WI Drunk Driving Sentencing:Rant Ahead

[Lisa loves Pooh]

http://www.peshtigotimes.net/?id=10882

Not to sound heartless, but there is more to this story (we get lots of coverage, victims were from my area). No one in the car was wearing a seatbelt, and the driver blew a stop sign, which is when he was broadsided by the drunk driver.

While unfortunate--the likelihood that lack fo a seatbelt contributed to all 5 deaths is moot. Some crashes are not survivable regardless of the seatbelt.

Also important to note from the article:

According to authorities, one of five witnesses to the crash reported the Rivas vehicle did not stop at the stop sign and the pickup truck went over the top of the vehicle. The Rivas vehicle was hit on the driver side and was badly mangled.

Authorities reported it was unclear whether or not the Rivas vehicle had stopped at the stop sign and that speed and weather were other possible factors to consider.

Not exactly the same as "blowing through the stop sign".

You make it sound like they flew on through the sign at full speed.

In the end, had the driver not been drunk (drove over the TOP of the vehicle)--the California stop would not have killed them.

It's like saying someone had a bad heart when the bullet entered it and they died. Had there been no bullet, they wouldn't have died at that moment.

These people didn't stand a chance.

 

[creativeamanda]

http://www.peshtigotimes.net/?id=10882

Not to sound heartless, but there is more to this story (we get lots of coverage, victims were from my area). No one in the car was wearing a seatbelt, and the driver blew a stop sign, which is when he was broadsided by the drunk driver.

It does sound heartless, actually. Looking at the picture of the car, I find it hard to believe seatbelts would have made a difference. If the drunk driver had not been on the road--as he should not have been seeing as his blood-alcohol level was .283--those people would still be alive. He took a vehicle and played Russian roulet with it and unfortunately almost an entire family died because of it.

 

[happygirl]

How sad for the families and friends that were killed
How sad for the family and friends of the man that was driving. I pray that he doesn't have any kids that will grow up without there dad

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

The seatbelts likely would not have made a difference, but stopping would have. If they ran the stop sign (not saying that they did), then they are not victims. Why? Because the primary cause of the accident would have been their running that stop sign. In that situation, the family lives if their driver shows proper care and obeys the law. It would represent a scenario in which both parties are very wrong and acted in a neglegent manner.

For the family's sake, I hope that this isn't true. Either way, this is a horrible tragedy...

 

[Sanchez]

Unless you can PROMISE me that he will never be allowed to get behind the wheel of a vehicle drunk again, I think he should get the maximum sentence.

I simply can't be as forgiving, I'm sorry.

Terri

The sentence seems to be the result of a plea deal. It just is not practical to seek the maximum penalty in every case as that would require a trial (why would a defendant accept a plea if he/she would receive the maximum sentence?) Trials are expensive and unpredictable. The resources are not available to have a trial in every case and negotiated pleas are a necessary part of the system.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

The seatbelts likely would not have made a difference, but stopping would have. If they ran the stop sign (not saying that they did), then they are not victims. Why? Because the primary cause of the accident would have been their running that stop sign. In that situation, the family lives if their driver shows proper care and obeys the law. It would represent a scenario in which both parties are very wrong and acted in a neglegent manner.

For the family's sake, I hope that this isn't true. Either way, this is a horrible tragedy...

I have never been in an accident where I haven't been clearly and obviously not at fault. (road debris that coud not be avoided and a hit and run rear ending while I was driving and had right of way).

So I'm not sure what occurs when both parties contributed to the crash.

If he were speeding excessively making his rate of approach much greater than it should have been. The family could have still been killed making a full and complete stop and then taking their turn.

For that reason--at night...I really do not like turning into traffic and my threshhold for clearance is much greater in the day. At night I cannot tell how fast the lights are approaching so I wait for it to be completely clear with no approaching cars. I hate it--but I just cannot tell and I figure I am safer for doing just that.

But with only 1 out of 5 witnesses able to ID that the car did not stop and a driver too intoxicated that likely he had no memory of impact and even if he did, it would be have had no credibilty--and of course he is more likely to lie about conditions.

It could also be the reason for the plea deal. But who knows?

Unfortunate all the way around.

Very sad.

 

[Poppinsme]

My opinion.

ALL drunk drivers who kill someone should get the death penalty and NO appeals.

