Posted on 05/15/2012 3:11:26 AM PDT by ETL
NEW CANAAN, Conn. (CBSNewYork) — A high school junior is facing homicide charges after being accused of running down a [] jogger in Fairfield County.
Police said the accident was as simple as it was deadly. The cell phone was out in the driver’s hand and the car veered for just a moment over the white line at the edge of the road before a sickening impact that left 44-year-old Kenneth Dorsey dead.
Now, the 16-year-old driver who hit him has been charged with negligent homicide. The juvenile was called in by Norwalk Police for an emotional reckoning. ..."
[snip]
Authorities know when the accident happened from the 911 calls that came in and the cell phone contained the rest of the information they needed, including where the driver was, what she was doing and when she did it.
The very thing police said distracted her, sealed her fate, Young reported.
“We do a forensic analysis of the phone after we get a search warrant for it,” Chief Rilling said.
The victim’s companion said the arrest will help only if it spreads the word about the dangers of distracted driving. She said she thinks about the young driver a lot.
“I can’t even imagine what she’s feeling and what her family is feeling. I sympathize with that, but at the same time, she’s still here and can still do good from this and Ken is not,” Dawn Jeffrey said.
(Excerpt) Read more at newyork.cbslocal.com ...
So you're actually trying to argue the case that, because a lot of people do something that's potentially dangerous, it should be accepted and ignored? What about all the a-holes who shoot through red lights unsuccessfully trying to beat them? What about all the a-holes that ride other drivers' rear bumpers on the highway, or who zig back and forth from one lane to another? Who cut you off without even bothering to signal? Suppose their actions injure or kill someone? If you can't hold your car in your lane, slow the F down!
Yes, this way you can see who it is that swerves and runs you over.
No doubt about it, there are a LOT of stupid friggin people in this world, as if the 2008 presidential election wasn't evidence enough. Early morning Sun in drivers' eyes don't help matters.
Absolutely there are certain circumstances where it's not easy to stay in a lane. There are major avenues here in Manhattan where the lines are so badly faded you can't even see them. Add that to the large number of idiots and maniacs driving here...
The problem is “scientists” counting ice layers as years when they should be counting them as snowstorms...
” I am all for making this as big a case as possible”
Sounds like you agree with the ‘crucify’ EPA guy.
If you do that, just make sure you watch out for cars pulling out. I had a friend that would have hit someone if I had not been in the car. She was pulling out on a road and was turning left. She was only looking to her left, when she started pulling out.
A guy walked in front of her car from the right. She would have hit him if I didn't scream stop.
It might have been completely her fault, but it really doesn't matter who is right when your dead. It made me completely understand the reason for going with traffic.
Believe me, I watch every driveway for cars moving or people getting into cars. I had a lady almost back into the dog and I when we were walking. She was on her cell phone and apologized as she was driving away.
[[NEW CANAAN, Conn. (CBSNewYork) — A high school junior is facing homicide charges after being accused of running down a [] jogger in Fairfield County.]]
New Canaan is a VERY wealthy town, they even rate their own 8-mile railroad branch from Stamford.
Chances are this girl’s parents have money. She won’t get off, but when the lawyers have had their say, she’ll “get light”.
“The cell phone should not be a factor until it becomes unlawful to use a cell phone while driving...”
It -is- unlawful to use a cell phone while driving in Connecticut, and has been so for a number of years.
It may be perfectly legal in the state from which you’re posting, but not so in CT...
I am not sure who “the ‘crucify’ EPA” guy is. If you mean the person who subsequently resigned from the EPA who wanted to make an example of a company under dubious conditions by imposing an out of proportion punishment, then no. If you mean the general principle of widely publicizing a case and the punishment - not arbitrarily increasing the punishment - then I guess I am in that camp.
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.