| Author | Post |
|---|
romegasir
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Rome, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 2345 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Mon May 19th, 2008 11:11 pm |
|
RN, valuing your opinion as I do, I'd like to know:
Knowing that this is a very dangerous intersection.................................do you feel like someone who has been drinking and is approaching the yellow light, at this already dangerous intersection, and decides to floor the accelerator and hope for the best is 1) showing a disregard for his own safety and/or the safety of others?......2) is exhibiting signs that the ingested alcohol is causing him to be less safe and take risks than he would have been had he not been drinking at all.? If you answer both questions with "NO! He showed plenty of regard for his safety and the safety of others and the alcohol probably made him safer".......then I'll drop it 
|
RNpara
Member
| Joined: | Sun Dec 23rd, 2007 |
| Location: | Rome, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 1362 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon May 19th, 2008 11:42 pm |
|
| as for question 1, yes he was showing disregard by flooring it and hoping for the best, but can you not say the same for her, there is no way she could have made it all the way across THAT intersection after the light had turned yellow. Also when turning at that intersection cars appear farther away than they are. If it was never proven that he was drunk then that would be fine to throw the book at him, all i am saying is that this was a case pushed by emotion, and had it been the average older, non pregnant victim he would have already served his time and been out. I and FRL both have worked wrecks involving obvious drunken drivers and the cases are never publicized this way and the drunk does not receive near the sentence that matt did, i do not agree that any drunk driver should get away with it, all i'm saying is accidents will happen. Had he not been arrested several times for DUI would he have even been charged? I do not claim to have the answers, just have seen other cases where things turned out differently.
|
Jr.FanAlways
Member
| Joined: | Wed Mar 5th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 387 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon May 19th, 2008 11:52 pm |
|
I agree that DUI is a plague on our roads, but why do we almost always assume it is alcohol. There are so many prescription drug users on the road 24/7. People abuse them more often than not. Most of the drugs I have been prescribed over the years, and I'm not much for going to the doctor, carry warnings not to operate heavy equipment. To me that includes a car. Maybe that is just to be on the safe side? I don't know. The warning is there and I take it seriously. What of people that are on multiple drugs? Legal drugs. All with these warnings? It is scary to think about, but most of us never really consider that. An impaired driver is impaired whether it is alcohol, illegal drugs or something your doctor prescribed. I don't know anything about these people but I hope the right thing is done. Whatever that is.
|
oldman
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 01:35 am |
|
Why was the DA not allowed to use the B/A reading at the trial or was it used. I think i remember reading in the newspaper that it was not. Am I right or wrong.
|
Gordon Lee
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 17th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 160 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 04:36 am |
|
oldman wrote: Why was the DA not allowed to use the B/A reading at the trial or was it used. I think i remember reading in the newspaper that it was not. Am I right or wrong.
That's what I'd like to know too. I also thought I recall reading somewhere that the administering officer did not do this properly (administering the Breath Analyzer test), according to a defense expert, and any and all evidence gathered concerning a possible DUI was considered invalid and inadmissable.
|
romegeorgiaman
Member
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 09:05 am |
|
| i hope that people will continue to support candice, and keep her in their prayers, and i hope that most people will find it in their heart to forgive matt dunagan, and let him continue with this second chance to start over. many folks never get that second chance.if the state feels that his case should be overturned, then that is their judgement. some may not like it...but they are the court.( they have the robes to prove it).. you dont have to accept him for what has happened, but to the bigger purpose is that it all happened that fateful night on the highway for a reason.:to teach us all that life is precious, and that it can be changed -or taken away in an instant...we make choices every day...and we have to live with the outcome..good or bad...candice suffered that night...matt suffered, and that unborn child never had a chance to find out how wonderful and forgiving this world could be. everyone loses...and nobody wins...and ...all of floyd county is broken hearted at the loss of one of our own...(a child)..but we are more careful...(at least when we think of our fellow floyd countians who were involved in this tragic scene. so perhaps some good can come from all this...More alert and careful drivers'' i think everyone concerned is learning an important lesson...(i know i have).. i am white knucked and cautious when approaching that or any intersection for that matter... it(hwy53) has a history of serious crashes, over at least a 25 year span that i can recall... life is sometimes being in the wrong place at the wrong time..fate has a funny way of proving that... . the grief is exponential across the board... the police /fire /rescue that responded..the hospital/rehab staff.....the news gatherers, the families, the friends of both families, and anyone who heard the news story...or even just saw the vehicles being towed away..witnesses, local focus on the subject. etc.... if ..everyone should obey traffic signals, and drive defensively/courteously, then more lives will be spared. and...if just one driver out there on the highway learned to be safe, and take care behind the wheel....... .. then that Angel shall not have left this earth and gone to heaven in vain.... . for those who are lost.. pray they may be found in Gods mercies...rgm Last edited on Tue May 20th, 2008 09:24 am by romegeorgiaman
|
zeke1950
Member
| Joined: | Sun Jan 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 167 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 10:25 am |
|
| good luck to matt and his family and also keep candance family in our thoughts and prayres this is not easy for neither family
|
Lil Pixie
Member
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 12:03 pm |
|
| I agree Candace, Matt and both families have surffered tremendously lets keep them all in our prayers.....
|
BillT962
Member
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 12:33 pm |
|
I know little or nothing about this specific case, but I do have some limited knowledge of DUI laws, procedures, rules etc.
