Mother serves more time than drunk driver
Options
Replies
-
Then work within the system to get the transportation needs changed... don't just jaywalk and put your life in danger because the "crosswalks suck"....
I live and work and commute through the largest US city without a mass transportation system... EVERYTHING is car centric here... a bus system has been brought up to a vote 3 times since the 1980's... and we are FINALLY getting something that will connect us to the intercity rail lines.... So yeah, it may take forever and a day long to get it done... but it can get done... Even if it means suing the city for lack of access... which has also happened in our city.0 -
Then work within the system to get the transportation needs changed... don't just jaywalk and put your life in danger because the "crosswalks suck"....
Or worse, just jaywalk and put your children's lives in danger.0 -
Then work within the system to get the transportation needs changed... don't just jaywalk and put your life in danger because the "crosswalks suck"....
Or worse, just jaywalk and put your children's lives in danger.
Yeah and that too...0 -
Then work within the system to get the transportation needs changed... don't just jaywalk and put your life in danger because the "crosswalks suck"....
Or worse, just jaywalk and put your children's lives in danger.
Except that it's questionable as to whether what she did was actually jaywalking. Yes, she pleaded guilty to it, but that's more likely due to the fact that a $200 fine is far better than who-knows-how-long in court (lost pay from being out of work), legal fees, and the consequences of potentially losing the trial.
According to Georgia crosswalk laws, crossing while not at an intersection is illegal only if the person crosses between two adjacent intersections with traffic lights ( http://peds.org/resources/pedestrian_right_of_way/ section 40-6-92)
If you look on the left hand side of the picture at http://t4america.org/blog/2011/07/18/prosecuting-the-victim-absolving-the-perpetrators/ you'll see that there's an intersection with a marked crosswalk, but notice that it has no traffic light. Therefore, regardless of what the next intersection had, she was not jaywalking. I've also taken the liberty of finding the location in question on Google maps - http://goo.gl/maps/O3Whb - if you take a look at the nearby intersections, even the full cross (as opposed to Ts from side streets) has neither traffic lights, nor marked crosswalks across Austell. And the ones that do, farther down, are both arguably more dangerous than crossing elsewhere, due to the way the two roads intersect (seriously, one of the crosswalks leads into the middle of the street of the intersecting road), and that's just in looking at the layout of the intersections (completely ignoring how the drivers or the lights themselves work).
Additionally, the incident could have happened had there been a marked crosswalk there, as well. Going to either intersection with a traffic light requires crossing two other intersections to get to the light, and 1-2 intersections to get back, plus crossing Austell Rd itself. By going that route, you've now added 3-4 crossings, in addition to the Austell crossing, in which any one of the children could have darted out in front of a car.0 -
Her crime "could lead to up to 2 years in prison." I doubt she'll get the max, if she doesn't have a record she probably won't serve any time at all.
Regardless, it sounds like the driver got off easy.0 -
A few years ago, a mother got off of a bus and crossed the street in an area that did not have a cross walk. While crossing the street, the mother's 4 year old son was hit and killed by a drunk driver who later fled the scene. The drunk driver, who already had a few DUIs, served 6 months in prison and probation. The mother is now facing jaywalking charges along with vehicular manslaughter and reckless conduct charges which could lead to up to 2 years in prison. What's your take??
This happened in Atlanta, right? I thought they dismissed the charges against the mother.0 -
was going to say this probably has a lot to do with the lawyer.
and 10 years for for first DUI? lol at that. unless you are off the charts wasted first offense deserves no jail time.
There is absolutely NO EXCUSE for DUI. If you're going to be driving, don't drink. Only the most stupid person finds that a difficult concept to comprehend. It's just as easy and just as likely to kill a little boy on the first time as it is the tenth.