My brother was killed by a drunk driver who received 6 months probation.
A year after killing my brother he was out driving on a suspended license when he killed again while drunk. He got 5 years for that.

People who smoke pot get worse jail time.

Maybe, maybe just knowing you would be put to death for driving drunk would stop some from drunk driving.

 

[N.Bailey]

I can see that on someone's first time.

But when someone has a history (I think the driver in my story was 3x convicted or something and had served jail tme)--it is no longer a "horrible mistake". It is someone not learning their lesson when they are well aware from personal experience that they will produce a terrible outcome with their reckless behavior.

Kind of like the 10, 20, life rule we have/had here in Florida regarding crimes commited with a gun. Things are more leniant when its your first time of stupidity than when you have demonstrated a repeated pattern that you are refusing to rehabilitate, you are certainly no longer "making mistakes".

ETA:
I can see that there are no winners. But sometimes, providing a suitable consequence isn't about having a winner. For some people who commit criminal acts--the consequence should be to prevent them from doing the same thing again. I will never believe that the person who caused the death by negiligence or illegal act--to EVER feel anywhere as horrible as the people who suffered the loss. Especially if that person is a habitual offender.

I remember a drag racing story where a young man caused the death of a mother and daughter. Dad was devestated but displayed an amazingly wonderful ability to forgive. HOWEVER--he did so, so that they could together education people on the risks of street racing and create venues for safe street racing so that the tragedy did not have to happen to another family. The young man was very grateful for the forgiveness and you can be darn certain he wasn't going to commit the same stupid act again. I'm okay with something like that. Had the young man lacked remorse and not taken responsibility for his actions and failed to repent his mistake, I seroiusly doubt the story would have turned out the same way.

Was that you who stated the one with 3 incidents under his belt? Sorry, I must have missed who had posted. I don't disagree on subsequent violations, but most are first offenders. I don't disagree on harsher punishments today than in the past for many offenses either. It's only in the recent past that we've started cracking down on those who drink and drive and many other offenses too (but that's another thread). That's progress, IMO, and good progress to boot!

Look at the story I posted above from Toledo (was a horrible link and I apologize for that, but I posted it before I read it, because I knew it was the story I was looking for). I'm sure we all remember it all too well as it was only the Christmas before last that it happened. That guy absolutely deserves to be punished. I do tend to feel that his sentence however was based on the emotional loss of the family (and I certainly am not trying to lessen what they have gone thru, it's downright horrible), but that was a young kid who made a heck of a stupid decision. He made the decision while intoxicated because he'd gotten a hotel room so he didn't have to drive anywhere once he began to drink. I am NOT making excuses for his behavior and I hope no one reads my posts in any such way. The boy however could have served a lesser sentence, then if he had to do X amount of time in community service (and that should have been a long time so that 1, he couldn't really even begin to forget what he did, and 2, he could have used his experience to try and get someone to keep from doing the same), society could have benefited somewhat from the tragic events that happened that night.

If you saw him at all, you couldn't walk away saying you weren't aware of how sorry he truly was. He also specifically said that he wanted the family to know that he's not only sorry because of his own consequences. I truly think he'd have given anything to have a do over. I'm not suggesting the family should feel any sympathy whatsoever for him. They lost too much for anyone to expect them to be forgiving. That is why families of victims will never get to say what punishment should be. There is simply no objectivity.

Nothing will ever change the outcome for the family that's left to carry on, but that kid, he's living a hell that the courts couldn't even begin to impose. If it's my tax dollar on the line, I'd rather pay to house violent offenders and more so when a child is involved (because it's a fact that these types of choices MUST be made whether we like it or not).

 

[N.Bailey]

Unless you can PROMISE me that he will never be allowed to get behind the wheel of a vehicle drunk again, I think he should get the maximum sentence.

I simply can't be as forgiving, I'm sorry.

Terri

Who mentioned forgiveness? That takes a soul bigger than I have.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

I believe that an NFL player was involved in this sort of accident in Florida a few years ago (if the driver did go through the stop sign here).

In that case, the driver was drunk. It was pouring (remember, this is in Miami, so pouring means cats and dogs). A pedestrian stepped into the street in front of him. The driver flashed his headlights at the pedestrian, but he just kept walking. Because of the alcohol, the driver did not react appropriately and he hit and killed the pedestrian.

