Person who kills two riders set to be sentinced withn just a slap on the wrist.

[Fathertime]

  Last year, two young adults were killed in our area while riding their bike.  The driver of the car was convicted of "failure to yield" and up to this point has refused to attend her actual hearing where her sentence will be handed down.  In fact, this person has shed all of her assets and moved out of state, close to the Canadian Border for reasons that are un disclosed.
 While working with another biker advocate group, I have learned that the way NY (and other state laws) are constructed, "failure to yield" is the strongest crime that they can be accused of, no matter how many people are injured or killed in this kind of accident.
 In order to attempt to bring awareness of this situation, I have posted the following on my Face Book account, with the hope that the general public would be made more aware of this.  I would ask that any of you who are also concerned with this copy it and post onto your own Face Book page:

Steven Susee and Shirley Waite were hit and killed on Rt 22 in Washington County NY in June of 2012. The driver of the car alleges that AFTER she hit them there was a second vehicle that ran them over thus she is ---innocent. The legal system of NY has charged her ONLY with FAILURE TO YIELD. She has had several sentencing hearings and is allegedly due to be sentenced this THURSDAY at the WHITE CREEK TOWN COURT 28 MOUNTAINVIEW DRIVE CAMBRIDGE NY at 6 PM.

The driver of the car has "shed" her assets (house, car etc.) and is now allegedly living in Vermont near the Canadian border (an area in which she was NOT involved prior to this accident). She has refused to attend hearings and has indicated that she will NOT report to serve any sentence imposed. New York has indicated that the State is NOT interested in extraditing her as this crime was less than a felony.

Steven Susee left behind a 2 year old daughter. OF course there are many other grieving family members both here and in Canada (The Susee family was from Canada). Family members have been shocked at the lack of response from local law enforcement in searching for the truth of this crash---was there a second vehicle; where IS that second driver; why neither of the insurance companies involved have paid out ANYTHING; why the killer of two innocent people is being charged with ONLY a minor traffic violation.
The Rally should be of concern to ALL BIKERS or those who KNOW any bikers as there is a strong suspicion that some of this lack of concern is due to the fact that these were two young people riding a--motorcycle. This sends a clear message of discrimination to those of us who ride--our lives are rated as LESS VALUABLE than say a toddler who had been walking on the same road.

 Granted, and I know that such a simple thing would resolve little - if any thing - but the fact that such a thing can happen to any one of us, at any time, has me feeling that something needs to be done,,,,, perhaps at least we can spread some awareness of the situation.

[biguglyman]

Link to the original story:

http://www.saratogian.com/articles/2012/06/10/news/doc4fd500285117e432889487.txt

[Rams]

Most states have vechicular homicide laws.  Not enough in the article to say it was intentional but, it appears the prosecuting office is not an advocate of or for motorcyclists.  I'd be amazed if "failure to yield" is the full extent of the law. 

Makes me mad but, not being a resident who votes there, I'd suggest spending your tourist dollars else where and making sure they know why.   I know that's not much of a response but, other than support certain motorcycle foundations and organizations, I don't believe there is much out of staters can do to convince the county attorney to actually do something.

[solo1]

Here in Indiana it appears to work the same way. Failure to yield, a misdemeanor.

However, just last week a person, in this area, was sentenced to one year for killing.... .....a cat!

Two or three years ago a motorcyclist was killed in Ft. Wayne while waiting for the light to change.  He was hit from behind by a girl who was texting.  She drove another 300 feet with the cycle impaled on the front of her car.
Never heard if she was even brought to trial.

[steve 3054]

This is a tough one...on one hand we have two people plucked from life and grieving families  left behind and the other a mistake...I do side on the side of the deceased but this happens about 45000 times a year here in the USA...In cases where the other driver is not impaired, it is called an accident.  I know we all want an eye for an eye but in cases where there is/was no crime of intent then sadly it is an ooopps.

[F6BANGER]

This is sad it happened.....Sounds like a job for Dexter..

[bigguy]

If we could just demonstrate she had a 32 oz softdrink in her lap, I'm sure NY would send her to the gallows.

[vanagon40]

In Indiana:

Failure to yield [Ind. Code §§ 9-21-8-29 to 9-21-8-34] is not a misdemeanor, but a Class C infraction.  Ind. Code § 9-21-8-50.  A Class C infraction carries a maximum fine of $500, and no possibility of jail time.  A Class C infraction is not a criminal offense.

