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.

[libravoter]

The person who made this particular 911 call really should feel bad. "ditch" was a lousy choice of words and a few minutes at the scene might have made a difference.

My guess is "leaving the scene" probably doesn't apply here. I drove by a car that ran off the side of the Saw Mill Parkway near NYC at probably 65 mph. By the time, my brain registered what I saw and I could slow down and pull to the side of the road, I was easily at least a mile sounds like the driver came upon the situation post-crash and probably drove by at 60 mph. (Pulling speed out of a hat.)

Driving at normal highway speed could make it really hard to see whether it was a ditch or creek or gully or what-have-you as well.

[woodbutcher]

I was paraphrasing your post.

---

I am not going to bother looking up "paraphrasing" and posting it here, but I suggest you might look it up for your own education.

Nowhere in my posts will you find any of the words you used, nor will you find any remote reference to those words.

If you are going to hold everyone else to such high standards of accuracy, I would suggest that you be more careful about your own.

[woodbutcher]

You certainly are correct.

And the real facts of life are that on most of the interstates, you have to go several miles to an exit, then go back the way you came to the next exit past the accident and by the time you do that you will be at the back end of a traffic jam so long you are of no use anyway.

Most medians on the modern I-s are really wide with trees or banks between lanes or they have crash barries of some sort. Some even concrete walls, as you well know.

It is just that some forget that when they are at their 'puter.

[libravoter]

And the real facts of life are that on most of the interstates, you have to go several miles to an exit, then go back the way you came to the next exit past the accident and by the time you do that you will be at the back end of a traffic jam so long you are of no use anyway.

Yeah ... in my case it was dark and raining, and by the time i got to the kind of exit that let me turn around and then drove back to the scene (where i had to find another exit to turn so I would be back on the right side of the parkway), it was easily 10-15 minutes later -- and that with minimal traffic.

I saw the cops were already there and I kept going...but, you know, if I hadn't have gone back I would have been consumed with wondering if I'd been needed. And yet I don't judge in this situation. It wasn't late on a rainy night and this guy probably had every reason to assume he'd taken care of it.

[TommyDale]

I think a lot of confusion is caused when a witness doesn't know how to tell where they are on I-95 because they are ignorant of the Mile Marker signs. No one ever explains that to drivers here, and it isn't a question on the driver's license tests. If a witness says "between mile markers 168 and 169 on Northbound I-95, it at least tells someone where they are within a one-mile stretch. I would venture to guess that most people have no idea why those markers are on the highways here.

I know at one time a "Good Samaritan" law required people to stop and give assistance. I would imagine that isn't a requirement in North Carolina?

[woodbutcher]

I know at one time a "Good Samaritan" law required people to stop and give assistance. I would imagine that isn't a requirement in North Carolina?

---

I posted a link that said not.

I admit the link was confusing because it was to a news story that quoted more than one person; a cop, a member of a highay safety studay commission at UNC Chapel Hill, etc., and was so poorly written that the reporter did not indicate who made the statement.

I have googled and found nothing that says more than the persons involved must stop.

If your state has such a requirement, you might post the link.

As for mile markers, that sounds good. The trouble is that after you look at about 200 of them, you can't remember the number of the last one you passed, certainly not when there is blood all over the place.

Truckers are really good at remembering mile markers, but the average person is not.

All new cell phones have GPS that is activated by making a 911 call, so eventually this will take care of itself as all old phones are replaced and 911 services get better at it.

Almost all calls regarding traffic accidents will be made from cell phones.

[TommyDale]

I don't know about North Carolina, but in California (at least when I lived there) in order to get a Class I driver's license to drive school busses, etc. you had to take a course in First Aid and pass it in order to get that license level. One of the requirements in the First Aid class was that you were required to give assistance in an actual emergency. People were actually sued for not doing so. They may have overturned that law by now.

As for the mile markers, they aren't really that difficult to follow. They start at the state line, and chenge each mile. Even the exits are marked with corresponding numbers, depending on the nearest mile marker. But if you were to ask the average driver, they wouldn't know that, because there is never an explanation given to new drivers here. If you can mark an "X" in North Carolina, you can get a driver's license. And now you don't even have to speak English.

[woodbutcher]

One of the requirements in the First Aid class was that you were required to give assistance in an actual emergency. People were actually sued for not doing so

---

That is not a link. It is not informative because of several things.

First, the fact that it might be a requirement to agree to something in order to get some benefit does not mean that it is the law.

