Bicyclist killed, trucker guilty

Subject: Bicyclist killed, trucker guilty
From: (Hunrobe)
Date: 8/26/2004 11:45 AM US Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

(Fx199

wrote:

Instead of bankrupting the driver, they go after the deep pockets of the
company.
The American way.

And the British way....
and the Canadian....
and the Australian...
and Indian...
and every other country whose laws have roots in English common law.

I've never understood why so many contemptuously term holding a company
responsible for it's employees actions "The American Way". The concept is a
good one and it is not limited to or even invented by Americans. Suppose some
part of your job performance caused one of your company's customers to lose
money. What remedy would you suggest? This is getting far afield for a
cycling
NG though so I'll drop the issue.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

I think we're becoming too litigoussp of a society.

Zoot Katz wrote:
26 Aug 2004 07:25:05 GMT,
,
(Hunrobe) wrote:


"They" didn't convict him, a criminal court did. That's even more encouraging
than any monetary award because the driver's company's insurer will pay the
award.


What's discouraging is that it sounds like the lawyers had to get a
court order so that a proper forensic investigation would be done.


He has to do the time though.


The other guy's dead forever. This guy should never again be permitted
to drive.

I'll second that sentiment.

Shouldn't that driver have gotten something for leaving the scene of an
accident?

-km

--
the black rose
proud to be owned by a yorkie
http://community.webshots.com/user/blackrosequilts

RE/
killed by a double-dump
trailer which was trying to pass....

evidence needed to identify and conclusively prove...
that the accident was the driver's fault...

I lived in Hawaii for about 10 years where the sugar companies ran what we
called "cane-haul trucks". Basically a tractor-trailer rig with two trailers.

Inherantly-deadly things, IMHO. Seemed to me like about 2-3 people per month
were killed by them - usually caught between the two trailers when the river
pulled back in thinking he had passed.

--
PeteCresswell

Zoot Katz

wrote:

What's discouraging is that it sounds like the lawyers had to get a
court order so that a proper forensic investigation would be done.

---snip---

If it really did take a court order obtained by a private legal firm to get
critical (and basic) investigative steps taken, then shame on the agency that
had jurisdiction. It is worth noting though that the only thing posted about
court orders and testing is a blurb from the law firm's own website. For that
matter, the bulk of Jobst's initial post in this thread was from that website.
Since that website's primary purpose is to advertise for clients it is wise not
to infer too much from the statements there. Advertising is advertising no
matter who does it.

The other guy's dead forever. This guy should never again be permitted
to drive.

Based on what was written about the evidence in the criminal case, the knothead
should not have been driving at the time. Unfortunately, there's only one sure
way to prevent people from driving- make it physically impossible for them to
drive. Since we can't lock them up forever (or kill them) and we can't
eliminate every motor vehicle on the planet the only sure way is just not an
option.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:03:52 GMT,
, the black rose
wrote:


Shouldn't that driver have gotten something for leaving the scene of an
accident?

Yeah, vivisected on national TV.
Call it educational programming.
--
zk

27 Aug 2004 03:59:53 GMT,
,
(Hunrobe) wrote:

Zoot Katz

wrote:

What's discouraging is that it sounds like the lawyers had to get a
court order so that a proper forensic investigation would be done.

---snip---

If it really did take a court order obtained by a private legal firm to get
critical (and basic) investigative steps taken, then shame on the agency that
had jurisdiction. It is worth noting though that the only thing posted about
court orders and testing is a blurb from the law firm's own website.
\snip
Duly noted.

The other guy's dead forever. This guy should never again be permitted
to drive.

Based on what was written about the evidence in the criminal case, the knothead
should not have been driving at the time. Unfortunately, there's only one sure
way to prevent people from driving- make it physically impossible for them to
drive. Since we can't lock them up forever (or kill them) and we can't
eliminate every motor vehicle on the planet the only sure way is just not an
option.

