Life in jail

[GNBRETT]

ummm nope. ur wrong. a driver is only LEGALLY responsible for stopping for the vehicle in front of them when the vehicle in front of them is stopping LEGALLY. there was nothn LEGAL about what she did which is why she was charged and convicted of a crime with a unanimous vote from the jury which took less then an hour to convict!

you keep saying no matter what its the motorcyclists responsibility for stopping in time and he didn't so therefore he is at fault. he didn't commit any violation nor wud he be cited for any violation if he was still alive. the violation was her actions which were criminal in nature as they shud be.

ur welcome to ur opinion on whether or not he shud have reacted in time but as far as the LAW is concerned ur 100% WRONG!

I am not ASSuming anything. What I said was, in the U.S., it is the responsibility of the operator of a motor vehicle to be able to stop when faced with an unexpected obstruction in the road. If that is different in Canada I do not know. The article does not state what the road conditions were, or how fast the motorcycle was traveling or really much about the facts other than she was stopped in the left hand lane of a Provincial Highway south of Montreal. Most likely around there those roads are a speed limit of 70 MPH I have been to Montreal MANY times. It is pretty flat around there. Doesn't mean anything to me other than somebody got killed because they ran into the back of a car that was stopped. Was she negligent? Yes. Was it criminal? By definition of the law in Canada it is. However even Canadian courts are struggling because the definition of criminal negligence needs to have an element of criminal conduct. Drunk driving, speeding, reckless driving, is what makes it Criminal. This will add a new level to "Criminal" conduct. Stopping for wildlife. So what's next for Canada? Hit the moose in the road and kill yourself to avoid stopping for fear that someone behind you may hit you?

Here if I am the driver of a motor vehicle, it is my responsibility to be prepared for something unexpected, even if it someone else being stupid. It has to be a very extreme and unusual situation, where I would not be at fault if I ran into the back of a vehicle.

If you want to start throwing the word ASS around, be my guest. I'll keep one hand tied behind my back and engage you if you like.

 

[TallTom]

I totally agree she has been found guilty of criminal negligence. However if stopping for wildlife in the road makes that criminal, then Canada has problems. And here in America if that motorcyclist was perhaps drunk or traveling too fast, then it would place her in a different light. Criminal negligence is derived from an offense of she was speeding or drunk or driving recklessly etc. , that resulted in another's death. That standard up until now was pretty much the same between the US and Canada. So now if we stop for a moose and a drunk driver runs into my car, I am going to jail. This will be nothing but trouble now.

Let's see how she gets sentenced.

If a father killed the man who raped his daughter, he absolutely committed premeditated murder. We gonna send him to prison or the chamber? He absolutely will have to be sentenced to something. Law won't allow the judge not to.

 

[GNBRETT]

cmon its not like a Moose was walking across the highway and some woman stopped for it. lets not get carried away with the term "Wildlife" here.

if a pack of frogs were tryn the cross the highway they too wud be considered wildlife which goes to my point that with any other negligent homicide case there are going to be extenuating factors that dictate whether or not someone has in fact committed a crime and whether or not their actions were reasonable. there has to be some reasonableness and stopping in the travel lane on a busy highway and getting out ur vehicle creating an immediate and obvious hazard is absolutely NOT reasonable!

if some chic stopped in the travel lane of the highway because she got a flat tire or a ball joint came lose or an axel broke there wud be some "Reasonableness" to her behavior. maybe not all that bright but some cud reasonably understand why someone did that and if so due to a mechanical failure then a strong argument cud be made for why she stopped where she stopped.

ducks crossing the highway is NOT a strong argument. in fact, its about as weak an argument as her stopping and getting out a lawn chair to get a tan....

u need two elements to be ccharged with negligent homicide. he first element in a negligent homicide case is that the defendant was aware of an unjustifiable risk associated with the events that led to the death of another person.

the second element is that it must be proven that it was an act or omission. there was a direct cause and effect relationship between the defendant's actions and the death of the motorist and his passenger. some places dont require an overt act, merely an omission.

I totally agree she has been found guilty of criminal negligence. However if stopping for wildlife in the road makes that criminal, then Canada has problems. And here in America if that motorcyclist was perhaps drunk or traveling too fast, then it would place her in a different light. Criminal negligence is derived from an offense of she was speeding or drunk or driving recklessly etc. , that resulted in another's death. That standard up until now was pretty much the same between the US and Canada. So now if we stop for a moose and a drunk driver runs into my car, I am going to jail. This will be nothing but trouble now.

Let's see how she gets sentenced.

If a father killed the man who raped his daughter, he absolutely committed premeditated murder. We gonna send him to prison or the chamber? He absolutely will have to be sentenced to something. Law won't allow the judge not to.

 

[devious1]

clear case of criminal negligence. stop ur car on a busy highway in the LEFT lane to help ducks? really? she's just stupid and as a result of her stupidity and negligence resulted in two ppl now DEAD! she's not gettn life. thats just sensationalism. not gonna happen.

^ This.