If a driver kills another person, the most likely criminal charge in Indiana would be Reckless Homicide [Ind. Code § 35-42-1-5]: "A person who recklessly kills another human being commits reckless homicide, a Class C felony."

There is also Involuntary Manslaughter, Ind. Code § 35-42-1-4(c)(2), but about the only traffic offense (other than drunk driving) that is a Class A misdemeanor is Aggressive Driving, Ind. Code § 9-21-8-55.  But, proof of Aggressive Driving would likely also supply proof of reckless homicide.

Involuntary manslaughter [Ind. Code § 35-42-1-4(c)(2)]: "A person who kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit a Class A misdemeanor that inherently poses a risk of serious bodily injury commits involuntary manslaughter, a Class C felony.  However, if the killing results from the operation of a vehicle, the offense is a Class D felony."

Note that texting while driving is also only a Class C infraction.  Ind. Code § 9-21-8-59.

If the driver was not "reckless," and was not drunk (or high), or did not leave the scene, there probably is no criminal charge for a motor vehicle accident resulting in death in Indiana.

[solo1]

I stand corrected.

Thanks for the lengthy excursion into Indiana code.   

[Fathertime]

I stand corrected.

Thanks for the lengthy excursion into Indiana code.   

  Lengthy yes, boring, perhaps, but still important information

This is a tough one...on one hand we have two people plucked from life and grieving families  left behind and the other a mistake...I do side on the side of the deceased but this happens about 45000 times a year here in the USA...In cases where the other driver is not impaired, it is called an accident.  I know we all want an eye for an eye but in cases where there is/was no crime of intent then sadly it is an ooopps.

  Sorry, I disagree.  When two lifes are snuffed out - and its not an act of God (no thread hijacking now) - its more than an oops.  Now, I'm not saying she did it on purpose, but the aftermath of this whole this is that the woman driving the car has in no way been held accountable.

Most states have vechicular homicide laws.  Not enough in the article to say it was intentional but, it appears the prosecuting office is not an advocate of or for motorcyclists.  I'd be amazed if "failure to yield" is the full extent of the law. 

Makes me mad but, not being a resident who votes there, I'd suggest spending your tourist dollars else where and making sure they know why.   I know that's not much of a response but, other than support certain motorcycle foundations and organizations, I don't believe there is much out of staters can do to convince the county attorney to actually do something.

  I did not make the first post so much as to generate a lot of traffic for New York only.  Honestly, some of it was just to "vent" a bit over this horrible turn of events.  The other part was to try and let some people that I care about aware that this situation exists in many other states in the US, not just in mine.

[Jess from VA]

There is such a thing as prosecutorial discretion (and proscutorial misconduct).

If I had a case such as this where a failure to yield resulted in death, I would take a very close look at the facts and evidence, and if there was at least an arguable case of negligent (reckless) homicide, I would bring the charge, try the case, and let a jury decide.  Most prosecutor offices are pretty busy and do not like to bring cases they cannot win (for sure), but some cases should be brought in any event, again so long as there is at least some evidence supporting the charge (enough to get past the Preliminary Examination).  Even if you lose the case, the killerhas been put thru the system (with attending fear and expense), the surviving families feel that justice at least took it's course, and the correct message is sent to the community.

Bringing a case with little or no evidence is prosecutorial misconduct.

Sadly many riders do not know how to do an emergency stop.  

[vanagon40]

I stand corrected.

Thanks for the lengthy excursion into Indiana code.   

Only partially corrected; partially confirmed.  There is no vehicular homicide statute in Indiana.

[Fathertime]

I stand corrected.

Thanks for the lengthy excursion into Indiana code.   

Only partially corrected; partially confirmed.  There is no vehicular homicide statute in Indiana.

Perhaps there should be

[Fathertime]

Perhaps this title should be changed to :
  The value of a Bikers Life.

  I just recently returned from court to witness the final sentencing of the person responsible for the deaths I mentioned at the start of this thread.
  The guilty party was NOT present when sentence was handed down.  She was residing some where near Burlington Vermont.  As a matter of fact, neither the DA nor the defending attorney were present either.
  Present were the parents and family (meaning brothers and sister) of Steven.  Also present was Steves two year old daughter.  A small group of bikers were also present during sentencing.