With public awareness we're able to release a pedophile back into the
community. If the police are doing their job, then the neighbours know
who it is and we're all trusting that if they show up near a school
yard somebody will be on the phone. Bracelets are already approved for
monitoring some offenders.

To make the penalties more serious requires that we begin taking
driving more seriously. We've done it to some extent with drunk
driving. Penalties for driving with a suspended or revoked license
should include forfeiture of the vehicle, for starts. Make it so he
can't legally buy one. Make it known that regardless of its ownership,
unless the car was stolen, it will be destroyed. That way nobody goes
loaning buddy their car.

No, he's probably not going to be a repeat offender but his victim
will never repeat anything, ever. Tough. Live with it.

I don't know how we can live with our conscience as a society that
values its driving privileges and cars more than it does human life.

Cars and driving will continue to be sold with the fantasy of carefree
unimpeded domination of the local environment because the reality
created by automotive over abundance sucks, royally. The amount of
dollars spent on automobile advertising makes it unlikely we'll ever
see responsible driving promoted as a cultural value.
--
zk

Zoot Katz

wrote in part:

Penalties for driving with a suspended or revoked license
should include forfeiture of the vehicle, for starts. Make it so he
can't legally buy one. Make it known that regardless of its ownership,
unless the car was stolen, it will be destroyed. That way nobody goes
loaning buddy their car.

I think that's a good idea but even that won't prevent unlicensed drivers from
getting behind the wheel and it would not have prevented this death. According
to news reports at the time, the driver that struck and killed Jeff Steinwedel
knew his license was already suspended when he applied for employment and
*lied* to the trucking company about that little detail to get the job in the
first place.
My only point is that there is no simple fix to the problem. It would be nice
if there were but there isn't. Removing hazardous drivers and unlicensed
drivers from the road takes more than just passing another law.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

28 Aug 2004 03:06:06 GMT,
,
(Hunrobe) wrote:

My only point is that there is no simple fix to the problem. It would be nice
if there were but there isn't. Removing hazardous drivers and unlicensed
drivers from the road takes more than just passing another law.

My point is if the commitment were there, the present laws would be
more stringently enforced and more meaningful penalties meted out.

There will never be a commitment to imposing serious penalties for
serious driving offenses as long as cars are sold with fantasies.

While we've got a glut of scud jockeys that readily trade their
humanity for a parking place everyday there's little hope of
reinstilling the social morality that sanctions those scumbags.
--
zk

28 Aug 2004 03:06:06 GMT,
,
(Hunrobe) wrote:

My only point is that there is no simple fix to the problem. It would be nice
if there were but there isn't. Removing hazardous drivers and unlicensed
drivers from the road takes more than just passing another law.

My point is if the commitment were there, the present laws would be
more stringently enforced and more meaningful penalties meted out.

There will never be a commitment to imposing serious penalties for
serious driving offenses as long as cars are sold with fantasies.

While we've got a glut of scud jockeys that readily trade their
humanity for a parking place everyday there's little hope of
reinstilling the social morality that sanctions those scumbags.
--
zk

Zoot Katz

wrote in part:

My point is if the commitment were there, the present laws would be
more stringently enforced and more meaningful penalties meted out.

There will never be a commitment to imposing serious penalties for
serious driving offenses as long as cars are sold with fantasies.

Would you consider a year in prison sufficiently serious for driving with a
revoked license when there was no crash involved, the driver just happened to
be detained at a roadside safety check? What about a six year prison sentence
for aggravated DUI when the crash killed an also drunk passenger as two drunks
meandered home from a party? How about five years for the same offense when the
driver and the passenger killed were two drunken brothers? I've seen the first
two sentences handed down just in the last two months and the last is what the
State is offering in a third case.
Contrary to what you believe there *is* a commitment by many to impose serious
penalties for serious driving offenses. You may not believe that because most
of those that have that commitment and almost all of those that act on it also
happen to be drivers. You know, scud jockey scumbags.

Regards,
Bob Hunt