Woman faces life in prison for stopping to save ducklings

Rory28 · 24-06-2014 10:55PM

Bongalongherb wrote: »

I see a problem with all of this. The motorcyclist should have been aware of 'expect the unexpected'... Maybe speeding without due care ?. If it was a cow or other sized object on the road, shouldn't the motorcyclist be driving with due care ?.

I find this story lacking in respect to the speed this motorcyclist was driving. The punishment this idiot woman received is also idiotic. I'm sure she will never get over her stupidity anyway for the rest of her life, but as was said... I cannot see a life sentence appropriate at all.

The motorcyclist should have been aware of the rules of the road, and as such, should have kept distance apart in the case of 'expect the unexpected' IMO.

So much rage at this. You blame the biker?

Bongalongherb · 24-06-2014 10:58PM

The scene of the accident is a highway, so why did the motorcyclist not see her car stopped ? was he actually speeding ? possibly indeed. He would have a clear sight of the car stopped... Accident scene picture below. It's important to find out if the motorcyclist was speeding, and if not, how did he fail to brake in a safe distance ?

24-06-2014 11:02PM

Bongalongherb wrote: »

I see a problem with all of this. The motorcyclist should have been aware of 'expect the unexpected'... Maybe speeding without due care ?. If it was a cow or other sized object on the road, shouldn't the motorcyclist be driving with due care ?.

I find this story lacking in respect to the speed this motorcyclist was driving. The punishment this idiot woman received is also idiotic. I'm sure she will never get over her stupidity anyway for the rest of her life, but as was said... I cannot see a life sentence appropriate at all.

The motorcyclist should have been aware of the rules of the road, and as such, should have kept distance apart in the case of 'expect the unexpected' IMO.

I've just glanced at the story as well and she had already stopped and then the bike crashed into the stopped car, the rear of the car, not the open door.
The problem is that she stopped in the (overtaking) left lane.
She created a static hazard, the bike rider should have been more aware of his surroundings. But where she stopped was dangerous in the extreme.

At the very least she should get a driving ban, maybe a few years for "involuntary" manslaughter, all said the rider of the bike isn't blameless.

Pwindedd · 24-06-2014 11:05PM

Bongalongherb wrote: »

I see a problem with all of this. The motorcyclist should have been aware of 'expect the unexpected'... Maybe speeding without due care ?. If it was a cow or other sized object on the road, shouldn't the motorcyclist be driving with due care ?.

I find this story lacking in respect to the speed this motorcyclist was driving. The punishment this idiot woman received is also idiotic. I'm sure she will never get over her stupidity anyway for the rest of her life, but as was said... I cannot see a life sentence appropriate at all.

The motorcyclist should have been aware of the rules of the road, and as such, should have kept distance apart in the case of 'expect the unexpected' IMO.

I have to agree with this somewhat, if you do not have enough stopping distance to bring your vehicle to a halt safely then you are either driving too close or too fast. The reason for her stopping is immaterial, even though it was on this occasion monumentally stupid.

She should lose her license agreed - but jail time. No. She has to carry this with her for life. That's sentence enough in my opinion.

Cookie_Monster · 24-06-2014 11:07PM

Bongalongherb wrote: »

The scene of the accident is a highway, so why did the motorcyclist not see her car stopped ? was he actually speeding ? possibly indeed. He would have a clear sight of the car stopped... Accident scene picture below. It's important to find out if the motorcyclist was speeding, and if not, how did he fail to brake in a safe distance ?

Stop trying to blame the victims.
The article states they weren't speeding and the she didn't even bother with hazard lights.

You cannot be expected to travel at such low speed on a motorway as to be able to stop in such a short distance, we may as well drop the limits to 40kph otherwise.

Bongalongherb · 24-06-2014 11:09PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I've just glanced at the story as well and she had already stopped and then the bike crashed into the stopped car's open door.
The problem is that she stopped in the (overtaking) left lane.
She created a static hazard, the bike rider should have been more aware of his surroundings. But where she stopped was dangerous in the extreme.

At the very least she should get a driving ban, maybe a few years for "involuntary" manslaughter, all said the rider of the bike isn't blameless.

Don't get me wrong, she is a complete idiot, and I feel for the father and daughters loss, but I was just pointing out that the motorcyclist should have been aware of obstacles of any kind on the highway because while driving a motorbike, one bit of debris on the road can be life and death if hit. With his daughter on-board he should have been driving slower in the slow lane.

Bongalongherb · 24-06-2014 11:10PM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Stop trying to blame the victims.
The article states they weren't speeding and the she didn't even bother with hazard lights.

You cannot be expected to travel at such low speed on a motorway as to be able to stop in such a short distance, we may as well drop the limits to 40kph otherwise.