Depends on how "drunk" - I think we've passed the point of diminishing returns cutting the BAC level that is permitted. I don't think people blowing a .08 are the ones causing accidents. That said, in this case I guess the only justification would be if ANY driver, drunk or not, could have avoided hitting the kid once his mom took him out into the street. But really, the poor woman lost her son, what's the point of punishing her more?0 -
A few years ago, a mother got off of a bus and crossed the street in an area that did not have a cross walk. While crossing the street, the mother's 4 year old son was hit and killed by a drunk driver who later fled the scene. The drunk driver, who already had a few DUIs, served 6 months in prison and probation. The mother is now facing jaywalking charges along with vehicular manslaughter and reckless conduct charges which could lead to up to 2 years in prison. What's your take??
This happened in Atlanta, right? I thought they dismissed the charges against the mother.
Got all excited over "probably". She did not serve any time. Whatever might have happened is secondary to what happened to her child. She is the one that endangered her childs life, when she jaywalked.
The biggest crime here is that a legal system didn't put the drunken driver away for a couple of decades.0 -
A few years ago, a mother got off of a bus and crossed the street in an area that did not have a cross walk. While crossing the street, the mother's 4 year old son was hit and killed by a drunk driver who later fled the scene. The drunk driver, who already had a few DUIs, served 6 months in prison and probation. The mother is now facing jaywalking charges along with vehicular manslaughter and reckless conduct charges which could lead to up to 2 years in prison. What's your take??
This happened in Atlanta, right? I thought they dismissed the charges against the mother.
Got all excited over "probably". She did not serve any time. Whatever might have happened is secondary to what happened to her child. She is the one that endangered her childs life, when she jaywalked.
The biggest crime here is that a legal system didn't put the drunken driver away for a couple of decades.
I'm sorry. When I read this post originally, the expression "old news" came to mind. But I agree, it is a travesty that this guy got off so easy. He actually served 6 months of a five year sentence.0 -
A few years ago, a mother got off of a bus and crossed the street in an area that did not have a cross walk. While crossing the street, the mother's 4 year old son was hit and killed by a drunk driver who later fled the scene. The drunk driver, who already had a few DUIs, served 6 months in prison and probation. The mother is now facing jaywalking charges along with vehicular manslaughter and reckless conduct charges which could lead to up to 2 years in prison. What's your take??
This happened in Atlanta, right? I thought they dismissed the charges against the mother.
Got all excited over "probably". She did not serve any time. Whatever might have happened is secondary to what happened to her child. She is the one that endangered her childs life, when she jaywalked.
The biggest crime here is that a legal system didn't put the drunken driver away for a couple of decades.
Except she didn't jaywalk. See my earlier post.0 -
A few years ago, a mother got off of a bus and crossed the street in an area that did not have a cross walk. While crossing the street, the mother's 4 year old son was hit and killed by a drunk driver who later fled the scene. The drunk driver, who already had a few DUIs, served 6 months in prison and probation. The mother is now facing jaywalking charges along with vehicular manslaughter and reckless conduct charges which could lead to up to 2 years in prison. What's your take??
This happened in Atlanta, right? I thought they dismissed the charges against the mother.
Got all excited over "probably". She did not serve any time. Whatever might have happened is secondary to what happened to her child. She is the one that endangered her childs life, when she jaywalked.
The biggest crime here is that a legal system didn't put the drunken driver away for a couple of decades.
Except she didn't jaywalk. See my earlier post.
I read your earlier post. I am not trying to villify the mother, but having the right of way and being safe to cross the street are not the same thing.. She was right, but her child is dead.0 -
A few years ago, a mother got off of a bus and crossed the street in an area that did not have a cross walk. While crossing the street, the mother's 4 year old son was hit and killed by a drunk driver who later fled the scene. The drunk driver, who already had a few DUIs, served 6 months in prison and probation. The mother is now facing jaywalking charges along with vehicular manslaughter and reckless conduct charges which could lead to up to 2 years in prison. What's your take??
This happened in Atlanta, right? I thought they dismissed the charges against the mother.
Got all excited over "probably". She did not serve any time. Whatever might have happened is secondary to what happened to her child. She is the one that endangered her childs life, when she jaywalked.
The biggest crime here is that a legal system didn't put the drunken driver away for a couple of decades.
Except she didn't jaywalk. See my earlier post.
