Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: UPDATE: NOT GUILTY even with a .09 BAC and drugs; Re: Update---Scum of the earth- motorcycle/car kills cyclist [jxj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jxj wrote:
gregl wrote:
I suggest reading the jury foreman's response linked in a previous post. The jury did no know about all the previous DWI convictions since they were deemed inadmissable as evidence. The prosecutor also did not make a good case for the possible effects of the drugs in the motorcyclist's system. While I agree the defendants got off too lightly, it appears the prosecutor presented the cases poorly.


I don't know the justice system but is there rany chance for a re-trial? Justice is clearly not served.

Usually, only the defendant can appeal in a criminal case. At this point, the family of the victim could try to start a civil case, although I'm not sure what they would base it on to be most effective.

Travis Rassat
Vector Cycle Works
Noblesville, IN
BikeFit Instructor | FMS | F.I.S.T. | IBFI
Toughman Triathlon Series Ambassador
Quote Reply
Re: UPDATE: NOT GUILTY even with a .09 BAC and drugs; Re: Update---Scum of the earth- motorcycle/car kills cyclist [SurfingLamb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I live in Rochester and how you could not know anything about these two or any of the "evidence" that wasn't allowed in court (prior DWIs, etc) is beyond me. You'd have to be living under an F-ing rock to not have heard any of that stuff. I know the jury has to be fair and not bring in prior knowledge or be impacted by things they hear outside of the court room, but to believe that they didn't know that stuff is difficult. It appears the prosecution didn't do a good enough job and clearly the system is insanely flawed to allow these two to essentially walk.

I was on my bike the day this happened and rode by the scene about ten minutes after it happened when all the first responders had arrived. It definitely makes you think and wonder what you can do to make yourself safer. At the end of the day though, you can really only do so much. We put ourselves out there and have to hope that people are paying attention. Ride as safely as you can and hope that most drivers aren't like these two.

_____________________________________________________
Instagram | Team Kiwami North America
Quote Reply
Re: UPDATE: NOT GUILTY even with a .09 BAC and drugs; Re: Update---Scum of the earth- motorcycle/car kills cyclist [Sbradley11] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sbradley11 wrote:
At the end of the day though, you can really only do so much. We put ourselves out there and have to hope that people are paying attention. Ride as safely as you can and hope that most drivers aren't like these two.


Yes we do. And the fact that I ride with no fear ever is a testament to the life of the fallen....who were in their rights to ride where they were - and if nothing more, died doing what they love. I could only hope for as much.

Prayers for the fallen - tears for the families and malice for the offenders (who also happen to have families).



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGRNHiMN9ZI
Quote Reply
Re: UPDATE: NOT GUILTY even with a .09 BAC and drugs; Re: Update---Scum of the earth- motorcycle/car kills cyclist [p2k2001] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
p2k2001 wrote:
Here is a good summary of the issues the jury dealt with. http://www.13wham.com/...Uhk2O-D-EMCt8uQ.cspx

Reading through that article makes me frustrated.
Direct quote from that link:

Here's what the jury was confused about: They were going to convict Mark Scerbo of reckless driving and of DWI, but they weren't sure about the most serious charge, aggravated vehicular homicide. They asked the judge to explain what the distinction was between manslaughter (that Scerbo was ultimately convicted of) and aggravated vehicular homicide. The distinction was rather simple: if a driver on a public roadway causes a death, and that driver is reckless, AND the reckless driving is a result of being intoxicated, then the driver has committed aggravated vehicular homicide.

Seems like the jury had their decision made for them, right? After all, they found Scerbo guilty of being intoxicated, and of being reckless. And Scerbo was on a public roadway, and caused a death.

But the jury decided that while Scerbo was reckless, he wasn't reckless BECAUSE he was intoxicated. In closing, Scerbo's attorney Liz Riley argued that maybe Scerbo drove recklessly because he was just a rash 22-year-old, not because he was intoxicated. Maybe he was reckless on a regular basis. Inside the jury room, it seemed that was enough.
Quote Reply
Re: UPDATE: NOT GUILTY even with a .09 BAC and drugs; Re: Update---Scum of the earth- motorcycle/car kills cyclist [heliix] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The jury I think sounded too analytical. The defense arguments seem weak to me but reading between the lines it sounds like the prosecutor did a poor job. The fact that no one on the jury had heard of bath salts seems incredulous to me. There have been bath salt articles in the local paper just about weekly during the last year, not to mention those dudes that were eating people's faces (in Florida ?) being blamed on bath salts got alot of coverage. So much bath salt coverage lately that it is a bit of a running joke, at least in my household. That the jury discounted all bath salt testimony because there were no "clinical trials" is ridiculous.


_______________________________________________
you know my name, look up my number
_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: UPDATE: NOT GUILTY even with a .09 BAC and drugs; Re: Update---Scum of the earth- motorcycle/car kills cyclist [tcrzero] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just to finish the circle on this- here is the article about what went down on sentencing day.
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...el-scerbo-sentencing
Quote Reply
Re: UPDATE: NOT GUILTY even with a .09 BAC and drugs; Re: Update---Scum of the earth- motorcycle/car kills cyclist [p2k2001] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Apparently, this story isn't over.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...-new-trial/97756336/

Sometimes, I really hate our legal system. A guy who was drunk and driving recklessly while on a suspended license gets a new trial because he may have been, "wrongly denied the opportunity to challenge a juror he did not want impaneled during his trial". I'm sickened by the idea that there's even a chance he may get off.






Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: UPDATE: NOT GUILTY even with a .09 BAC and drugs; Re: Update---Scum of the earth- motorcycle/car kills cyclist [Tri-Banter] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
disgusting.

In Australia we have a new law that means a drunk driver is automatically responsible for traffic accidents they are involved in, irrespective of who is to blame. It came about when a drunk driver hit and killed a young girl on her bike, it was her fault, she rode out in front of him, but perhaps if he wasn't drunk he could have stopped in time. He wasn't convicted of anything other than DUI, but if it happened now he'd be off to jail.
Quote Reply

Prev Next