STORM2K

i realize he is old and sick, but according to the judge and victims he has not taken responsibility for the carnage, asked forgiveness, nor apologized. i feel jail time would be justified

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-ex ... -headlines

does he even know what happened? People that old tend to not even remember what happened 10 minutes earlier, much less 3 years ago (I know from my great-grandmother, who with Alzheimer's has about as much memory as Saddam had tactical sense)

I agree Derek. I do not feel he should go to jail. We do not know if he apologized or not.

my grandmother could remember things from like 30 yeras ago or so
but ask her something from like 10 mins ago and she would be lost
Alzheimer's is such a sad illness

the judge himself said he hadnt apolgized or taken responsibility. further, he apparently did remember that he mistook the accelerator for the brake. so he did remember what happened

ome other point. the elderly dont want to be discriminated against. that also means they shouldnt get favorable treatment because of age

Well as unfortunate as this is the real action should be that all seniors should be tested for driving and held to a higher standard. Get around the course or parked 3 times slower or with the limit on errors should reconsidered to even be driving.. Alzheimer's is a terrible thing and yet many of those people do get into cars and all of a sudden are lost. Granted most of this occurs in early stages and most have sense to decide not to drive. No doubt we have to many out there in denial and trying to be young but are clearly a hazard waiting to happen. I know it's tough when they of sound mind but it takes more than a brain and reaction time is just no there. I would have no problem with a federal law on this issue. Down here in snowbird retirement land it is a scary thing and I read about old folks pulling out in front of somebody all the time in rural areas as well. We have age limits for the young same should be for the old. The testing system is not strong enough. imo

Yeah it sucks he is lacking remorse.. sounds senile to me..hence no jail.

Sometimes the elderly know -- at some level of self-awareness -- that they shouldn't be driving anymore. But they ignore that instinct and continue driving in order to maintain their independence. I'm very much in favor of more frequent drivers' tests for older people, as well as those who may have gradual impairment due to illness or injury. And nope, I won't hazard an opinion on a specific or even general age to begin such testing. If folks were more responsible, this "pedal error" incident would be much more rare.

At 51, I acknowledge that my night vision is not what it ought to be. So I purposely do NOT drive at night. Nor do I drive in snow, ice, or tropical systems. I don't even LIKE to drive!

Im not sure what to do with him. Justice demands that he be put in jail. He killed people. He didnt write a bad check or forget to pay a parking ticket. At the minimum he should be confined to a nursing home.

I understand that he is old and sick,but he killed 10 people.Think about the families of those victims before defending him.I know that it was an accident,but you have to pay for your mistakes.

age discrimination laws makes it nearly impossible to scrutinize the elderly more closely for drivers liceneses. he accepted a licence to drive, he must accept the consequences of driving

I don't see how putting a senile old man in jail is going to help their morning. They need to understand this and if anything take action so it does not happen again.. Putting one ol man in jail is not going to resolve the real issue or stop all seniors from driving.. Yeah maybe give him a good spanking don't let him drink prune juice.. That would some suffering.. but then again he is senile..

rainstorm wrote:i realize he is old and sick, but according to the judge and victims he has not taken responsibility for the carnage, asked forgiveness, nor apologized. i feel jail time would be justified

As bad as it was, it was an accident. We don't generally jail people for accidents. There has to be criminal intent.

We should pray for him.

agree

No jail time. The damages awarded were way too light. I don't know if those damages preclude a civil suit, but a substantial civil suit would be appropriate against the driver and/or his estate.

My daughter was nearly in an accident this weekend when a 90-year old lady pulled out in front of her at the mall and forced her into the oncoming traffic lane. Fortunately there was no accident. Then my stupid son-in-law threw a plastic drink bottle at her car "to get her attention." Now this lady is pursuing them for damaging her car. Defininitely a case of dumb and dumber.

I will pray for the families of the victims before I even think about praying for him.After all,they're the ones who were the most devastated thanks to his mistake.

"I will never get to see my mom again. Why should he get to see his family?" she asked.

gtalum wrote:

rainstorm wrote:i realize he is old and sick, but according to the judge and victims he has not taken responsibility for the carnage, asked forgiveness, nor apologized. i feel jail time would be justified

As bad as it was, it was an accident. We don't generally jail people for accidents. There has to be criminal intent.

that was some accident. he had to be going mighty fast to manage to kill 10 people and injure 63 more. thats 73 people he mowed down in 1 "accident". at what age do we excuse criminal activity? 65? 55? 75?
80?

the defense in this case didnt use mental incapacity as a defense. they said he remebered the accident and he remembered mistaking the accelerator for the brake. he accepted the drivers licence.

and as far as "doing something about the elderly getting drivers licences", you will have to repeal age discrimination laws first, and that wont happen.

and as far as "doing something about the elderly getting drivers licences", you will have to repeal age discrimination laws first, and that wont happen.

Many states have laws requiring more frequent exams for people over a certain age...say age 70. Not sure this would have made a difference here if the eye and knowledge tests are as perfunctory as they are here in VA.

I agree there should be some accountability here but i dont know where to start.

but again i ask the question. at what age can all criminal activity be excused?. the problem with more frequent exams is that they dont screen out the elderly that may have diminished mental capacity.

i assume this man passed whatever exam he was given to get a licence

rainstorm wrote:that was some accident. he had to be going mighty fast to manage to kill 10 people and injure 63 more. thats 73 people he mowed down in 1 "accident". at what age do we excuse criminal activity? 65? 55? 75?
80?

the defense in this case didnt use mental incapacity as a defense. they said he remebered the accident and he remembered mistaking the accelerator for the brake. he accepted the drivers licence.

There is no crime to excuse. For a crime to take place, there has to be criminal intent. It is not a crime to mistake the accelerator for the brake. It's an accident.

Absolutely nothing positive can come out of putting him in prison.