Charges rec'd in death of 2 NorCal cyclists

[Andre Jute]

On May 11, 3:25 am, Tom Sherman <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Andre Jute wrote:
> > On May 10, 9:04 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> >> Andre Jute wrote:
>
> >>  http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/may08/may10news
>
> >>>>> You will remember this as the incident when the (literal) sleeping
> >>>>> policeman mowed down two cyclists on the other side of the road. Likely
> >>>>> charge against the county deputy would be vehicular manslaughter.
> >>>> That would seem the appropriate charge. He is likely not a
> >>>> premeditated type candidate.
> >>> The two years mentioned elsewhere in this thread as a likely sentence
> >>> seems to me low for a case where someone by negligently going to sleep
> >>> behind the wheel killed two people and injured another. Would the
> >>> sentence be per death and injury, and run consecutively?
> >>> And now we're told by Ryan, presumably from experience, that the
> >>> sombambulist driver -- a policeman no less! -- is not likely to serve
> >>> any time...
> >>> Looks to me like a cyclist's life is held pretty cheap.
> >> Such comments don't help the relationship between bicyclists and
> >> police in which we hope to ride.  The reason a harsh sentence may not
> >> be given the driver is that major fault lies with supervisors and
> >> policy they enforce.  Documented and reviewed is that these officers
> >> serve consecutive 12-hour shifts.  If this were Abu Ghraib or
> >> Guantanamo, supervisory culpability would not be considered, but we
> >> are a bit more civilized in Santa Clara County than that.
>
> >> Jobst Brandt
>
> > I wasn't aware that the RBT charter limits comments to those "helpful"
> > in Santa Clara County politics.
>
> > I certaintly hope no one in the families and other loved ones of the
> > dead and injured cyclists families reads your cynical attitude to
> > their loss.
>
> > Nor was I calling for "harsh" sentences. I was observing that a two
> > year sentence for a negligent murder, if served, would be lenient. A
> > suspended sentence doesn't even qualify as a slap on the wrist.
>
> > Nor am I impressed with your attempt to blame the supervisors. The
> > policeman who killed those drivers should take responsibility for his
> > actions; he could have slept in the stationhouse until he was fit to
> > drive.[...]
>
> Sleeping on the job is grounds for both immediate termination and denial
> of unemployment benefits in the US. The deputy may well have been faced
> with the choice of working overtired or losing his livelihood.
>
> Note that in US hospital, it is routine to make medical interns work 24
> to 36 hour shifts, yet management is never held criminally liable when
> mistakes are made due to fatigue. (Of course, the US medical system is
> rotten at the core, but that is another subject.)
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Lots of beds in hospitals for interns to catch a nap. -- AJ

 

[Andre Jute]

On May 11, 6:30 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email protected]> wrote:
>  >Such comments don't help the relationship between bicyclists and
>
> > police in which we hope to ride. The reason a harsh sentence may not
> > be given the driver is that major fault lies with supervisors and
> > policy they enforce. Documented and reviewed is that these officers
> > serve consecutive 12-hour shifts. If this were Abu Ghraib or
> > Guantanamo, supervisory culpability would not be considered, but we
> > are a bit more civilized in Santa Clara County than that.
>
> > Jobst Brandt
> >>I wasn't aware that the RBT charter limits comments to those "helpful"
> >>in Santa Clara County politics.
> >>I certaintly hope no one in the families and other loved ones of the
> >>dead and injured cyclists families reads your cynical attitude to
> >>their loss.
>
> Please identify the "cynical attitude" where Jobst showed disrespect to the
> families of those involved in this tragedy.
>
> You don't have to pass the AP english comprehension exam to recognize that
> Jobst was pointing out that blame might lie in multiple places, not just
> with the police officer who ran the cyclists down.
>
> --Mike--     Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com

If this is a sample of your comprehension, Mike, you'd do well to
stick to selling bike components and leave the English comprehension
to me. Jobst's entire letter to me was an exercise in appeasement and
collaborationism. The police are our servants, not a force to be
appeased and permitted special dispensations to break the law and
murder citizens either deliberately or negligently.