Sorry, I disagree with your comment.

dharma200 · 24-06-2014 11:12PM

Nice one. A woman stops her car dead on the motorway for some freaking ducks, two people are killed, and your intonating it is their fault....
I've heard it all now.

mad muffin · 24-06-2014 11:16PM

dharma200 wrote: »

The fast lane in a motorway. Car stopped. Door open. Two dead people.

Jail. Simple.

There should also be a sentence handed down for the thread title. My internet is pretty slow tonight and it's fecking annoying to load up a page just for it to be misleading. Super annoying.

Again with the thread title?! What title would you suggest?

24-06-2014 11:18PM

Bongalongherb wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, she is a complete idiot, and I feel for the father and daughters loss, but I was just pointing out that the motorcyclist should have been aware of obstacles of any kind on the highway because while driving a motorbike, one bit of debris on the road can be life and death if hit. With his daughter on-board he should have been driving slower in the slow lane.

I agree, as I said "the rider isn't blameless" that road looks similar to any of the motorways here so visibility is usually good, what is missing from the story and I've looked at a couple of the reports is was it day or night when the crash happened? the photos of the crashed car were taken at night.

RoisinDove · 24-06-2014 11:18PM

mad muffin wrote: »

Again with the thread title?! What title would you suggest?

Something accurate?

She's not facing life in prison for stopping to save ducklings.
She's facing life in prison for stopping her car in the overtaking lane of a highway for no good reason, which led to the death of two people.

Bongalongherb · 24-06-2014 11:24PM

dharma200 wrote: »

Nice one. A woman stops her car dead on the motorway for some freaking ducks, two people are killed, and your intonating it is their fault....
I've heard it all now.

Where in any of my posts did I specifically say it was the fathers (motorcyclists) fault. I didn't, read my comments again.

Bongalongherb · 24-06-2014 11:32PM

The Canadian Press reports Andre Roy, 50, who was traveling with his 16-year-old daughter, Jessie, on his Harley-Davidson, was driving an estimated 70 mph to 80 mph in a roughly 60 mph zone.His wife was following behind them at a slower speed and avoided injury.

Czornobaj had stopped her car in the left lane of a provincial highway after spotting roughly seven ducklings on the median, reports CTV

The Montreal Gazette notes that the case is an unusual one, in that Czornobaj faces a life sentence though there was no criminal intent tied to her actions.

This is akin to some folk here... blindly looking for the harshest penalty without studying or reading properly into the account.

Source: http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/06/23/woman-who-stopped-car-help-ducks-faces-life-prison-causing-fatal-crash

foggy_lad · 24-06-2014 11:44PM

Pugsly wrote: »

Lifetime ban from driving maybe but a life sentence would be just utterly pointless. It was stupid and negligent and resulted in deaths but a life in prison wont change anything or benefit anyone.

Pugsly wrote: »

Bit of a length to go to to keep someone off the roads isn't it ? Rather than as I said just handing down a lifetime driving ban ?

she will do the same thing again if it came to it because a duck is worth more to her than any human life, People like her can be banned for life from driving but bar paralysing her how can she be stopped from driving if she wants to?

Awkward Badger · 24-06-2014 11:50PM

foggy_lad wrote: »

she will do the same thing again if it came to it because a duck is worth more to her than any human life, People like her can be banned for life from driving but bar paralysing her how can she be stopped from driving if she wants to?

She made one horrendous mistake and cost two people their lives. You're talking about her like she's some serial killing maniac.

mad muffin · 24-06-2014 11:50PM

RoisinDove wrote: »

Something accurate?

She's not facing life in prison for stopping to save ducklings.
She's facing life in prison for stopping her car in the overtaking lane of a highway for no good reason, which led to the death of two people.

Yeah, good luck with fitting that into a thread title. You still haven't suggested a better one.

Thread title is accurate enough to get the gist.

Bongalongherb · 24-06-2014 11:54PM

foggy_lad wrote: »

she will do the same thing again if it came to it because a duck is worth more to her than any human life, People like her can be banned for life from driving but bar paralysing her how can she be stopped from driving if she wants to?

In all fairness Foggy Lad, I would bet she will never even think of such a stupid thing again, because she is going to have to deal with it for the rest of her life. Nowhere does it say that she is mentally unstable, she just made a hell of a stupidly bad mistake.

Life in prison of which was forwarded to her was just anger on all parts toward her because it was the most stupid thing to do. The court and the jury put no thought into the fact that it was not a criminal intention. This is why a life sentence is completely over the top.

Rips · 25-06-2014 12:06AM

Meanwhile in Ireland, a boy who gets drunk and violently attacks and stabs someone to death is sentenced to 7 years for murder ...

