Female gets life for stopping in fast lane to save ducklings

Options
2

Replies

  • Jlennhikes
    Jlennhikes Posts: 290 Member
    Options
    What do you think about this?
    Woman, 25, faces life in prison for stopping on highway to rescue ducklings and causing crash that killed a father and his daughter

    Emma Czornobaj, 25, faces life in prison
    Andre Roy, 50, and his daughter Jessie, 16, died in 2010 after crashing into Czornobaj's car on a Canadian highway
    The financial analyst parked her car on the road with the driver's door open and no hazard lights on
    She said she wanted to catch the orphaned ducklings and take them home

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2663995/Canada-woman-stops-ducks-guilty-2-deaths.html


    She won't get life in prison, and it makes me wonder if we were better off before the Internet, when we didn't debate and get outraged about things that didn't happen.
  • _John_
    _John_ Posts: 8,642 Member
    Options
    The story doesn't say what kind of ducklings...unless rare I really want to sit in my armchair and roll my eyes for "saving" an animal that loses so many young annually and is not threatened or rare....

    Seriously, no matter how "altruistic" she might have intended, I have no sympathy for essentially purposeful being negligent in a vehicle.

    Seriously, who give a **** about a couple ducklings.
  • Meerataila
    Meerataila Posts: 1,885 Member
    Options
    Sentence was way too harsh, imo. Yeah, I get that people died as a result of negligence but what about that case in Texas about the teen who rammed into four people, killed them all, then sentenced to only rehabilitation because he has "affluenza??"

    America's legal system is a sad joke precisely because of affluenza. Not sure how Canada's system is. How much money you have determines your treatment even before you are arrested and for every moment thereafter. Our system disgusts me.
  • Lisa1971
    Lisa1971 Posts: 3,069 Member
    Options
    Sentence was way too harsh, imo. Yeah, I get that people died as a result of negligence but what about that case in Texas about the teen who rammed into four people, killed them all, then sentenced to only rehabilitation because he has "affluenza??"

    That case infuriates me! SO WRONG!:mad: :explode:
  • Kamikazeflutterby
    Kamikazeflutterby Posts: 775 Member
    Options
    Sentence was way too harsh, imo. Yeah, I get that people died as a result of negligence but what about that case in Texas about the teen who rammed into four people, killed them all, then sentenced to only rehabilitation because he has "affluenza??"

    "(CNN) -- A judge on Wednesday ordered that Ethan Couch -- who drove drunk and caused a crash, killing four people and injuring two -- go to a lock-down residential treatment facility.

    State District Judge Jean Boyd had already decided the Texas teenager would serve no jail time. He was sentenced last year to 10 years' probation.

    His story made national headlines after a witness claimed Couch was a victim of "affluenza" -- the product of wealthy, privileged parents who never set limits for the boy.
    (CNN's Jason Morris and Ed Lavandera contributed to this report)"

    The affluenza term caught my interest so I Googled it. The judge was female. Couch would probably would have been sentenced to some prison or jail time if the judge was male. Then again, I wonder how often the children of judges are afflicted with affluenza? Probably pretty often.

    As far as the oopsy-some-poor-people-accidently-got-killed-while-I-was-frolicking-with-wayward-ducklings girl, I think the wise judge was making a good point. Roll the dice, pay the price. But as someone here said earlier, she'll probably spend some time in prison but not nearly a life sentence. Probably the guilt alone is a life sentence. Hard to imagine.

    Wow, I expected this thread to take a bad turn for one reason, and then here's this gem. Be a troll. Please, please be a troll.
  • Meerataila
    Meerataila Posts: 1,885 Member
    Options
    The judge was female. Couch would probably would have been sentenced to some prison or jail time if the judge was male.

    :explode: NO.
  • AllonsYtotheTardis
    AllonsYtotheTardis Posts: 16,947 Member
    Options
    she hasn't even had the sentencing hearing yet. We don't know what sentence she will get.
  • dpwellman
    dpwellman Posts: 3,271 Member
    Options
    I drive in one of the most congested cities in the United States (top 30). So things like this are. . well. . . tragic, but I'm always prepared for dumb and stupid. I think everyone else should be too. Rule number 1) LEAVE a FREAKING gap between you and the car in front. you will not get there any faster by travelling 30 feet from some guy's bumper. What you will do is slow everyone else down by have to use brakes for corrections[/rant].
  • Meerataila
    Meerataila Posts: 1,885 Member
    Options
    I drive in one of the most congested cities in the United States (top 30). So things like this are. . well. . . tragic, but I'm always prepared for dumb and stupid. I think everyone else should be too. Rule number 1) LEAVE a FREAKING gap between you and the car in front. you will not get there any faster by travelling 30 feet from some guy's bumper. What you will do is slow everyone else down by have to use brakes for corrections[/rant].

    Dead on. This is indeed rule #1. But if humans were all sane logical beasties who followed sane logical rules, there would be no need for rule #1 at all, would there?

