What do you think about the Corasanti verdict?

[LeviF]

Gee I'm glad she didn't land in your yard. You'd be out there yelling at her to get off your lawn . . .

 

I'm also certain that you never felt invincible and did wreckless things when you were 18.

 

You've convinced me. Because she crossed the street 3 carlengths in front of another driver, the whole damn thing is her fault. NOT the fault of the 50 something respected member of the community, who is supposed to act like an ADULT, not put pedestrians, cyclists and boarders at risk by driving drunk, texting while driving, and then FLEEING THE ***KING SCENE.

 

Yup, must be her fault. Damn kids . . .

 

But you keep defending the indefensible and put some of the blame on the girl. It speaks well of you . . . it really does . . .

Now I'm confused. First you say that bbb's position is that "the whole damn thing is her fault," but then you say, "but you keep defending the indefensible and put some of the blame on the girl."

 

So which is it? Or is your emotional outrage making you all confuzzled?

[Doc]

Now I'm confused. First you say that bbb's position is that "the whole damn thing is her fault," but then you say, "but you keep defending the indefensible and put some of the blame on the girl."

 

So which is it? Or is your emotional outrage making you all confuzzled?

I don't get the argument that being a teenager excuses you from doing stupid stuff. Riding a skateboard on a busy road at night while wearing dark clothing and swerving in and out of traffic is about as reckless as you can get, and she paid the ultimate price for it. And even if there wasn't a drunk driver on the road who may or may not have been impaired while driving, there are still idiots on the road who can't drive worth ****.

[bbb]

Now I'm confused. First you say that bbb's position is that "the whole damn thing is her fault," but then you say, "but you keep defending the indefensible and put some of the blame on the girl."

 

So which is it? Or is your emotional outrage making you all confuzzled?

 

Seems confuzzled to me. I, and the juror, put some of the blame on her. Not all of it.

 

As Doc said, being a teenager doesn't excuse you from doing stupid stuff, and what she did is as reckless as you can get. You know the joke about Hey, go play in traffic. Well, she did it.

[Philly McButterpants]

Ah, we're arguing semantics now. Court is now in session . . .

[bbb]

Semantics? Are you kidding me? Saying somebody is either partially or fully at fault is not semantics. It's a huge difference.

[ExiledInIllinois]

You seem cool with it.

 

Yeah... I supposed... At least she got what she wanted? How can you not be cool with that?

[Jim in Anchorage]

Corasanti gets max-

 

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/topics/dr-james-corasanti-trial/article1007279.ece

 

Good.

[bills44]

I wish nothing but the worst for this scumbag POS

[MDH]

And, yes I do think it was stupidity from both parties. Something like 65/35 Corisanti/Rice. Mr. McButterpants said you can't blame the girl to me. Really? She has 2 near misses in the five minutes before she finally gets hit, and she doesn't share some of the blame? She's zig zagging down the road (perhaps tied in her wish to die in spectacular fashion) in dark clothes at night, crouched down, and she doesn't have any blame in this?

 

 

Sure she has some of the blame. But you know what, those other drivers DIDN'T hit her. What do those other drivers have in common? They weren't drinking. They're being sober allowed them to make up for someone else's mistake.

 

People pull out in front of me all the time on the road, I've had near misses with bikers, pedestrians, etc who have made mistakes. They were near misses because I was sober and able to quickly respond to the situation. A drunk driver isn't able to do that nearly so well so whether she was in the road or not doesn't mean he isn't accountable for her death.

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

He's a scumbag. I hope he gets what he deserves in jail

[NoSaint]

 

 

Sure she has some of the blame. But you know what, those other drivers DIDN'T hit her. What do those other drivers have in common? They weren't drinking. They're being sober allowed them to make up for someone else's mistake.

 

People pull out in front of me all the time on the road, I've had near misses with bikers, pedestrians, etc who have made mistakes. They were near misses because I was sober and able to quickly respond to the situation. A drunk driver isn't able to do that nearly so well so whether she was in the road or not doesn't mean he isn't accountable for her death.

 

really, we dont know if thats what the primary difference was. he might have hit her stone cold sober. while your statements about reaction time are obviously true, that is far from proving causation. being sober may have saved her, but we just dont know that.

 

thats not to excuse anything that happened that night though.

Edited August 16, 2012 by NoSaint

[bbb]

really, we dont know if thats what the primary difference was. he might have hit her stone cold sober. while your statements about reaction time are obviously true, that is far from proving causation. being sober may have saved her, but we just dont know that.

 

thats not to excuse anything that happened that night though.

 

I agree with all that. Plus I said I thought it was 65% his fault - due to the drinking and possible texting. Her actions were AT LEAST 35% of what caused it.

[MDH]

really, we dont know if thats what the primary difference was. he might have hit her stone cold sober. while your statements about reaction time are obviously true, that is far from proving causation. being sober may have saved her, but we just dont know that.

 

thats not to excuse anything that happened that night though.

 

Perhaps, but I'm of the opinion that once you decide to get into a car drunk and drive you lose the right to try and blame the other person for an accident.

 

Obviously these jurors felt otherwise.

[NoSaint]

 

 

Perhaps, but I'm of the opinion that once you decide to get into a car drunk and drive you lose the right to try and blame the other person for an accident.