Stupid - yes, Guilty - yes!! Lifetime driving ban and a hefty suspended sentence seems more appropriate.

As far as the other motorists being at fault here, there doesn't seem to be enough detail, even at a slower speed, there was still the potential for serious injury and death. Its seems clear from the state of the car that they made no attempt to even avoid collision. I'd wonder if the two bikes weren't travelling side by side or quite close together, effecting the father's ability to swerve and put other members of his family at risk. Carrying a passenger on a motorbike while speeding on a motorway, not exactly clever either. Driving in the overtaking lane?

Tragic and stupid all round IMO

emeldc · 25-06-2014 12:07AM

In the US you can make what could be seen as a mistake no matter how stupid and they lock you up and throw away the key.
Over here Mommy can teach her 5 year old daughter to do things a 5 year old shouldn't know about and then allow your neighbour to do as he wishes with her and all she gets is 14 yrs with 4 suspended, out in 7. It's a fcuked up world.

RoisinDove · 25-06-2014 12:07AM

mad muffin wrote: »

Yeah, good luck with fitting that into a thread title. You still haven't suggested a better one.

Thread title is accurate enough to get the gist.

No it isn't. It's completely misleading.

It implies she's facing jail for trying to save the ducklings.

She isn't.

She's facing jail because two people died due to her stupidity.

The ducklings don't really come into it.

Did you really need that explained?

mad muffin · 25-06-2014 12:17AM

RoisinDove wrote: »

No it isn't. It's completely misleading.

It implies she's facing jail for trying to save the ducklings.

She isn't.

She's facing jail because two people died due to her stupidity.

The ducklings don't really come into it.

Did you really need that explained?

Yet you still can't come up with a better thread title.

25-06-2014 12:21AM

" Woman faces life in prison for deaths caused by stopping in the overtaking lane!"

Bongalongherb · 25-06-2014 12:24AM

Rips wrote: »

Meanwhile in Ireland, a boy who gets drunk and violently attacks and stabs someone to death is sentenced to 7 years for murder ...

Stupid - yes, Guilty - yes!! Lifetime driving ban and a hefty suspended sentence seems more appropriate.

As far as the other motorists being at fault here, there doesn't seem to be enough detail, even at a slower speed, there was still the potential for serious injury and death. Its seems clear from the state of the car that they made no attempt to even avoid collision. I'd wonder if the two bikes weren't travelling side by side or quite close together, effecting the father's ability to swerve and put other members of his family at risk. Carrying a passenger on a motorbike while speeding on a motorway, not exactly clever either. Driving in the overtaking lane?

Tragic and stupid all round IMO

I think she should have to go through a 6 month course of how not to be stupid. A person like this would be better off getting direct help in relation to her actions. She needs help not being dumped in a prison with hardened criminals for life, this would be nonsensical.

Maybe a year long course 'mandatory' to teach her the dangers of all things she does in her life. It will never happen again if this was the case.

mad muffin · 25-06-2014 12:24AM

Deleted User wrote: »

" Woman faces life in prison for deaths caused by stopping in the overtaking lane!"

To do what? Oh that's right. Save ducklings :rolleyes:

Bongalongherb · 25-06-2014 12:25AM

Deleted User wrote: »

" Woman faces life in prison for deaths caused by stopping in the overtaking lane!"

? Clarify.

IrishEyes19 · 25-06-2014 12:28AM

I can understand her need to help the ducklings, its admirable. But she pulled up in the road when there were cars coming and her actions resulted in the death if two innocent people. It's not the issue of the ducks at hand here, its her reckless driving. Her concern for human life was non existent here

25-06-2014 12:29AM

Bongalongherb wrote: »

? Clarify.

Is it not clear enough in less than 60 characters, any longer and it would get truncated!.

feargale · 25-06-2014 12:46AM

catallus wrote: »

How do you know she isn't some duck-saving maniac, wilfully putting the lives of people in danger to save all things that waddle and quack?!

Hmmm. I can imagine the judge thinking : this woman could be a duck-saving maniac. There's no evidence to that effect, but who knows? It could be so. I'd better assume that is so and throw the kitchen sink at her. Who knows? I could be right.

25-06-2014 12:52AM

In many jurisdictions, it is illegal to put animals safety before that of humans, in other words if a dog runs into the road and there is a pedestrian in your "avoidance" route, then you're supposed to not avoid the dog to save risking the pedestrians life.

And then the pedestrian comes over and accuses you of being a "dog killer".

25-06-2014 12:55AM

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

I hate those misleading headlines ... she's not in prison for stopping to save ducklings, she's in prison for causing an accident which killed two people.

So is it people or ducklings that are most important? I want to got to bed soon, so I want to clear this up as soon as possible.

Woman faces life in prison for stopping to save ducklings

Comments