    Okay, okay, fine, unforeseen mechanical failure would still necessitate rule #1. Fine. Be that way.
  • Leonidas_meets_Spartacus
    Leonidas_meets_Spartacus Posts: 6,198 Member
    Options
    I ride a motor cycle, and would never in effing mind follow some one close. It's a stopped vehicle or some debris flying out can knock you off from motor cycle. It's sad, there are only losers in this case.
  • littlefoot612
    littlefoot612 Posts: 156 Member
    Options
    There was another vehicle between the motorcycle and the stopped car (in the left lane with no hazard lights on). The other vehicle managed to swerve to avoid the stopped car at the last minute. The stopped car was probably not visible to the motorcyclist until the car in front of him swerved to avoid it.
  • bloodyhonest
    bloodyhonest Posts: 196 Member
    Options
    It is ridiculous to sentence her to life for this. The motorcyclist had the responsibility of leaving the proper stopping distance plus driving a motorcycle on a highway means you should pay better attention, because hello you get killed much easier. I read that they didn't notice until a car in front of them swerved to miss the parked car, if the motorcycle was following the swerver properly they would have had ample time to break a freakin motorcycle which can stop fast.
    Stupid judge.

    Agreed. A gap is required to be able to see far ahead and to avoid the dumbos on the road.
  • Meerataila
    Meerataila Posts: 1,885 Member
    Options
    You know, this whole thread has decided me: I will welcome our google AI driver overlords. No really, I will. Humans are just too fallible.

    Also good at hacking things, though...I sense trouble ahead.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    she hasn't even had the sentencing hearing yet. We don't know what sentence she will get.

    Exactly. It is highly unlikely given all the circumstances that she will be given the maximum penalty. The article is written for dramatic effect. Even impaired drivers don't get the max penalty in similar cases and alcohol/drugs is considered an aggravating factor when sentencing.
  • Meerataila
    Meerataila Posts: 1,885 Member
    Options
    Come to think of it, I got mad at someone for saying a male judge wouldn't give anyone a break for anything while a woman would, but why is this thread headlined by pointing out that the driver on trial is female? Is it so improbable that a male might pull the same dumbass heartfelt move?
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    Come to think of it, I got mad at someone for saying a male judge wouldn't give anyone a break for anything while a woman would, but why is this thread headlined by pointing out that the driver on trial is female? Is it so improbable that a male might pull the same dumbass heartfelt move?

    Well the title of the article also said "woman" but really, how else would it be worded?
    "Person facing life sentence"? Accused, maybe, but generally these types of articles are worded as man/woman sentenced to.... I've seen it for many types of offences. I don't think it is necessarily implying that gender has anything to do with the offence.
  • Meerataila
    Meerataila Posts: 1,885 Member
    Options
    Come to think of it, I got mad at someone for saying a male judge wouldn't give anyone a break for anything while a woman would, but why is this thread headlined by pointing out that the driver on trial is female? Is it so improbable that a male might pull the same dumbass heartfelt move?

    Now now Meerata. :wink:

    But to answer you question - would a guy shepherd ducklings into his Toyota at the midnight hour and forget he was parked on a highway? So he could take them home and breastfeed them and then chat about it on Facebook? Probably not. :brokenheart:

    I would consider him extremely sensitive and dateable. Right up until the breastfeeding part!
  • fullersun35
    fullersun35 Posts: 162 Member
    Options
    I'm ok, but not ok with it.

    Mainly just for hypocritical reasons that often times people that kill people while drunk driving don't even get life. So I don't understand how that happens.
    Absolutely agree with you on drunk drivers. I had a friend killed by a drunk driver (habitual) and he only got 3 years. I'm betting the guys still drives drunk.
    This is more than likely why I quit drinking altogether.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    A first time offender killed my spouse's cousin and got 35 years. I think the family knew a judge or something.
  • MikeLAdams
    MikeLAdams Posts: 40
    Options
    Hey, every time I pass by awkward waddling aquatic winged creatures, I scream "Duckies!!!" whether or not they are ducks. Can one really blame her for wanting to take a couple home?
  • sabified
    sabified Posts: 1,051 Member
    Options
    It is ridiculous to sentence her to life for this. The motorcyclist had the responsibility of leaving the proper stopping distance plus driving a motorcycle on a highway means you should pay better attention, because hello you get killed much easier. I read that they didn't notice until a car in front of them swerved to miss the parked car, if the motorcycle was following the swerver properly they would have had ample time to break a freakin motorcycle which can stop fast.
    Stupid judge.
    Yes others do have responsibility of leaving proper stopping distances IN CASE of a road hazard or accident. Problem here was, there was no accident or hazard. More of negligence. It had to be taken into consideration. Had she blown a flat tire and had her hazards on and sat in the car (she didn't have hazards on and was on the road distracting other drivers), then I'm sure the trial probably would have never happened.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    This... she parked her car where she shouldn't have (on a HIGHWAY) and was walking on the edge of the road. I haven't read this article, but the one I read stated that both the driver of the motorcycle who was killed and his wife, who was driving another one behind him saw her and were distracted by her walking on the side of the highway. That's why the driver didn't see the car in time to get out of the way- the wife just barely had reaction time.

    A life sentence is extreme, and probably won't happen because usually intent needs to be shown, but she does deserve some punishment for committing an act which caused 2 deaths.

Categories