Quebec Woman Guilty - Saves Ducks, Two People Dead

jacee · 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.

Gee ... maybe she should have taken the plea bargain ... but she didn't think she did anything wrong. :rolleyes:

And this statement on change.org I find ludicrous:

Ms. Czornobaj was acting as a kind-hearted, compassionate person -- Please - Be kind & compassionate to her!

"compassionate" ? ... How was she compassionate to the other people on the road?

It's pure luck that more people weren't killed!

The SUV pulling a trailer had to swerve abruptly with no time to even check whether there was someone in the next lane. If there had been ... it could have been much worse.

There were children, maybe babies, Moms and Dads, Grandmas and Grandpas in those vehicles.

What compassion?!?!

I doubt very much it will all be overturned on appeal. She'll get some jail time ... because without any remorse, she'll go out and do it again. And I'm beginning to worry that there's a lot of people who think she didn't do anything wrong and might do the same thing.

Would you do what she did, guyser?

.

Edited July 16, 2014 by jacee

jacee · September 20, 2014

She's getting off light:

http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/mobile/prosecutor-seeks-9-months-for-duck-stop-driver-1.2016152

A prosecutor is calling for a nine-month prison sentence as well as 240 hours of community work and a five-year ban on driving for Emma Czornobaj, who was convicted of Criminal Negligence Causing Death and Dangerous Driving Causing Death in June.

Czornobaj's lawyer argued, however, that she should only serve 240 hours of community service as punishment for an incident which saw two people die after Czornobaj stopped her car in the left lane of a busy roadway on the South Shore in order to help ducks.

A father and daughter died after the motorcycle they were on collided with the stationary vehicle.

The woman whose husband and daughter died in the accident spoke in court about her loss and accused Czornobaj of lacking remorse.

Big Guy · December 7, 2014

Deja Vu all over again.

A young lady is driving on a highway. She spots somebody throwing something (furry) out the car window in front of her. She "pulled over just before the Gardiner Expressway and carefully got out of her car, walking along the shoulder of the highway as cars whizzed by. Halfway towards the animal, she realized what it was a kitten... Seeing a break in traffic, she straddled the line and waved at the oncoming cars to get them to slow down. She quickly scooped up the tiny animal and brought it back to her car."

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/12/06/kitten_rescued_from_highway_427_after_being_thrown_from_a_vehicle.html#

Should this lady get a medal for saving the kitten or a citation for endangering lives?

December 7, 2014

It looks like she took some care over her actions and really didn't endanger anybody.

Love to see the original owner thrown in jail though.

Big Guy · December 18, 2014

Update on that Quebec lady who stopped on a highway to help some ducks and caused motorcycle death (can't find the original post);

She was sentenced to 90 days and 240 hrs of community service

Edited December 18, 2014 by Big Guy

Boges · December 18, 2014

She'll get 90 Days or less.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/12/18/quebec-woman-who-caused-deadly-crash-while-helping-duck-on-a-highway-gets-90-days-jail-240-hours-community-service/

cybercoma · December 18, 2014

She'll get 90 Days or less.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/12/18/quebec-woman-who-caused-deadly-crash-while-helping-duck-on-a-highway-gets-90-days-jail-240-hours-community-service/

She won't get less because she's serving her time on the weekends. She'll end up serving exactly 90 days, less any time she spent in prison after being arrested and awaiting trial.

cybercoma · December 18, 2014

This is already being discussed here: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/23720-quebec-woman-guilty-saves-ducks-two-people-dead/page-31

You should search the forum before starting new posts, especially on old topics with updated information such as this.

guyser · December 22, 2014

Too harsh.

No vicarious/contributory liabilty to the other driver(s).

Too bad.

The_Squid · December 22, 2014

I agree... too harsh.

cybercoma · December 22, 2014

Too harsh.

No vicarious/contributory liabilty to the other driver(s).

Too bad.

Because he's not liable for her actions which directly caused his death. Had she not parked her car in the passing lane, something anyone with even a modicum of intelligence knows is insanely dangerous, he would still be alive, even with all else being equal.