Andre Jute
No Vichy water here, thank you

> "Andre Jute" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:c0eb793e-c853-45b9-acc1-e9828762cebd@p25g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> On May 10, 9:04 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
> > Andre Jute wrote:
>
> >http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/may08/may10news
>
> > >>> You will remember this as the incident when the (literal) sleeping
> > >>> policeman mowed down two cyclists on the other side of the road.
> > >>> Likely
> > >>> charge against the county deputy would be vehicular manslaughter.
> > >> That would seem the appropriate charge. He is likely not a
> > >> premeditated type candidate.
> > > The two years mentioned elsewhere in this thread as a likely sentence
> > > seems to me low for a case where someone by negligently going to sleep
> > > behind the wheel killed two people and injured another. Would the
> > > sentence be per death and injury, and run consecutively?
> > > And now we're told by Ryan, presumably from experience, that the
> > > sombambulist driver -- a policeman no less! -- is not likely to serve
> > > any time...
> > > Looks to me like a cyclist's life is held pretty cheap.
>
> > Such comments don't help the relationship between bicyclists and
> > police in which we hope to ride. The reason a harsh sentence may not
> > be given the driver is that major fault lies with supervisors and
> > policy they enforce. Documented and reviewed is that these officers
> > serve consecutive 12-hour shifts. If this were Abu Ghraib or
> > Guantanamo, supervisory culpability would not be considered, but we
> > are a bit more civilized in Santa Clara County than that.
>
> > Jobst Brandt
>
> I wasn't aware that the RBT charter limits comments to those "helpful"
> in Santa Clara County politics.
>
> I certaintly hope no one in the families and other loved ones of the
> dead and injured cyclists families reads your cynical attitude to
> their loss.
>
> Nor was I calling for "harsh" sentences. I was observing that a two
> year sentence for a negligent murder, if served, would be lenient. A
> suspended sentence doesn't even qualify as a slap on the wrist.
>
> Nor am I impressed with your attempt to blame the supervisors. The
> policeman who killed those drivers should take responsibility for his
> actions; he could have slept in the stationhouse until he was fit to
> drive.
>
> If this policeman's superiors are culpable, they should be in the dock
> with him under criminal charges. And we would like to hear from the
> politicians, apparently your pals, that disciplinary action is taken
> against them for their poor judgement.
>
> There was a time when a policeman was held to a higher standard than
> the other criminals on American streets.
>
> Two innocent men are dead, and you, Jobst Brandt, want to play
> politics. That's contemptible.
>
> What's more, if cyclists trade away the lives of two of their own for
> no greater gain than the vague wishful nothingness of "the
> relationship between bicyclists and police in which we hope to ride",
> you will be seen as weak and powerless and treated with the contempt
> you deserve. You don't earn respect by snivelling and selling out.
>
> Andre Jute
> Disappointed

 

[Andre Jute]

On May 11, 8:35 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> > You don't have to pass the AP english comprehension exam to recognize
> > that Jobst was pointing out that blame might lie in multiple places,
> > not just with the police officer who ran the cyclists down.
>
> Speaking of English comprehension, Jobst should get a year just for this:
> "Such comments don't help the relationship between bicyclists and police in
> which we hope to ride."

From Germany out came the Syntax of Jobst to the Police to relate.
It's perfectly good English, hardly even awkward if one remembers that
English is a Teutonic language...

Andre Jute
Cyclist

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<[email protected]>,
Andre Jute <[email protected]> wrote:

> On May 11, 1:29 am, Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In article
> > <c0eb793e-c853-45b9-acc1-e9828762c...@p25g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> >  Andre Jute <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Nor was I calling for "harsh" sentences. I was observing that a two
> > > year sentence for a negligent murder, if served, would be lenient. A
> > > suspended sentence doesn't even qualify as a slap on the wrist.
> >
> > It would if you had to serve it. Do you know how many rights
> > you have to sign away when you serve a supervised probation?
> > For instance, police may enter your residence without a warrant.
>
> Hasn't it penetrated your thick skull that by neligently running over
> these two cyclists who did him no harm and killing them, this sleeping
> policeman took away all their rights, forever?

You change the subject. I address your assessment of
the relative severity of supervised probation.

--
Michael Press

 

[Andre Jute]

On May 13, 12:55 am, Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
>  Andre Jute <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 11, 1:29 am, Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <c0eb793e-c853-45b9-acc1-e9828762c...@p25g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> > >  Andre Jute <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Nor was I calling for "harsh" sentences. I was observing that a two
> > > > year sentence for a negligent murder, if served, would be lenient. A
> > > > suspended sentence doesn't even qualify as a slap on the wrist.
>
> > > It would if you had to serve it. Do you know how many rights
> > > you have to sign away when you serve a supervised probation?
> > > For instance, police may enter your residence without a warrant.
>
> > Hasn't it penetrated your thick skull that by neligently running over
> > these two cyclists who did him no harm and killing them, this sleeping
> > policeman took away all their rights, forever?
>
> You change the subject. I address your assessment of
> the relative severity of supervised probation.
>
> --
> Michael Press

I never know if you are a malicious troll or merely terrifying stupid,
Michael. Today you appear to be only a debating trade merchant, a
kindergarten polemicist begging to be congratulated on his cleverness
in retreating to the narrowest literality used as a diversion. It's
not clever when you're appearing before an intelligent audience. When
you grow up you will discover that what matters is not the cleverness
of your points but their substance.

