BODIES OF SOUTH CAROLINA COUPLE WHO WENT MISSING EN ROUTE TO NEW YORK TO VISIT FAMILY FOUND

Fox News Channel | 12/11/2006

[tsmith130]

Found in a NC swamp. No foul play...believe to be an auto accident. Prayers for their family. They looked like a loving, happy couple.

[Velveeta]

If you don't have a pilot, then who're you talking to?

(kidding...kidding!)

[Velveeta]

Thanks, you pulled up a chair for me too!

I've been working so much, I do need to take a load off.

>>>plops in chair...yum, good popcorn

[Rte66]

I'm making a garland for my Christmas tree with those pieces of popcorn you're dropping on the floor.

[Howlin]

LOL!

[surfer]

Actually something has come up and I have to take care of something.

[Howlin]

A search and rescue, I presume.

[sissyjane]

Maybe someone started a new search thread, and he needs to impart his wisdom.... ;>)

[surfer]

I wish it were a search and rescue. I have a funeral to go to up north. You didn't know...so no offense taken.

Talk to you all in a few days.

Be safe.

[blu]

Howlin, do you know that at least half the message is the manner in which it is delivered? You are acting like YOU ALONE are privy to "the facts", and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong, stupid, embellishes the truth...yada yada yada.

Since you are such a news hound, surely you're aware that we don't always get "just the facts". Remember when the World Trade Center was hit by a private plane on 9-11?

(Speaking very softly here) It is possible for your posts and someone else's posts, all on the same thread and even mostly all on topic, to conflict with each other. It is possible for the same story to be reported by different people in different ways, and even with different facts. Instead of trashing those whose reporting differs from yours, you do yourself a disservice. You make it more about "I'm right, I tell ya!", instead of "This is what I'm hearing".Your combative style detracts from your reporting. Just lettin' ya know how it looks from here. Teacherly speaking, of course!

[Howlin]

Listen, when he and I are listening to a reporter and he posts absolutely incorrect information, I'm going to correct him; I wasn't the only person who didn't think he was right.

And yes, I do remember about the private plane; and I remember most of all that it took Freepers about five minutes to say it was a commercial jet AND that it was bin Laden.

I am more than willing to have people disagree with me; but when somebody posts ERRONEOUS information, do you think we should let it just sit here like it's the truth?

And I don't act like I alone am privvy to the facts; anybody who took the time to Google the word "Guay" would have seen over 300 articles last night and today with the facts are reported by the people on the ground in them. I've posted links to back up every single statement I've made.

This is not a GUESSING game; it's news; facts are there if people are willing to look for them; but some people would much rather just post the first things that pops into their mind, whether it's accurate or not.

And then THEY act all insulted when somebody calls them on it.

And just for the record, I believe if you go back to the first of this thread, you will see exactly WHO it was that started trashing people first, if you care to find out.

I suggest you look at post 22 and get back to me.

On the other hand, if you prefer to be misinformed, that's on you.

And don't lecture me again.

[woodbutcher]

And sassyjane:

I have been away for a while, so I missed everything after the first 50 posts on this and I felt an obligation to read every one of them before I said anything.

As luck would have it, surfer had to leave before I could read all of them.

Obviously there were many different news sources and not all of them were on the same page, so there is no reason for anyone to get their nose out of joint because they are reading something different.

As for the daughter, I heard her on my XM while driving yesterday and I can tell you that she was very uncomplimentary towards the SC law enforcement. I am not saying she was justified or not. Simply telling you what I heard. She was particularly put out that the detective in charge had Friday off and that there was no one to sub for him. When she called back, on Monday I believe but again don't hold me to the day because I sure am not taking notes on this while I drive in I-40 traffic, she was mad as could be because the person she talked to did not even know who she was and what it was all about.

She was asking for the FBI and volunteers to help because the SC LE was doing nothing (her words, not mine).

So with that in mind, I would not be surprised at anything she or her family said. Angry people do that. Nor would I be surprised that she said one thing in anger and something else after she cooled off, maybe to another reporter representing a different network.

As for my take on it, I have two questions. Why didn't the 911 caller stay and if he/she did not, why did the 911 operator not find out who called?

In NC, I believe that all 911 systems have the ability to determine the
number of the caller. In addition, it is a felony to leave the scene of an accident if you are involved. NC is not easy on those who do not.

There is no law in NC that requires a witness to an accident to stop or to render aid.

I don't really fault the State Patrol for not finding the car immediately.
For all I know, he took a look and then got another call or saw something like a truck running 80 and had to go on.

I am just guessing, as I have no idea.

On the other hand, I do feel that when they get a call from someone who says they saw a collision that someone should spend serious time
investigating.

It was only last week that the Canadian cops kicked a woman's door in and arrested her because she would not open her door and let them in after dialing 911 by accident. I would think a wreck report would get the same attention.

howlin and surfer fought for 300 posts as to what "collision" means. I also find that interesting. If I had called 911 and I saw a car run off the road, I would have said something like " I just saw a car go off the road".

If I saw one roll, I would have said "A car just turned over and went
through the guard rail" or whatever.