I read your earlier post. I am not trying to villify the mother, but having the right of way and being safe to cross the street are not the same thing.. She was right, but her child is dead.
Her child is dead because someone chose to get behind the wheel of a car drunk. In this state, the pedestrian ALWAYS has the right-of-way.0 -
A few years ago, a mother got off of a bus and crossed the street in an area that did not have a cross walk. While crossing the street, the mother's 4 year old son was hit and killed by a drunk driver who later fled the scene. The drunk driver, who already had a few DUIs, served 6 months in prison and probation. The mother is now facing jaywalking charges along with vehicular manslaughter and reckless conduct charges which could lead to up to 2 years in prison. What's your take??
This happened in Atlanta, right? I thought they dismissed the charges against the mother.
Got all excited over "probably". She did not serve any time. Whatever might have happened is secondary to what happened to her child. She is the one that endangered her childs life, when she jaywalked.
The biggest crime here is that a legal system didn't put the drunken driver away for a couple of decades.
Except she didn't jaywalk. See my earlier post.
I read your earlier post. I am not trying to villify the mother, but having the right of way and being safe to cross the street are not the same thing.. She was right, but her child is dead.
Her child is dead because someone chose to get behind the wheel of a car drunk. In this state, the pedestrian ALWAYS has the right-of-way.
No they don't... here is a part of the pedestrian code for Georgia that would apply to this instance:
§ 40-6-92. Crossing roadway elsewhere than at crosswalk:
(a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway unless he has already, and under safe conditions, entered the roadway.
(b) Any pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway if he uses the roadway instead of such tunnel or crossing.
(c) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation, pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
“Jaywalking” is not a legal term and does not appear in the Georgia Code. Even so, people often use “jaywalking” to describe a pedestrian crossing outside of a crosswalk. In fact, crossing the street outside of a crosswalk is perfectly LEGAL in most places, as long as the pedestrians yield to traffic. These images illustrate the law.
http://peds.org/resources/pedestrian_right_of_way/
The bolded part determines that pedistrians don't ALWAYS have the right of way. So I guess the real question is were was the driver when she started crossing the street.0 -
A few years ago, a mother got off of a bus and crossed the street in an area that did not have a cross walk. While crossing the street, the mother's 4 year old son was hit and killed by a drunk driver who later fled the scene. The drunk driver, who already had a few DUIs, served 6 months in prison and probation. The mother is now facing jaywalking charges along with vehicular manslaughter and reckless conduct charges which could lead to up to 2 years in prison. What's your take??
This happened in Atlanta, right? I thought they dismissed the charges against the mother.
Got all excited over "probably". She did not serve any time. Whatever might have happened is secondary to what happened to her child. She is the one that endangered her childs life, when she jaywalked.
The biggest crime here is that a legal system didn't put the drunken driver away for a couple of decades.
Except she didn't jaywalk. See my earlier post.
I read your earlier post. I am not trying to villify the mother, but having the right of way and being safe to cross the street are not the same thing.. She was right, but her child is dead.
Her child is dead because someone chose to get behind the wheel of a car drunk. In this state, the pedestrian ALWAYS has the right-of-way.
No they don't... here is a part of the pedestrian code for Georgia that would apply to this instance:
§ 40-6-92. Crossing roadway elsewhere than at crosswalk:
(a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway unless he has already, and under safe conditions, entered the roadway.
(b) Any pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway if he uses the roadway instead of such tunnel or crossing.
(c) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation, pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
“Jaywalking” is not a legal term and does not appear in the Georgia Code. Even so, people often use “jaywalking” to describe a pedestrian crossing outside of a crosswalk. In fact, crossing the street outside of a crosswalk is perfectly LEGAL in most places, as long as the pedestrians yield to traffic. These images illustrate the law.
http://peds.org/resources/pedestrian_right_of_way/
The bolded part determines that pedistrians don't ALWAYS have the right of way. So I guess the real question is were was the driver when she started crossing the street.