I remember that the more that we learned about the incident, the more that we realized that both the driver and the pedestrian were very much at fault. The judge eventually said as much. Still, because of the drinking, the driver was found guilty. I think his sentence was minimal because the judge ruled that the pedestrian would likely have been struck by a sober driver. Still, a tragedy all the way around...

 

[N.Bailey]

http://www.peshtigotimes.net/?id=10882

Not to sound heartless, but there is more to this story (we get lots of coverage, victims were from my area). No one in the car was wearing a seatbelt, and the driver blew a stop sign, which is when he was broadsided by the drunk driver.

I don't care who was or who was not buckled (though I'm a strong advocate for wearing them). I don't like the implications of blaming the victims and I am not suggesting that's your motivation, just saying the implication is there even if it's not implied. Failure to stop at a stop sign however is different and likely contributed to the accident if not downright caused it since the guy following directly behind could tell that he wasn't going to make it. Speed of course was a factor, so perhaps that's why the driver thought he'd make it?

Ultimately, it doesn't only have to be your fault. If you drink and drive, it's all going to fall on your shoulders whether that's fair or not.

 

[christineann]

Some have asked why he should be sent to prison........because NOTHING ELSE HAS WORKED TO DETER HIM FROM DRIVING DRUNK. Most DUI killers have at least a couple prior DUI's on their records. Some criminals just can't be rehabbed, so they need to be removed from society to protect the community.

That's why.

 

[N.Bailey]

The seatbelts likely would not have made a difference, but stopping would have. If they ran the stop sign (not saying that they did), then they are not victims. Why? Because the primary cause of the accident would have been their running that stop sign. In that situation, the family lives if their driver shows proper care and obeys the law. It would represent a scenario in which both parties are very wrong and acted in a neglegent manner.

For the family's sake, I hope that this isn't true. Either way, this is a horrible tragedy...

He accepted a plea deal. It's going no further.

I agree that it's possible that running the stop sign may have been the actual cause of the accident (I'm not saying it was, just that it may have been), but that still makes those who lost their lives victims. They are victims of an automobile accident.

 

[N.Bailey]

The sentence seems to be the result of a plea deal. It just is not practical to seek the maximum penalty in every case as that would require a trial (why would a defendant accept a plea if he/she would receive the maximum sentence?) Trials are expensive and unpredictable. The resources are not available to have a trial in every case and negotiated pleas are a necessary part of the system.

90 to 95% off all cases (depending which study you want to believe) end in a plea deal. I concur, thank God for that. Can you just imagine the expense otherwise?

 

[N.Bailey]

My opinion.

ALL drunk drivers who kill someone should get the death penalty and NO appeals.

My brother was killed by a drunk driver who received 6 months probation.
A year after killing my brother he was out driving on a suspended license when he killed again while drunk. He got 5 years for that.

People who smoke pot get worse jail time.

Maybe, maybe just knowing you would be put to death for driving drunk would stop some from drunk driving.

I"m so sorry.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Some have asked why he should be sent to prison........because NOTHING ELSE HAS WORKED TO DETER HIM FROM DRIVING DRUNK. Most DUI killers have at least a couple prior DUI's on their records. Some criminals just can't be rehabbed, so they need to be removed from society to protect the community.

That's why.

The driver had no previous traffic incidents of any kind, per this article: link.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

He accepted a plea deal. It's going no further.

I agree that it's possible that running the stop sign may have been the actual cause of the accident (I'm not saying it was, just that it may have been), but that still makes those who lost their lives victims. They are victims of an automobile accident.

You are, of course, correct - but that is a far sight from being the victims of murder, or even vehicular homicide...

 

[christineann]

So this guydidn't have any prior arrests, but

"Duket also put some stock in a letter written by Powell's wife of 10 years, Anne Peregoy, who described him as abusive, violent and the self-proclaimed "world's best drunken driver."

He killed seven people and was arrested, first offense. As long as he is in prison, he can't kill again.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

So this guydidn't have any prior arrests, but

"Duket also put some stock in a letter written by Powell's wife of 10 years, Anne Peregoy, who described him as abusive, violent and the self-proclaimed "world's best drunken driver." ...

Her testimony goes against the testimony of every other person. Either everyone else is lying, or she is...

 

[christineann]

Even if this is the first time he ever drove drunk, prison is justified.

BTW, roll Tide! (from a Georgia grad)