I am not arguing that it is not the law. I am saying that without a link to the law or a quotation from someone expected to be knowledgable about the law (cop, lawyer, EMC, etc.), it is not informative.

The second point is that whether a civil suit is a possibility has nothing to do with criminal law. They are two different things.

[TommyDale]

I don't know where the argument is, I am not arguing. I am merely telling what I have personally experienced.

BTW, I heard the phone call from the driver on his cell phone to 911 and he should have stopped until a State Trooper arrived on the scene. But you can't teach people how to use common sense, or even hold them responsible.

Sorry I didn't link any of this. I wasn't aware that linking is a requirement for comments. Have a good day.

[woodbutcher]

Sorry I didn't link any of this. I wasn't aware that linking is a requirement for comments. Have a good day.

---

OK.

I admit that I was not very tactful.

So to be tactful even though it is considerably more time consuming in this instance, I will ask the question:

Was the requirement to agree to stop and render assistance an agreement you had to make in order to take the course and get the job as bus driver, or was it California law?

[Howlin]

I am almost positive I heard David Crabtree on WRAL say tht it is against the law in NC to leave the scene of an accident; that would explain why some of the stories said that the State Patrol was talking to Brian Ross, the driver, but he would not be charged with leaving the scene.

I just can't find a link. :-)

[TommyDale]

It was California Law at the time. I have no idea if the law is still on the books or not, it was often referred to as the "Good Samaritan Law".

You could not only be sued for NOT giving assistance, but if you gave improper assistance after passing the course, you could STILL be sued. Yes, in civil court.

[TommyDale]

Apparently in 1999, California amended the laws to remove liability from Good Samaritans who performed assistance in good faith.


http://www.swc.cc.ca.us/~kjacobs/goodsam.htm

[Howlin]

Well, I was wrong, according to this:

"The caller was not required to stay in the area and wait for emergency workers or the N.C. Highway Patrol to arrive, said Robbie Stone, emergency services assistant director."

Also, it was not just the State Patrol that went to the scene after the original call; it was EMS, Nash County Sheriff, and the NC Highway Patrol.

[Howlin]

December 13, 2006 -- Wrong information from a 911 caller caused a four-day delay in finding the bodies of a former Queens couple in their car, which had careened off a North Carolina highway into a swamp, authorities said yesterday.

An unknown cellphone caller told cops last Thursday morning that he saw the Mazda belonging to Wayne and Dianne Guay run off a straight stretch of I-95 in Rocky Mount, N.C., a mile or two north of where the accident actually occurred, police said.

So when authorities went to check the reported location - mile marker 141 - shortly afterward, there was no sign of an accident. After that, a state trooper drove three miles south of that location - to mile marker 138 - and then drove north looking for evidence of a crash, said Lt. Everett Clendenin of the North Carolina Highway Patrol.

The Guays' car veered off the highway onto a grassy embankment that was level with the roadway, knocked down a tree, crashed through a guardrail and then plummeted about 20 feet straight down into a swamp.

The car was found Monday in a swamp near - but not visible from - I-95, between mile markers 139 and 140. Inside were the bodies of Wayne, 57, a former city sanitation worker, and Dianne, 55, a former school aide.

An autopsy yesterday revealed that Wayne Guay died from the force of the crash, while his wife drowned, authorities said.

[Sue Perkick]

This is the closest thing I've been able to find so far.

http://www.deadlyroads.com/laws/north-carolina-hit-and-run-laws.shtml

[TommyDale]

While the caller may not have been required to stay, any responsible human being would have done so. Of course, I will be labeled a racist for saying that I suppose.

[Howlin]

I agree 100 percent; and now that they have put his name out, Brian Rogers, I imagine his life is going to be holy hell.

[Rte66]

Wouldn't that depend on whether you caused the accident or just saw the accident?

Obviously, if someone caused it by sideswiping another car, they're probably not going to admit it - but they wouldn't be totally evil if they also called 9-1-1 after doing it.

Sounded to me like the other driver was just an observer - but he does need to provide eyewitness details if he can. Seems he has done so, voluntarily, so can't be forced by LE to do much more than that, legally.

It's hard to believe he's the only witness - and if he were part of the cause, there might be other witnesses to that who don't want to get involved.

[TommyDale]

This is how I see the actual scenario: Driver headed north on I-95 sees car between mile marker 139 and 140. He calls in on his cell phone to 911. The dispatcher asks his location, and the driver sees the next mile marker, number 141 and says "Mile marker "141". The dispatcher sends the State Trooper there instead of back where the accident actually occurred.