have to go the route of justification or lack of culpability for it.

Yup - that's why I was making the caviat repeatedly that I'm just talking about the scenario of if he did (or any scenario of that sort).....it's the more interesting discussion



Rick's point about pushing with the lights out is specific to the case and about his contribution to the kids getting hit. (and apparently anything after that point in the chain of events). I should have not tied his comment into my hypothetical.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GeorgiaDon 381]

Quote

I can appreciate all teh other details, but I don't see how the father gets any blame or fault because they were pushing their car on a dark road.

Do you think it is a particularly smart or safe thing to do to push a truck on a dark road at night with no lights? Would you encourage your children to walk in the middle of the road at night without any lights, or would you reprimand them if you found them doing that?

I wonder, if the driver was not drunk (and assuming nobody killed him), if he would have even been charged with anything.

Amongst the million and one reasons why it is a terrible idea to drive impaired, is the simple fact that if you have an accident that is completely the fault of the other driver, and there was nothing anyone could have done to avoid it, you will still be blamed for it because you were impaired. Similarly, people who leave the scene of an accident are always held responsible regardless of who actually caused the accident.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Amongst the million and one reasons why it is a terrible idea to drive impaired, is the simple fact that if you have an accident that is completely the fault of the other driver, and there was nothing anyone could have done to avoid it, you will still be blamed for it because you were impaired.

I agree that this is one of the many reasons not to drive after drinking.

This case reminded me of two other incidents that I was interested in when I first heard of them.

The first was a similar accident that happened close to where I live. A man was standing in a dimly-lit street, helping someone to back out a trailer which had no working lights. A car came along and hit the trailer, the trailer hit the man in the street, and that man later died. The driver in the other car turned out to have a BAC over .08. At the time, the intoxicated driver was only charged with a regular DUI. I couldn't find any new info on that case, so I assume that is all that he has been charged with.

The second was a pedestrian/vehicle fatality. A popular blogger in Austin, TX was killed while he was crossing the road and struck by a driver who turned out to be intoxicated. At the time, I read a lot about it and couldn't help wondering if the pedestrian was drunk too. I just found an updated news report on that case, and sure enough...
http://www.myfoxaustin.com/story/26145675/driver-involved-in-fatal-crash-indicted-with-dwi

Quote

A grand jury will not indict a suspected drunk driver for the death of an Austin blogger. Instead, the driver was indicted for the misdemeanor crime of DWI.

On Saturday April 26, 32-year-old Kelly Noel was fatally struck by a car on the northbound frontage road of IH-35 near 7th Street.

Austin police identified the person who hit him as 40-year-old Wade Atwood. Atwood was arrested for driving while intoxicated. His preliminary breath test registered at a .102.

Toxicology results revealed Noel's blood alcohol content at .27.

After reviewing the crash officers came to this conclusion.

"You had a pedestrian intoxicated to the point that witnesses say he was stumbling walking with his head down not paying attention and stepped into the street directly in front of a car. When he stepped in the street, the driver did not have time to stop," said APD Corporal Mike Jennings.

Vehicular homicide detectives presented the evidence to a grand jury who ended up feeling the same way.

"In this case what they determined was that they felt that someone even being sober could not have avoided that crash the way that the crash occurred," Jennings.

Instead of a felony charge, jurors indicted Atwood for the misdemeanor crime of DWI.

Now I don't condone driving while intoxicated, but it's good to see that there is some common sense being applied when charging the people in these cases. But, as you mentioned, I'm guessing there are times when the drunk driver is automatically at fault simply by being a drunk driver.

On another note, it was disturbing how difficult it was for me to find that last report. I couldn't remember the guy's name, so I was searching for "Austin pedestrian killed dui,"
and I got so many links to different incidents. I think Austin may have a bit of an alcohol problem. (Or maybe it's that way everywhere???)

[Shotgun 1]

It appears to me that the dad committed a murder. But without having been on the jury, I can't say that for sure. And if the prosecution was unable to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, then the jury made the right decision.

Tragic case all around.

[normiss 900]

Having had pushed a vehicle with a dead electrical system, shit happens.

We try to get home.