All I can tell you is that was what I was told when I was taught to drive. If you hit a person with your vehicle, even if you were following traffic laws (which the driver in this instance wasn't) then you are at fault. I'm really surprised that this guy got off. Most judges in Georgia would have gone after a life sentence for the driver if they could. Vehicular homicide as a result of DUI isn't usually something taken this lightly.0 -
All I can tell you is that was what I was told when I was taught to drive. If you hit a person with your vehicle, even if you were following traffic laws (which the driver in this instance wasn't) then you are at fault. I'm really surprised that this guy got off. Most judges in Georgia would have gone after a life sentence for the driver if they could. Vehicular homicide as a result of DUI isn't usually something taken this lightly.
I agree, I had always thought that peds had ROW all the time... and I think that is a dangerous way of thinking, because there are way too many times when a ped isn't seen. Around here, the only time (it seems anyway) you are charged with hitting someone with a car is if you are DWI or if you hit and run.
ETA: and it always seems like the ones that get hit the most are the ones crossing in between crosswalks.0 -
The mother had stepped off the bus and was crossing the street with three children. This particular child slipped from her grip and ran into traffic.
Again... all this happened last year so my personal knowledge of the incident was not fresh. I've had to do some research to refresh my memory.
It seems I've got the story a little wrong here. The driver was not drunk at the time, but he had several DUI's on his record. He did, however, hit and run. He claimed that he thought he hit a basket, and he did six months. The mother was charged with vehicular homicide, reckless conduct, and jaywalking.
For whatever reason she had to jaywalk, her son didn't die because she wasn't walking where she was supposed to be. He died because she lost her grip on him. It was a terrible accident, and the charges were over-inflated because the DA chose not to go after the driver. In the end, justice prevailed, and the mother can finally get some closure on the loss of her child.
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/cobb-mother-chooses-a-retrial/nQKMT/0 -
The mother had stepped off the bus and was crossing the street with three children. This particular child slipped from her grip and ran into traffic. She wasn't jaywalking! Which is why the charges were dropped.
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/judge-denies-bid-to-drop-vehicular-homicide-charge/nQMp4/
Again... all this happened last year so my personal knowledge of the incident was not fresh. I've had to do some research to refresh my memory.
And this is why I have no problem putting a leash on my kid.0 -
The mother had stepped off the bus and was crossing the street with three children. This particular child slipped from her grip and ran into traffic. She wasn't jaywalking! Which is why the charges were dropped.
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/judge-denies-bid-to-drop-vehicular-homicide-charge/nQMp4/
Again... all this happened last year so my personal knowledge of the incident was not fresh. I've had to do some research to refresh my memory.
And this is why I have no problem putting a leash on my kid.
See my edit... she was jaywalking, but the death was not because of the jaywalking.
And I can see your point. Travelling by public transportation with three children, and carrying stuff, is difficult. I personally don't believe in using leashes, but in her situation, it would have been appropriate.0 -
The mother had stepped off the bus and was crossing the street with three children. This particular child slipped from her grip and ran into traffic. She wasn't jaywalking! Which is why the charges were dropped.
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/judge-denies-bid-to-drop-vehicular-homicide-charge/nQMp4/
Again... all this happened last year so my personal knowledge of the incident was not fresh. I've had to do some research to refresh my memory.
And this is why I have no problem putting a leash on my kid.
See my edit... she was jaywalking, but the death was not because of the jaywalking.
And I can see your point. Travelling by public transportation with three children, and carrying stuff, is difficult. I personally don't believe in using leashes, but in her situation, it would have been appropriate.
I agree with your edit... and I have always maintained that it could have happened even while IN a crosswalk... Their ability to prosecute would have been much less (not that it had any weight anyway seeing as the charge was dropped) than had she crossed the street outside of a crosswalk.0 -
Her child is dead because someone chose to get behind the wheel of a car drunk. In this state, the pedestrian ALWAYS has the right-of-way.
You're missing my point. If you maintain that she had the right of way, I agree with you. The fact that she stepped out in traffic, when she could see a car coming might not have been wise. With the drunk driving epidemic and the high likeli hood that someone is texting or talking on a cell phone, I always lean towards being overly cautious. Being right doesn't take the dents out of cars or bring your dead loved ones back to life.0