  The total sentence to the guilty party?  Not including court costs, a fine of $150.
  That works out to $75 for each person killed that night.
  Oh yea, and a suspended drivers licence.  That's it.  Nothing else.

  Somehow, I think I'm going to be ill.

[Rams]

I don't blame you for the ill feelings at all.   The thought did cross my mind though that where criminal courts fail, some times civil courts can make some sort of justice occur. 

If I remember correctly, OJ Simpson was sued in Civil Court and lost big time.  May not be possible in NY but, it is worthly of consideration.  I do know that if it were my child, there would be a price to pay, one way or another.

[Fathertime]

I don't blame you for the ill feelings at all.   The thought did cross my mind though that where criminal courts fail, some times civil courts can make some sort of justice occur. 

If I remember correctly, OJ Simpson was sued in Civil Court and lost big time.  May not be possible in NY but, it is worthly of consideration.  I do know that if it were my child, there would be a price to pay, one way or another.

I understand that the parents of Steve's girl friend is looking at a civil suit.  The guilty party has divested herself of all personal property so not much there.
I so wish i could say i was proud to be a new Yorker

[Hooter]

   I don't understand the charge? Fail to yield the right of way causing death should be the charge. This is a "felony" everywhere else in the country. With that said, she shouldn't be allowed to leave the area during the investigation and this information should have been passed down by the judge. Until sentencing, she should have either been in jail or if bond was posted (which is usually high in these cases) remained at her current residence and had her driving priviledges revoked until final determination.

   No witnesses? What did accident reconstruction show? Should be evidence of another vehicle if involved at the scene. A bunch of this makes no sense at all.

[steve 3054]

As I posted above...sadly...if there is no criminal intent, there will be little if any fine as in this case...I here ya...try to change the law in your state.

I don't wish to sound callas but.....within a split second bad things happen and sometimes it is an accident, sometimes lives are taken and no amount of money or jail time can bring that back.

[Hooter]

As I posted above...sadly...if there is no criminal intent, there will be little if any fine as in this case...I here ya...try to change the law in your state.

I don't wish to sound callas but.....within a split second bad things happen and sometimes it is an accident, sometimes lives are taken and no amount of money or jail time can bring that back.

So I guess to think that there will be a couple of  warrants issued for her arrest for FTA = Fail To Appear  aren't going to happen either?  Evidentially NY law is different from common law. You don't have to prove intent in a neg hom / accident causing death case in most states. They are common charges in states where death occurs in a motor vehicle accident. Its too bad!

[Fathertime]

 nope,  no failure to appear,  no nuttin  except the fine mentioned above.
   court allowed defence  attorney and da  not to appear either.   apparently the way it was allowed to go down was that all the PD  issued was a ticket for failure to yield,  and that's all the DA went after
  Will answer more of your questions when I get on a real computer

[Jess from VA]

Just to clear things up a bit.

Criminal law in the US, originating in English common law, has always required proof of several elements for any given crime, one of which is always mens rea,  Latin for guilty mind.  Any crime generally requires an evil or wrongful intent of some kind exist in the perpetrator's mind and actions, and it must be proved beyond any reasonable doubt, to convict and sentence.  A wrongful intent to kill, assault, injure, steal, defraud, rape, etc.  

There is generally no crime for any form of simple negligence, or failure to conform your behavior to expected reasonable norms, or failure to exercise reasonable care in your actions.  Simple negligence can result in a Tort (a Civil wrong, decided in civil courts, with the burden of proof being only by a preponderance of the evidence), but not a Crime.

Those States (I suspect a majority) that have a crime of negligent/reckless homicide/manslaughter, or vehicular manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter still require a mens rea element.... but it falls somewhere between usual criminal intent (intentional) and simple negligence (mistake).  It generally means a perpetrator must be shown to have acted in a willful and intentional manner with reckless disregard of probable and foreseeable consequences.

Vehicular manslaughter statutes often specify certain factors such as driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, or excessive speed, or recklessly in conjunction with taking a life.  But however you cut it, there must be some reckless, willful, wanton behavior to elevate a negligent traffic accident with a death to be a crime.  The intent in such cases is intent to drive recklessly or under the influence, not the intent to kill.

When you have traffic accidents resulting in death that are charged as crimes, you will generally see clear evidence of some form of recklessness (beyond simple negligence) before the accident.

