Horrible logic.

Driving safe isn't difficult. People on the road these days just have a reckless disregard for the safety of others. It is unacceptable.

Most accidents are caused by people simply being to trifling lazy to turn their head and check their blind spot, or people trying to go +20 mph over the speed limit in congested traffic. If you honk at these people, they will flip you the bird and speed off. But then they cause an accident that takes someone's life, and it is "oh, pity me, it could happen to anyone." Well, no, it couldn't happen to anyone. It can only happen to those who are grossly negligent. As such, you deserve to do HARD TIME.

You act as if "not paying attention" while operating a +1 ton amalgamation of metal which is hurdling across the earth at +70 mph ought to be an accepted norm. It is this attitude that gets people killed.

 

I don't know all the details of this (or any other) accident.
Prior record, behavior and attitude should contribute to sentences. 18 years is a stiff sentence but could be justified.
How much money a person has should not make a difference, but obviously does.

 

I must have skimmed past that the first time.

NOW, I see why she got the asinine sentence.
Had the off-duty LEO been driving the car, it would have been probation.



The world we live in.

 

Dam sure can't be compared to pulling an O.J.,......WTF.

 

Maybe it is a stiff sentence, but two people won't ever be going home. Accidents are one thing, but driving wildly at 87 MPH is completely avoidable. 9 years per fatality is a bargain for her.

 

3 people won't be going home to their children.

 

amen.

No offense, but I think your sympathy for the perp is misplaced ed

 

I don't think she will either. With time off for good behavior, she may do as little as 1/2 her sentence, and she will be eligible for parole before that.

It is important to remember that she also had her two children and brother in the car, endangering them as well. One of the bikers who was killed had two small children who will grow up without their dad now.

I don't understand the sympathy for this woman. I think her sentence is about right.

 

If you are saying you NEVER are distracted ever while driving...you're living in denial...it happens to all....whether it be fumbling with the radio or going back through the day at work in your head or thinking about what you need to do when you get home. Even if you do know where your radio is and don't need to look...you are still distracted enough to veer and cause a series of events that can lead to collision. Short of the blatant breaking laws like passing on the right....we are all susceptible to accidents while driving.

 

I understand you Shu and no offense taken.

We are just trading personal opinions here.


The sympathy comes from watching evil minded horrible people get light sentences. Our streets are full of them in every large city.

Some more sympathy grew out of finding out that having a LEO involved makes the Judge biased. A victim is a victim. What he does for a living should have zero effect on the sentencing.

What do you think the sentence would have been had the LEO been driving the same car? Never would have made the press.

5 - 6 years would have been more appropriate. That seems to be the upper end of the average sentence given in these cases.
(notice that I didn't suggest letting her go free?)

The "scales of justice" are supposed to be balanced.

This wasn't punishment,... this was revenge!





.