Edited December 22, 2014 by cybercoma

Smallc · December 22, 2014

And had he been following the rules of the road...and over and over again.

jacee · December 22, 2014

Too harsh.

No vicarious/contributory liabilty to the other driver(s).

Too bad.

I'm pretty sure the sentence would have been harsher had not other conditions been considered.

.

guyser · December 23, 2014

Because he's not liable for her actions which directly caused his death.

Sure he is, everyone is responsible for their actions. He was speeding and not paying attention.

Its that simple.

Had she not parked her car in the passing lane, something anyone with even a modicum of intelligence knows is insanely dangerous, he would still be alive, even with all else being equal.

Yes, she did a stupid thing and will serve time for it, which I think is too harsh. She should not be without blame of course.

And as easily as I turn this phrase of yours around we get....Had he not been speeding and failing to keep a proper lookout, he would be alive as would his daughter.

I have no cause to revisit this ad naseum, I know where you stand on this, and thats ok, but in my job I see some of these things hundreds of times over the years and never seen this result.

And ponder this, lots of things have flown off vehicles/trucks and one can easily surmise that they 'should have known the result would be debris on the road' and people have run into said debris. Ive never seen anyone charged criminally for the same actions.

jbg · December 25, 2014

Deja Vu all over again.

Should this lady get a medal for saving the kitten or a citation for endangering lives?

Fortunately it ended well but she took a risk. One must not prefer animal over human lives.

jbg · December 25, 2014

I'm pretty sure the sentence would have been harsher had not other conditions been considered.

.

I felt she deserved to face charges. But should they be for a willful crime? I'm not so sure.

Big Guy · December 25, 2014

I believe that the intent of our sentencing system is for rehabilitation and maintaining social order. Fortunately, it is not supposed to be punitive. As to the rehabilitative aspect of her sentence, I do not think that she will repeat that mistake.

Some kind of incarceration was required as a message that a mistake that can lead to the death of others cannot be excused outright as just an error. The publicity the case garnered worked to send a message to others about the danger of stopping on a highway. The law of the land was upheld and social order was not disrupted.

I believe the sentence reflected the event.

Boges · May 21, 2015

Hey it happened in Ottawa, no one died though.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/05/20/woman-halts-ottawa-rush-hour-traffic-to-save-ducks

Commuters had a close encounter with some feathered friends during Wednesday's morning rush hour, but one woman may have gotten a little too close for comfort.

A dashcam video captured by a Sun reader and posted to YouTube shows traffic grinding to a halt on the eastbound lanes of the highway around 9:15 a.m. as cars suddenly merge to avoid hitting a vehicle parked in the fast lane.

The video then shows a woman on the other side of the median, with her back to the cars speeding past her, carrying a cardboard box.

GostHacked · May 21, 2015

And had he been following the rules of the road...and over and over again.

Like you follow the rules of the road all the time.

Smallc · May 21, 2015

Like you follow the rules of the road all the time.

I don't. If I have an accident I'm at fault then (or at least partially, considering all circumstances).

cybercoma · May 21, 2015

Still arguing the guy was at fault even though the negligence causing death finding by definition states that it's her fault, eh?

Smallc · May 21, 2015

Still arguing the guy was at fault even though the negligence causing death finding by definition states that it's her fault, eh?

I didn't realize that we're to consider courts infallible and never discuss their findings.

Boges · May 21, 2015

Her being guilty of being reckless doesn't absolve him from not paying attention to what's ahead of him on the road.

Smallc · May 21, 2015

Her being guilty of being reckless doesn't absolve him from not paying attention to what's ahead of him on the road.

Eaxctly. Both parties were somewhat guilty. That's what really surprised me about the ruling - the lack of recognition that speeding and reckless driving played.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Smallc

cybercoma · May 21, 2015

Her being guilty of being reckless doesn't absolve him from not paying attention to what's ahead of him on the road.

She wasn't reckless. She was negligent. By definition it was her negligence that caused his death. That's what the hearing of all the facts determined, not a bunch of know-it-alls on the internet.