And so when you have multiple motorcycle accidents (which generally have much more serious injuries than car-alone accidents) resulting from left turn in front of bike, rear-end bike, failure to yield, and red light violations, you can see the difficulty in proving gross negligence in such cases, if there are no other aggravating factors such as drugs/alcohol/speed/reckless driving leading up to the accident/death.  Thousands of these traffic infractions are written daily, and usually with little or no serious injuries, at least in cars.  Good preparation of on-scene accident reports, measurements, weather conditions, pictures, and ID of witnesses are essential.

This does not mean these cases should not be looked at very carefully by a prosecutors office to see if a vehicular manslaughter case can or should be brought, but you need more than a simple failure to yield leading to death to get a conviction.  It is what it is.  Simple negligence leading to death is a tort, wrongful death, but if there is little or no insurance or the perpetrator is worthless or nearly so, you are SOL........ nobody sues broke people.  

This is why we all need to ride like we are the only ones that can save our lives, because that is largely the truth.

[musclehead]

This is a tough one...on one hand we have two people plucked from life and grieving families  left behind and the other a mistake...I do side on the side of the deceased but this happens about 45000 times a year here in the USA...In cases where the other driver is not impaired, it is called an accident.  I know we all want an eye for an eye but in cases where there is/was no crime of intent then sadly it is an ooopps.

yes and no. we do want to be fair but, we also want those responcible to 'own it'. from the actions of this woman it seems as though (in her mind) she is not at fault for the accident. then there are the usual culprits, was she paying 100% attention or texting? we Americans are so optimistic we believe we are the best drivers in the world (  ) even the ones that total a car every year think we are DANG GOOD drivers!  sad anyhow.

[Fathertime]

   I don't understand the charge? Fail to yield the right of way causing death should be the charge. This is a "felony" everywhere else in the country. With that said, she shouldn't be allowed to leave the area during the investigation and this information should have been passed down by the judge. Until sentencing, she should have either been in jail or if bond was posted (which is usually high in these cases) remained at her current residence and had her driving priviledges revoked until final determination.

   No witnesses? What did accident reconstruction show? Should be evidence of another vehicle if involved at the scene. A bunch of this makes no sense at all.

She was charged with plain failure to yield.  Not a lawyer (where's Oss when you need him?) But I believe that's like mistomener level.  New York REFUSED to extrodite her - the charges were not serious enough!
No witnesses.  Don't know results of accident reconstruction but they did find a hubcap as evidence of a second vehicle.  That there's good sherriff work Barney!

[Fathertime]

Jess: thank you for your legal insight.

  Forgot to mention that this all went down in a "town court" situation - you know presided over by a justice of the peace.  I THINK you don't need formal training to hold that position.

 Just to add fuel to the discussion.... my wife just reminded me that a person who was convicted in the same county for HOARDING DOGS is serving time!

[big d]

makes me proud to be a new yorker....cant wait till i can retire and get the f outa here

[Fathertime]

makes me proud to be a new yorker....cant wait till i can retire and get the f outa here

Amen!

[Hooter]

  Hi Jess,

      General practice here: Anytime death is involved in an accident all evidence is gathered on scene by the investigating officer(s) and then the information is sent to the prosecutor for determination. IF the prosecutor feels that arrest is warranted a warrant may be issued for the determined charge. If in fact like you stated there is the evidence of alcohol of drugs the infomation is still gathered and sent to the prosecutor for determination as soon as possible.
  If alcohol is present, and if the suspect is still on scene he / she are usuall arrested  unless injured and sent to the hospital. If under the influence and uninjured they are usually still in jail when the prosecutor receives the case. A person under the influence must remain in jaul for 12 hours. If so and all criteria is met they are charged accordingly, remain in jail and bail is set. (or not)
  If arrested at a later date they are arrested, booked on the charge and remain in jail until they go to court for pre lim. Usually this is the time that bail is set. Then they can post bail but they still have to appear when oredered.
  Long story short and like you stated. All evidence must be presented, evaluated and all elements of the crime must be met before anything can be done or charges rendered.  My 2 cents

[Jess from VA]

Hey Hooter,

Yes, that's my recollection.  Last year of private practice was '83 (thank the good Lord).

[Hooter]

Hey Hooter,

Yes, that's my recollection.  Last year of private practice was '83 (thank the good Lord).

I'm rusty too. I retired from    in 99 so its been a while for  me too.