Posted on 06/29/2006 2:40:55 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
Assistant District Attorney John Norsetter said today he has not decided whether to retry a traffic homicide case that ended Wednesday night with a hung jury after 12 hours of deliberations.
"I don't know," Norsetter said this morning when asked whether he will bring the case against Tracy Sorum, 30, of McFarland, back for a new trial. "We have to look at how the evidence came in in this trial and reflect on the likelihood there would be a significant positive change for the prosecution if we tried it again."
Sorum was driving down Hope Road near his hometown of Cottage Grove on June 30, 2005, when his car struck and killed Jessica Bullen, 29, who was on a bicycle. Sorum told jurors he was suffering from strep throat and felt he had something lodged in his throat. He testified that he took his eyes off the road, opened his mouth and looked into the rear-view mirror to see what the problem was.
Before he looked back to the road, he struck the rear of Bullen's bicycle. Although she was wearing a helmet, Bullen suffered a severe head injury and died July 3.
In closing arguments to jurors on Wednesday and in an interview today, defense attorney Stephen Eisenberg said: "This was just an accident." Neither Norsetter nor Eisenberg was surprised at the outcome and Eisenberg said, "I just hope they don't try it again."
At issue for jurors was whether Sorum's taking his eyes off the road for a few seconds - estimates ranged from 4 to 12 - constituted the type of substantial negligence that would justify a conviction for homicide by negligent use of a motor vehicle.
There were early hints that the case was going to be a difficult one for jurors. Around 3 p.m. Wednesday, after about four hours of deliberations, the jurors sent a note to Judge Patrick Fiedler saying the jury was split 6-6.
Fiedler responded by bringing jurors into court and reading what is called the "Allen Instruction," in which the judge exhorts jurors to reach a decision in the case.
Jurors went back to deliberate and later sent out several notes, asking to see Bullen's damaged bicycle, for a clarification of some definitions and for 12 copies of the jury instruction defining homicide by negligent operation so each juror would have one during deliberations.
At about 10:30 p.m., Fiedler brought jurors back into court and told them they had three options: breaking for the night; continuing deliberations; or declaring an impasses. He sent them back to the jury room to decide which option they would choose, and 10 minutes later they said they were hopelessly deadlocked.
One source said the breakdown at that time was 10 votes for acquittal and two for conviction.
There was little dispute at trial over the facts of the case and it was left to jurors to decide whether Sorum's actions "created a risk of death or great bodily harm," which was "unreasonable and substantial," and that he should have been aware that his actions were creating such a risk.
Norsetter said Bullen's family was disappointed in the outcome, while Eisenberg said Sorum "just wanted it over."
"He has to live with the fact he killed this woman," Eisenberg said of his client. "He wanted it over, but he understands that this is better than a conviction. I still don't think you'll find 12 people in Dane County who will convict on this one."
They are prohibited on limited access highways (i.e. freeways).
Anyone on a bike who trusts the common sense of others to protect them from a 2 ton car shouldn't be surprised when they get f-ed up. Yea, I know about your right to the road but I have the right to golf in a lightning storm. That doesn’t make it safe.
Or he might be chuckling himself to sleep every night. How can one get inside the head of another?
Motorcycles and scooters under 250cc are also prohibited but my main point is that the story says the driver was on Hope Road, it does not mention a highway or a freeway.
Sharing the road with bicyclists is a dangerous situation even when paying full attention. Much greater speed differences, a much smaller target to notice. Not a lot of imagination required to see how a brief lapse that you could get away with behind another car would be enough to overtake and strike a bicyclist.
As far as prosecution, if you are speeding by 20mph and manage to hit and kill someone, they will throw the book at you and it will probably stick. If you had a couple beers, they will throw the book at you and it will absolutely stick. Taking your eyes completely off the road for ten seconds is a much more dangerous impairment than either of the previous examples so it would seem illogical and inconsistent to give such inattention a pass.
Yet it's something we're all guilty of from time to time, the only thing that seperates us from this guy is that he picked the wrong moment to look away.
If I had been on the jury, I would have voted to acquit, but I wouldn't feel very good about it.
Is falling asleep while driving negligence? What if you didn't fall asleep on purpose? Is it OK?
It's proper protocol to ping the person you are denegrating when you do so. :)
Your posts are all the same. Do you walk on water in your spare time? Yeesh!
I did pray for the safety of your family.
And, no I do not walk on water but I do ride my bike 100 miles a week and never take my eyes off the road for 12 seconds while driving a car or hit my children.
And at 20 mph, a car travels 30 feet in a second -- 120 feet in 4 seconds.
Two things we don't know: a)how fast he was going and b) how long he took his eyes off the road. (Plus time of day, type of road, flat or hilly, 2-lane or 4-lane -- all factors in determining negligence.)
If you have an SUV that has a place for LCD screens on the backs of the front seats, you can buy the special remote punching-glove option instead.
"Taking your eyes completely off the road for ten seconds is a much more dangerous impairment than either of the previous examples so it would seem illogical and inconsistent to give such inattention a pass."
I still remember the driver (a trucker, a professional too) who killed a highway worker and was acquitted due to the fact that he had fallen asleep and not misused his medication, as the jury found. I couldn't believe that you did not have a legal duty to stay awake behind the wheel. I believe this case was in NJ.
"The fact that it didn't in this case tells me that the driver was focusing on the mirror; using short-range vision -- which probably made his long-range peripheral vision ineffective. He should have pulled off the road."
That's a good point.
Would you have the same response to a motorcyclist hurt by a car driver? How about passenger car occupants who are creamed by a big rig?
LOL!!
Lots of "roadies" here like to tempt fate by riding on very narrow two lane roads with no shoulder or bike lane. The car drivers have to move into the opposite lane to pass or slow down to the bike riders' speed. Doesn't make for "happy" motorists.
I've talked with drivers who've said they have alot of animosity towards certain groups (Bikers, bicyclists,etc.) because of some incident with one on the road. Not that they've deliberately gone out to hurt someone, but it makes them less accomodating and potentially more aggressive in not giving quarter to the rider.
As far as trusting someone in a "cage" to watch out for me, forget it. I gave up riding a motorcycle in my area because I had been run off the road more times than I care to count. Why would they be any different for someone on bicycle?
I ride mountain bikes and I would rather take my chances with my own abilities and the tricks mother nature might throw my way. Already broke a collarbone, just waiting for the next OTB.
Dress to ride, not to crash!!
Cheers,
SZ
A bike rider can sustain substantial head injuries from a fall at any speed. Yes, the driver hitting the cyclist precipitated the event, but if the rider had gone on the cheap with her helmet, it may be a contributing cause. I've seen folks spend over $250 for a pair of cycling shoes and $35 for a helmet. Which do you think is worth more?
SZ
Absolutely. It's all part of risk-vs-reward calculation. Just because someone else is at fault doesn't mean the damage can be undone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.