You're the one who introduced supervised probation. I am speaking
about a specific case with a specific culprit and specific victims,
and expressing outrage at a suggestion that in this specific case
there will not be a custodial sentence, and at the appeasers of the
police "force" finding reasons to justify what is clearly an
injustice. Whatever is in the place of a jail sentence will not be
enough, despite your disingenuous apologia.

I repeat, the sleeping policemen negligently took away all the rights
of the two cyclists he killed, forever. He should be held responsible,
and not sent away with a slap on the wrist because the local cycle-
pols contemptibly consider that justice "doesn't help the relationship
between bicyclists and police in which we hope to ride".

You may have the last word; your limp apologia won't persuade me of
anything and I've made my point already.

Andre Jute
Disgusted

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<7b2b8142-d70e-40c2-8dec-d943b2bffe65@j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
Andre Jute <[email protected]> wrote:

> On May 13, 12:55 am, Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In article
> > <[email protected]>,
> >  Andre Jute <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On May 11, 1:29 am, Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <c0eb793e-c853-45b9-acc1-e9828762c...@p25g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> > > >  Andre Jute <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Nor was I calling for "harsh" sentences. I was observing that a two
> > > > > year sentence for a negligent murder, if served, would be lenient. A
> > > > > suspended sentence doesn't even qualify as a slap on the wrist.
> >
> > > > It would if you had to serve it. Do you know how many rights
> > > > you have to sign away when you serve a supervised probation?
> > > > For instance, police may enter your residence without a warrant.
> >
> > > Hasn't it penetrated your thick skull that by neligently running over
> > > these two cyclists who did him no harm and killing them, this sleeping
> > > policeman took away all their rights, forever?
> >
> > You change the subject. I address your assessment of
> > the relative severity of supervised probation.
>
> I never know if you are a malicious troll or merely terrifying stupid,
> Michael. Today you appear to be only a debating trade merchant, a
> kindergarten polemicist begging to be congratulated on his cleverness
> in retreating to the narrowest literality used as a diversion. It's
> not clever when you're appearing before an intelligent audience. When
> you grow up you will discover that what matters is not the cleverness
> of your points but their substance.
>
> You're the one who introduced supervised probation.

No, you introduced supervised probation,
calling it "a slap on the wrist."

--
Michael Press

 

[Robert Chung]

On May 9, 5:41 pm, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/may08/may10news
>
> You will remember this as the incident when the (literal) sleeping
> policeman mowed down two cyclists on the other side of the road. Likely
> charge against the county deputy would be vehicular manslaughter.

Charges filed today:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/19/BAIL11CBFJ.DTL&tsp=1

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article
<55fde9f7-ac11-4b7f-9fd4-ec54c9a7d843@s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:

> On May 9, 5:41 pm, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> > http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/may08/may10news
> >
> > You will remember this as the incident when the (literal) sleeping
> > policeman mowed down two cyclists on the other side of the road. Likely
> > charge against the county deputy would be vehicular manslaughter.
>
> Charges filed today:
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/19/BAIL11CBFJ.DTL&tsp
=1

"Misdemeanor manslaughter"?

I'm still a bit torn by the nature of this whole case. But I am now
newly introduced to the idea that you can kill two people through a
criminally negligent act, but it's not a big crime.

I know, I know, misdemeanor versus felony in the US is mostly a
distinction in the jail sentence length, and I don't think it was ever
likely they were going to throw this guy in jail for more than a year,
but even reasonable incongruities often pique my fancy.

