Quebec Woman Guilty - Saves Ducks, Two People Dead

Hal 9000 · July 14, 2014

We all agree that she was negligent, we all know that this negligence resulted in 2 deaths...so, the only thing really in dispute is wether criminal negligence causing death is actually punishable - I can't believe that so many people think that such a crime should be dealt with by giving out a fine or simply nothing at all.

Boges · July 14, 2014

We all agree that she was negligent, we all know that this negligence resulted in 2 deaths...so, the only thing really in dispute is wether criminal negligence causing death is actually punishable - I can't believe that so many people think that such a crime should be dealt with by giving out a fine or simply nothing at all.

I haven't been arguing this. If that's what the law says then fine. But I think that the MC driver would have shared in the blame had he lived.

Round and round this argument goes.

jacee · July 14, 2014

I haven't been arguing this. If that's what the law says then fine. But I think that the MC driver would have shared in the blame had he lived.

Round and round this argument goes.

Round and round go you and smallc.

But the court is finished: Guilty on all counts.

.

Edited July 14, 2014 by jacee

Smallc · July 14, 2014

We're not allowed to question court decisions now?

DFCaper · July 14, 2014

I haven't been arguing this. If that's what the law says then fine. But I think that the MC driver would have shared in the blame had he lived.

Round and round this argument goes.

I agree that the MC driver should bear some of the blame. If he was alive, he should be facing charges as well for the death of the little girl.

Anything less than 2 year in prison is an injustice to the life of the little girl.

jacee · July 14, 2014

We're not allowed to question court decisions now?

Do you have all the evidence ?

Were you in court?

Have you even read the decision?

You can question anything you want, but if you do it in ignorance of the facts, you don't have much credibility.

.

cybercoma · July 14, 2014

This thread needs to die.

But something else dawned on me driving a fair distance this weekend. Even if she didn't put her four-ways on, wouldn't her break light still have been on? Unless she took the keys out and turned the car completely off, which would have been completely daft.

Was she in the car when he hit her?

Smallc · July 14, 2014

Do you have all the evidence ?

Were you in court?

.

Ahh so I can't talk unless I was there. That will shut down this forum pretty fast.

cybercoma · July 14, 2014

Sure. You can talk about it. But when you say he could have avoided her, but the court says he couldn't have, you ought to have some compelling reason to say so. Otherwise, you just look foolish.

Smallc · July 14, 2014

I know he could have avoided her. It's not even a question. The way provincial HTAs work is this - you have a responsibility to follow the rules of the road, and if you don't, you bear responsibility. He was driving too fast and too close. She created the hazard and he hit it. Each holds blame for their part in the incident. This will be my last post in this circular thread.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Smallc

GostHacked · July 14, 2014

I think we have to let it slowly peter out, move over to the slow lane and park on the shoulder.

If it was stopped abruptly in the fast lane where it seems to be at the moment it may cause another thread to pile into it and injure some unsuspecting posters.

Best comment of the thread so far.

jacee · July 14, 2014

Ahh so I can't talk unless I was there. That will shut down this forum pretty fast.

Or ... you could read and learn the facts instead of speculating and jumping to conclusions.

.

Smallc · July 14, 2014

You asked if I was in court. I can't have been in court by reading.

I have all the necessary evidence to make a conclusion based on more than a year of training in incident theory, and a pretty vast knowledge of various HTAs.

guyser · July 15, 2014

I know he could have avoided her. It's not even a question. The way provincial HTAs work is this - you have a responsibility to follow the rules of the road, and I'd you don't, you bear responsibility. He was driving too fast and too close. She created the hazard and he hit it. Each holds blame for their part in the incident. This will be my last post in this circular thread.

Dead

Spot

On.

Boges · July 15, 2014

Some of you might find this development rage inducing.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Online+petition+seeks+leniency+duck+saving+driver+Emma+Czornobaj/10031277/story.html?__federated=1

MONTREAL – An online petition asking for leniency for Emma Czornobaj, who was found guilty of criminal negligence causing death in a highway crash, has collected more than 7,200 signatures.

“Some people agree with Ms. Czornobaj’s gesture and some disagree; either way I hope most people will agree that sending this young woman to jail is too much,” said the author of the petition on the websitechange.org, whose username is DJ Xfile. The petition is addressed to Quebec Justice Minister Stéphanie Vallée.

Another petition on the same website to acquit Czornobaj has gathered fewer than 100 signatures.

On June 27, 2010, Czornobaj stopped her Honda Civic in the left-hand lane of Highway 30 in Candiac to help a family of seven ducklings out of harm’s way. Seconds later, a Harley-Davidson motorcycle – driven by André Roy, 50, and carrying his 16-old daughter Jessie – crashed into the back of the car. Both died in the collision.

Smallc · July 15, 2014

Dead

Spot

On.

I just realized I posted again...oops

jacee · July 15, 2014

Some of you might find this development rage inducing.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Online+petition+seeks+leniency+duck+saving+driver+Emma+Czornobaj/10031277/story.html?__federated=1

Predictable. I expect her sentencing will appear lenient compared to the 78 year maximum for her convictions.

.

Hal 9000 · July 16, 2014

She's gonna get leniency, no one disputes that. It's a matter of how lenient the judge will be. In the cases that i've seen, the criminals tend to get about 4 years, some up to 7 years. In my opinion, what this woman did was in line with those getting the 4 year sentence. I would think that is adequate...maybe tack on one more year for basic lack of remorse or empathy.

As for an acquittal, I think thats just stupid. A jury of 12 people convicted her after hearing all the evidence, and for a judge to overturn their decision would render our entire legal system a joke.

guyser · July 16, 2014

As for an acquittal, I think thats just stupid. A jury of 12 people convicted her after hearing all the evidence, and for a judge to overturn their decision would render our entire legal system a joke.

Render it a joke?

Oh I doubt that , in fact its pretty ludicrous to suggest it.

I would hope for an appeal and the whole thing be overturned. IME she should have been charged with a much lower offence.

Hal 9000 · July 16, 2014

Render it a joke?

Oh I doubt that , in fact its pretty ludicrous to suggest it.

I would hope for an appeal and the whole thing be overturned. IME she should have been charged with a much lower offence.

So, you don't believe in the jury system?

Boges · July 16, 2014

So, you don't believe in the jury system?

Signed,

The OJ Simpson Jury

guyser · July 16, 2014

So, you don't believe in the jury system?

No idea what point you are trying to make or cover for such a suggestion.

One case does not make an entire legal system.

guyser · July 16, 2014

Signed,

The OJ Simpson Jury

Actually I find this a vary salient post.

We know OJ did it, we also know his lawyers were very good and got the benefit of the doubt. If Marsha and whathisname were better prosecutors then that travesty would not have occurred.

Maybe our QC woman had lousy lawyers. Either way, I hope saner heads (IME) prevail

jbg · July 16, 2014

So, you don't believe in the jury system?

It is common for judges to vacate a jury verdict and acquit a defendant. When a judge believes the evidence is weak, in this country, he'll frequently take that tack to preserve the State's (in your country the Crown's) right to appeal. Double jeopardy would otherwise prevent re-charging.

jbg · July 16, 2014

We know OJ did it, we also know his lawyers were very good and got the benefit of the doubt. If Marsha and whathisname were better prosecutors then that travesty would not have occurred.

I happen to think OJ did not do it.