 

Obviously these jurors felt otherwise.

 

that is not a perhaps. everything i posted was factually correct. sober people cause accidents all the time. just because someone drank doesnt mean they have caused an otherwise avoidable accident. alcohol can clearly be (and often is) linked to causation though.

 

that is a ridiculous opinion. but youre certainly entitled to it.

 

if alcohol is found not to be the cause, than its not the cause. that has happened a fair amount of times. some accidents are relatively unavoidable. (not saying thats the case here)

Edited August 16, 2012 by NoSaint

[bbb]

I don't drink anymore, so as you can imagine I'm anti drunk driving.........But, being drunk doesn't mean anything that happens after that is your fault.........You're stopped at a red light while drunk and somebody else hits you. The drinking had nothing to do with it.

[NoSaint]

I don't drink anymore, so as you can imagine I'm anti drunk driving.........But, being drunk doesn't mean anything that happens after that is your fault.........You're stopped at a red light while drunk and somebody else hits you. The drinking had nothing to do with it.

 

Exactly. I know it's popular to be the most anti-drunk driving person around.... But practically speaking it becomes pretty extremist to say you are 100% at fault no matter what.

Edited August 16, 2012 by NoSaint

[bbb]

Exactly. I know it's popular to be the most anti-drunk driving person around.... But practically speaking it becomes pretty extremist to say you are 100% at fault no matter what.

 

Now here is a somewhat similar case. The dead person is doing something stupid - albeit even stupider than Ms. Rice. The driver is impaired. And, she only gets a $560 fine and no jail time, etc. Did she buy her way out of it? Is it 100% her fault because she was drinking and then got behind the wheel? Or does the victim take some blame for laying in the middle of the road??:

 

A Hamburg woman who fatally injured an intoxicated man lying in the middle of Sowles Road in June pleaded guilty Monday to driving while impaired.

Joyce McNelis, 32, was fined $560 and granted a one-year conditional discharge by Hamburg Town Justice Walter L. Rooth.

McNelis registered a blood-alcohol content of 0.07 percent after her vehicle struck Cameron John, 24, at about 3:30 a.m. June 22. Her attorney, Aaron Frederick Glazer, told The Buffalo News the crash occurred as McNelis was driving home from her job at a Buffalo restaurant, describing the incident as a tragedy for both the McNelis and John families.

Police confirmed John was intoxicated and lying face down in the road at the time of the crash.

The Erie County District Attorney's Office recommended the sentence; Glazer confirmed the John family has retained an attorney for a civil lawsuit against his client.

[plenzmd1]

At .07 why was she guilty of anything? Is there a new law or something that any race of alcohol in your system is a Driving While Impired?

 

EDIT. So in NYSE, and maybe others..there is a Driving While Ability Impaired, or. DWAI. It is between .05 and.07, fine between $300 and $500.

 

Learn omthing new every day.

Edited August 27, 2012 by plenzmd1

[KD in CA]

Now here is a somewhat similar case. The dead person is doing something stupid - albeit even stupider than Ms. Rice. The driver is impaired. And, she only gets a $560 fine and no jail time, etc. Did she buy her way out of it? Is it 100% her fault because she was drinking and then got behind the wheel? Or does the victim take some blame for laying in the middle of the road??:

 

A Hamburg woman who fatally injured an intoxicated man lying in the middle of Sowles Road in June pleaded guilty Monday to driving while impaired.

Joyce McNelis, 32, was fined $560 and granted a one-year conditional discharge by Hamburg Town Justice Walter L. Rooth.

McNelis registered a blood-alcohol content of 0.07 percent after her vehicle struck Cameron John, 24, at about 3:30 a.m. June 22. Her attorney, Aaron Frederick Glazer, told The Buffalo News the crash occurred as McNelis was driving home from her job at a Buffalo restaurant, describing the incident as a tragedy for both the McNelis and John families.

Police confirmed John was intoxicated and lying face down in the road at the time of the crash.

The Erie County District Attorney's Office recommended the sentence; Glazer confirmed the John family has retained an attorney for a civil lawsuit against his client.

Those cases don't sounds that similar to me.

 

--She was a .07. He was a .10 five hours after the crash. That means he had roughly double the BAC, and was well over the limit (she's wasn't).

--He fled the scene. I'm presuming she didn't if that wasn't mentioned.

--A guy lying face down in the road at 3:30am is probably going to get run over 80% of the time even if the driver had nothing to drink.

[bbb]

At .07 why was she guilty of anything? Is there a new law or something that any race of alcohol in your system is a Driving While Impired?

 

EDIT. So in NYSE, and maybe others..there is a Driving While Ability Impaired, or. DWAI. It is between .05 and.07, fine between $300 and $500.

 

Learn omthing new every day.

 

Thanks for clarifying that.

 

Those cases don't sounds that similar to me.

 

--She was a .07. He was a .10 five hours after the crash. That means he had roughly double the BAC, and was well over the limit (she's wasn't).

--He fled the scene. I'm presuming she didn't if that wasn't mentioned.

--A guy lying face down in the road at 3:30am is probably going to get run over 80% of the time even if the driver had nothing to drink.

 

Here's where it's similar. A driver driving impaired hits and kills a person doing something stupid.