And of course, the victims, regardless of subsequent outcomes, remain
dead.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

On Jun 20, 1:51 am, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article
> <55fde9f7-ac11-4b7f-9fd4-ec54c9a7d...@s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
>  Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On May 9, 5:41 pm, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/may08/may10news
>
> > > You will remember this as the incident when the (literal) sleeping
> > > policeman mowed down two cyclists on the other side of the road. Likely
> > > charge against the county deputy would be vehicular manslaughter.
>
> > Charges filed today:
> >http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/19/BAIL11CBF....
>
> =1
>
> "Misdemeanor manslaughter"?
>
> I'm still a bit torn by the nature of this whole case. But I am now
> newly introduced to the idea that you can kill two people through a
> criminally negligent act, but it's not a big crime.
>
> I know, I know, misdemeanor versus felony in the US is mostly a
> distinction in the jail sentence length, and I don't think it was ever
> likely they were going to throw this guy in jail for more than a year,
> but even reasonable incongruities often pique my fancy.
>
> And of course, the victims, regardless of subsequent outcomes, remain
> dead.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau [email protected]://www.wiredcola.com/
> "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

We had a teen here that fell asleep and killed a cyclist and he
received essentially no punishment at all. A fine, some probation. He
whined and cried about how sorry he was but.....proper punishment is
for punishing and to try to prevent some other stupid kid from doing
stupid things that result in an innocent getting hurt of killed. His
peers see this as an 'oh well, I'll get a good lawyer, no biggie'.

 

[still just me]

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 05:37:21 -0700 (PDT), Qui si parla Campagnolo
<[email protected]> wrote:

>We had a teen here that fell asleep and killed a cyclist and he
>received essentially no punishment at all. A fine, some probation. He
>whined and cried about how sorry he was but.....proper punishment is
>for punishing and to try to prevent some other stupid kid from doing
>stupid things that result in an innocent getting hurt of killed. His
>peers see this as an 'oh well, I'll get a good lawyer, no biggie'.

Well, I think the cop actually has a higher level of responsibility as
he's one duty, doing a job. That's a little different than some kid
driving home late and falling asleep - although the results no more
tragic.

However, even with motor vehicle to motor vehicle, I've rarely seen
auto related fatalities result in serious charges. It's almost always
"vehicular manslaughter" which rarely includes jail time. Whether it
should or not, I don't know. These cases are typically true
"accidents" and if there is no evidence of intent or outright
negligent behavior, then I think the lesser charge might be right.

Whether or not he or the department is negligent for the long shifts
officers in many other states are allowed and encouraged to work to
drive up their pay, that's another argument.

 

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 07:51:45 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]>
wrote:

>In article
><55fde9f7-ac11-4b7f-9fd4-ec54c9a7d843@s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On May 9, 5:41 pm, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/may08/may10news
>> >
>> > You will remember this as the incident when the (literal) sleeping
>> > policeman mowed down two cyclists on the other side of the road. Likely
>> > charge against the county deputy would be vehicular manslaughter.
>>
>> Charges filed today:
>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/19/BAIL11CBFJ.DTL&tsp
>=1
>
>"Misdemeanor manslaughter"?
>
>I'm still a bit torn by the nature of this whole case. But I am now
>newly introduced to the idea that you can kill two people through a
>criminally negligent act, but it's not a big crime.
>
>I know, I know, misdemeanor versus felony in the US is mostly a
>distinction in the jail sentence length, and I don't think it was ever
>likely they were going to throw this guy in jail for more than a year,
>but even reasonable incongruities often pique my fancy.
>
>And of course, the victims, regardless of subsequent outcomes, remain
>dead.

Dear Ryan,

It probably falls under Bierce's second category:

HOMICIDE, n. The slaying of one human being by another. There are
four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable, and
praiseworthy, but it makes no great difference to the person slain
whether he fell by one kind or another--the classification is for
advantage of the lawyers.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[Tom Kunich]

"Ryan Cousineau" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:rcousine-DE2700.00514220062008@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]...
> In article
> <55fde9f7-ac11-4b7f-9fd4-ec54c9a7d843@s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Charges filed today:
>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/19/BAIL11CBFJ.DTL&tsp=1
>
> "Misdemeanor manslaughter"?
>
> I'm still a bit torn by the nature of this whole case. But I am now
> newly introduced to the idea that you can kill two people through a
> criminally negligent act, but it's not a big crime.

It IS a big crime. But the important thing is this - he didn't have any
drugs or alcohol in his system. He fell asleep at the wheel. I'm certainly
not forgiving the asshole but the fact is that you can't really put a cop
behind bars unless he did something purposefully wrong.