So the word "collision" is interesting.

I realize a lot of people when excited, and almost as many when not, will choose inappropriate words. But the very people that are generally careless with words are most likely to say "wreck" for everything from a two car collision to a rollover to collision with a tree.

So that makes the use of that word even more interesting.

It could even be that the caller thought he saw a collision (contact) when in fact another car just got so close to the SC car that it was forced to take evasive action and lost control. If in fact there was a problem with a tire, it does not take much of a swerve to turn into something exciting.

sassyjane, you are not the only LE following this. I don't see the others getting upset. Be cool. If you really are associated with LE, you had better get used to it or you will go nuts. Learn to handle it.

[blu]

And don't lecture me again.

zeig heil, baby!

[Howlin]

The caller said that there was a car in the ditch; he didn't say a word about collision.

There is no law in NC that requires a witness to an accident to stop or to render aid.

I think there is a law that states just that; I am thinking I heard David Crabtree on WRAL say that the other night, but I can't find it right this minute.

From WRAL:

"I just passed exit 141 and in between where (U.S. Highway) 64 connects with 95 at exit 141. There is a car in the ditch," the caller said. "There's a car in the ditch. It's in the swamp area, lights on and everything."

The Highway Patrol, a rescue squad and the Nash County Sheriff's Department searched up and down I-95 from mile marker 138 to mile marker 141 but couldn't find anything.

"They were unable to locate (it), not seeing any evidence on the roadway of the crash or seeing off the roadway," said Lt. Everett Clendenin of the Highway Patrol.

__SNIP___

"It would have been helpful had someone been there to direct us to where the vehicle had left the roadway. We didn't have that," he said. The Highway Patrol is talking with the motorist who called 911, but they don't plan to charge him with leaving the scene of an accident, Clendenin said.

I heard them say that the trunk on the car was open, so I am thinking that it sank very quickly and that's why they didn't see it when they went by.

[woodbutcher]

And don't lecture me again.

zeig heil, baby!

---

Charm school?

Wonder which one?

[woodbutcher]

But the following was reported by WRAL on 12/11.

Which makes my point. There were many stories, some of them conflicting and there is no reason to get in an uproar because someone reads a different story.

Note the reference to a collision.

---

Missing S.C. Couple Found In Car Off I-95 In Rocky Mount

POSTED: 7:26 pm EST December 11, 2006
UPDATED: 12:10 am EST December 12, 2006

ROCKY MOUNT, N.C. -- Authorities recovered the bodies of a missing South Carolina couple from inside a vehicle submerged in water along Interstate 95 in Rocky Mount, the North Carolina Highway Patrol said Monday evening.

Wayne Anthony Guay, 57, and Dianne Guay, 55, of Myrtle Beach, S.C., were positively identified as the occupants inside the white Mazda with South Carolina registration, the Highway Patrol said.

Troopers were notified at about 3:30 p.m. about the vehicle, which was found in a swampy area located between mile markers 139 and 140. Sgt. Keith Stone, with the Highway Patrol, said the vehicle apparently ran off the road, hit a tree and landed in a creek.

Authorities did not know how the couple died. The cause of wreck is under investigation but troopers said they did not think speed was a factor.

The Guays were on their way to visit family members in Queens, N.Y. for an early holiday. Christmas gifts were still in the back seat of their four-door sedan when crews pulled it from the creek.

Last week, Nash County 911 Communications had notified the Highway Patrol of a traffic collision near the location where the vehicle was recovered, but emergency personnel were never able to locate a collision at the location or see any debris, the Highway Patrol said.

"A lot of times, these accidents are given out on I-95 in the northbound lane, and it could be a three- or four-mile stretch," Stone said.

A Department of Transportation employee doing work along the highway Monday spotted some luggage floating in the creek. When he went for a closer look, he found the car submerged, authorities said.

The Guays' son-in-law, Mike Liendo, said Monday evening that the family was shocked when it learned that the Highway Patrol was called to the scene but found nothing. He criticized the Highway Patrol for not conducting an immediate or thorough search for the couple.

[Howlin]

I'm not sure what your point is?

They used the word "collision," but the caller didn't.

[Howlin]

BTW, other stories called it various things: a wreck, a crash, etc.

Some people just got fixated on "collision."

[woodbutcher]

howlin:

I forgot to add to my last that it is obvious, or apparently so if anything is obvious in this confusion, that the quote you posted in your last probably the correct information.

I searched WRAL and got exactly the same thing and it does seem to be authentic.

The time stap on what I saw was 4:59 PM today. I don't know whether that same info was posted earlier.

[Ditter]

I am thinking, at that time of morning, in that kind of country, they could have swerved to miss a deer and ended up in the water.

There is a little gadget that you can keep on your key ring that breaks safety glass. Have you heard if they were still buckled in their seat belts, or did it appear that they tried to get out of the car?

[Howlin]

They were not buckled in, but I don't know if they tried to get out.

It surely could have been a deer, or the tire I mentioned up the thread. I've not read about that anywhere else though. Just heard it on Fox.