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<508c68f4-1c4d-4d5f-a31e-1e886754765e@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
Qui si parla Campagnolo <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Jun 20, 1:51 am, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In article
> > <55fde9f7-ac11-4b7f-9fd4-ec54c9a7d...@s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> >  Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On May 9, 5:41 pm, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/may08/may10news
> >
> > > > You will remember this as the incident when the (literal) sleeping
> > > > policeman mowed down two cyclists on the other side of the road. Likely
> > > > charge against the county deputy would be vehicular manslaughter.
> >
> > > Charges filed today:
> > >http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/19/BAIL11CBF...
> >
> > =1
> >
> > "Misdemeanor manslaughter"?
> >
> > I'm still a bit torn by the nature of this whole case. But I am now
> > newly introduced to the idea that you can kill two people through a
> > criminally negligent act, but it's not a big crime.
> >
> > I know, I know, misdemeanor versus felony in the US is mostly a
> > distinction in the jail sentence length, and I don't think it was ever
> > likely they were going to throw this guy in jail for more than a year,
> > but even reasonable incongruities often pique my fancy.
> >
> > And of course, the victims, regardless of subsequent outcomes, remain
> > dead.
>
> We had a teen here that fell asleep and killed a cyclist and he
> received essentially no punishment at all. A fine, some probation. He
> whined and cried about how sorry he was but.....proper punishment is
> for punishing and to try to prevent some other stupid kid from doing
> stupid things that result in an innocent getting hurt of killed. His
> peers see this as an 'oh well, I'll get a good lawyer, no biggie'.

Mostly nobody is deterred by prospective punishment.
People are only deterred by meditating on the consequences
of their actions on their own well-being, and plenty of
people do not do that.

--
Michael Press

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

> "Ryan Cousineau" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:rcousine-DE2700.00514220062008@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]...
> > In article
> > <55fde9f7-ac11-4b7f-9fd4-ec54c9a7d843@s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> > Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Charges filed today:
> >> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/19/BAIL11C
> >> BFJ.DTL& tsp=1
> >
> > "Misdemeanor manslaughter"?
> >
> > I'm still a bit torn by the nature of this whole case. But I am now
> > newly introduced to the idea that you can kill two people through a
> > criminally negligent act, but it's not a big crime.
>
> It IS a big crime. But the important thing is this - he didn't have
> any drugs or alcohol in his system. He fell asleep at the wheel. I'm
> certainly not forgiving the asshole but the fact is that you can't
> really put a cop behind bars unless he did something purposefully
> wrong.

He got behind the wheel without adequate sleep. Not any different than
getting behind the wheel without adequate time since your last drink.

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

On Jun 20, 8:52 am, still just me <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 05:37:21 -0700 (PDT), Qui si parla Campagnolo
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >We had a teen here that fell asleep and killed a cyclist and he
> >received essentially no punishment at all. A fine, some probation. He
> >whined and cried about how sorry he was but.....proper punishment is
> >for punishing and to try to prevent some other stupid kid from doing
> >stupid things that result in an innocent getting hurt of killed. His
> >peers see this as an 'oh well, I'll get a good lawyer, no biggie'.
>
> Well, I think the cop actually has a higher level of responsibility as
> he's one duty, doing a job. That's a little different than some kid
> driving home late and falling asleep - although the results no more
> tragic.

Disagree. The 'level of responsibility' is to drive safely and not
cause an accident, period. Intent or job has nothing to do with it.
These were not 'accidents' in the sense they were both preventable and
were the result of negligence on the driver's part. A slap on the
wrist and assuming 'they feel bad' for a while is not punishment
enough.
>
> However, even with motor vehicle to motor vehicle, I've rarely seen
> auto related fatalities result in serious charges. It's almost always
> "vehicular manslaughter" which rarely includes jail time. Whether it
> should or not, I don't know. These cases are typically true
> "accidents" and if there is no evidence of intent or outright
> negligent behavior, then I think the lesser charge might be right.
>
> Whether or not he or the department is negligent for the long shifts
> officers in many other states are allowed and encouraged to work to
> drive up their pay, that's another argument.

 

[Tom Kunich]

"Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> He got behind the wheel without adequate sleep. Not any different than
> getting behind the wheel without adequate time since your last drink.

Tell me Tim. How do you know that?

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > He got behind the wheel without adequate sleep. Not any different
> > than getting behind the wheel without adequate time since your last
> > drink.
>
> Tell me Tim. How do you know that?

He fell asleep in the middle of the day while driving. Duh.

The other option is that he has narcolepsy, which means he should not be
driving at all unless the problem has been successfully treated. Equal
culpability.

In either case he is responsible for the consequences of his actions.

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article
<[email protected]>,
Qui si parla Campagnolo <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Jun 20, 8:52 am, still just me <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 05:37:21 -0700 (PDT), Qui si parla Campagnolo
> >
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >We had a teen here that fell asleep and killed a cyclist and he
> > >received essentially no punishment at all. A fine, some probation.
> > >He whined and cried about how sorry he was but.....proper
> > >punishment is for punishing and to try to prevent some other
> > >stupid kid from doing stupid things that result in an innocent
> > >getting hurt of killed. His peers see this as an 'oh well, I'll
> > >get a good lawyer, no biggie'.
> >
> > Well, I think the cop actually has a higher level of responsibility
> > as he's one duty, doing a job. That's a little different than some
> > kid driving home late and falling asleep - although the results no
> > more tragic.
>
> Disagree. The 'level of responsibility' is to drive safely and not
> cause an accident, period. Intent or job has nothing to do with it.
> These were not 'accidents' in the sense they were both preventable
> and were the result of negligence on the driver's part. A slap on the
> wrist and assuming 'they feel bad' for a while is not punishment
> enough.

I agree, Peter. That's a good summation.

> > However, even with motor vehicle to motor vehicle, I've rarely seen
> > auto related fatalities result in serious charges. It's almost
> > always "vehicular manslaughter" which rarely includes jail time.

That's because culturally death on the highways in "accidents" is
considered an acceptable loss. It's the price of progress and the
American Way. If you suggest that people should drive less, should live
closer to their jobs, should have goods and services within a short
distance of home, etc. then you are looked at as tantamount to the Red
Menace.

> > Whether it should or not, I don't know. These cases are typically
> > true "accidents" and if there is no evidence of intent or outright
> > negligent behavior, then I think the lesser charge might be right.
> >
> > Whether or not he or the department is negligent for the long
> > shifts officers in many other states are allowed and encouraged to
> > work to drive up their pay, that's another argument.

The research on job-related injuries makes it quite clear that shifts
longer than 8 hours result in increased injuries, shifts with less than
a full night's sleep between them result in increased injuries, and late
shifts result in increased injuries.

 

[Tom Kunich]

"Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> Qui si parla Campagnolo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 20, 8:52 am, still just me <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 05:37:21 -0700 (PDT), Qui si parla Campagnolo
>> >
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >We had a teen here that fell asleep and killed a cyclist and he
>> > >received essentially no punishment at all. A fine, some probation.
>> > >He whined and cried about how sorry he was but.....proper
>> > >punishment is for punishing and to try to prevent some other
>> > >stupid kid from doing stupid things that result in an innocent
>> > >getting hurt of killed. His peers see this as an 'oh well, I'll
>> > >get a good lawyer, no biggie'.
>> >
>> > Well, I think the cop actually has a higher level of responsibility
>> > as he's one duty, doing a job. That's a little different than some
>> > kid driving home late and falling asleep - although the results no
>> > more tragic.
>>
>> Disagree. The 'level of responsibility' is to drive safely and not
>> cause an accident, period. Intent or job has nothing to do with it.
>> These were not 'accidents' in the sense they were both preventable
>> and were the result of negligence on the driver's part. A slap on the
>> wrist and assuming 'they feel bad' for a while is not punishment
>> enough.
>
> I agree, Peter. That's a good summation.

Except you can't put a cop in with other criminals. That would be signing
his death warrant or even worse. That means that in the case of a cop you're
pretty much forced to go very lightly with him unless the crime he's
committed is overwhelmingly careless or purposeful.

> That's because culturally death on the highways in "accidents" is
> considered an acceptable loss. It's the price of progress and the
> American Way. If you suggest that people should drive less, should live
> closer to their jobs, should have goods and services within a short
> distance of home, etc. then you are looked at as tantamount to the Red
> Menace.

Come on - that's easy to say and you know it isn't true. People more or less
ignore highway deaths mainly because it doesn't seem real to them. Think
about this - highway deaths are seldom reported directly whereas every night
on TV you can see two dozen people murdered in cold blood. That tends to
make people treat highway deaths as not quite real.

> The research on job-related injuries makes it quite clear that shifts
> longer than 8 hours result in increased injuries, shifts with less than
> a full night's sleep between them result in increased injuries, and late
> shifts result in increased injuries.

Do you have a reference for such a study?

 

[duh]

On Jun 21, 11:51 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> Except you can't put a cop in with other criminals. That would be signing
> his death warrant or even worse. That means that in the case of a cop you're
> pretty much forced to go very lightly with him unless the crime he's
> committed is overwhelmingly careless or purposeful.
>

I believe that is what Club Fed is for.