As far as the defense counsel wanting all references to the negative test results out, he may have been afraid of some type of similar transaction motion that had been filed.
I believe as do others, that if the moderator says she saw a blood test result of zero, she saw it. As RGS points out correctly, everybody is zero at some point. How long after the incident was the blood drawn? There is a presumption at law (not always correct) that you metabolize alcohol somewhere between .01-.02 gr per hour. So, for the sake of argument only, if a DUI suspect were .08 at the time of the wreck, and various reasons arise why the blood is not extracted within a 4 hour period, that suspect could reasonably be at .00. (RGS--even retrograde extrapolation has its limits).
Was there any other type of substance involved or suspected? I don't know.
Without knowing the details, it sounds like a horrible incident that both sides wish had never happened.
|
BillT962
Member
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 12:42 pm |
|
Jr.FanAlways wrote: I agree that DUI is a plague on our roads, but why do we almost always assume it is alcohol. There are so many prescription drug users on the road 24/7. People abuse them more often than not. Most of the drugs I have been prescribed over the years, and I'm not much for going to the doctor, carry warnings not to operate heavy equipment. To me that includes a car. Maybe that is just to be on the safe side? I don't know. The warning is there and I take it seriously. What of people that are on multiple drugs? Legal drugs. All with these warnings? It is scary to think about, but most of us never really consider that. An impaired driver is impaired whether it is alcohol, illegal drugs or something your doctor prescribed. I don't know anything about these people but I hope the right thing is done. Whatever that is.
please don't leave out cell phones in the above mix. NHTSA has some amazing numbers.
|
sweetapril73
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 8th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 01:14 pm |
|
I am just curious....
If one driver actually was DUI during the time of an accident but the other was not, yet they both ran a red light, who is at fault?
I'm not taking sides on this case because I do feel that both parties are victims as well as their families. However, I do think that evidence speaks for itself and that is why I asked my question.
|
SouthernRain
Moderator
| Joined: | Wed Oct 10th, 2007 |
| Location: | Rome, USA |
| Posts: | 1144 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 01:25 pm |
|
sweetapril73 wrote: I am just curious....
If one driver actually was DUI during the time of an accident but the other was not, yet they both ran a red light, who is at fault?
I'm not taking sides on this case because I do feel that both parties are victims as well as their families. However, I do think that evidence speaks for itself and that is why I asked my question.
I think they would BOTH be at fault and the DUI driver would have an additional charge besides running a red light.
|
BillT962
Member
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 01:30 pm |
|
sweetapril73 wrote: I am just curious....
If one driver actually was DUI during the time of an accident but the other was not, yet they both ran a red light, who is at fault?
I'm not taking sides on this case because I do feel that both parties are victims as well as their families. However, I do think that evidence speaks for itself and that is why I asked my question.
that may never be settled at the criminal level. At the civil level, the purported DUI would normally weigh heavily against the drinking driver. What you may see is that "last clear chance doctrine" play into the mix. i.e., had they not been dui, they would have had a chance to avoid the wreck. That may be enough to deal out 51% of the liability, maybe, sorta, kinda, possibly.
|
sweetapril73
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 8th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 01:32 pm |
|
BillT962 wrote: sweetapril73 wrote: I am just curious....
If one driver actually was DUI during the time of an accident but the other was not, yet they both ran a red light, who is at fault?
I'm not taking sides on this case because I do feel that both parties are victims as well as their families. However, I do think that evidence speaks for itself and that is why I asked my question.
that may never be settled at the criminal level. At the civil level, the purported DUI would normally weigh heavily against the drinking driver. What you may see is that "last clear chance doctrine" play into the mix. i.e., had they not been dui, they would have had a chance to avoid the wreck. That may be enough to deal out 51% of the liability, maybe, sorta, kinda, possibly. Ahhhh...I see what you are saying. Makes sense. I was just wondering. Thanks for the insight! 
|
NeverEnough
Member
| Joined: | Thu Mar 13th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 141 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue May 20th, 2008 03:12 pm |
|
| No matter if Matt gets out, Candice still got a LIFE SENTENCE. Yeah he might remember that he had a wreck. He wasn't in a big truck, yeah they do get blamed a lot. He might have gone behind bars and I'm sure that not being around family is tough. You get meals and a place to watch tv right? Doesn't she have a feeding tube still? So she doesn't really get to enjoy a meal, right? Family I'm sure that still love her and help with care, that she will need for the rest of her life. Matt can dress himself and go out and drive again right? I don't think that she will be able to do any of that. YES this was a horrible terrible thing. Was he drinking, well since it does take some time to obtain a warrant from a Judge, I would say that the time passing through his body most likely allowed the alcohol to exit his system. And the atty didn't want the results to be known for a reason. I do think some people felt like a chnage of venue was in order, but that didn't happen. Does Matt have any children? She lost her unborn child. He lost some time at work. Were is the justice? I'm not sure. I know each person suffered. Will any one ever get over it. Probably not. Will any of us forget it, no. What can we do about it? Keep praying for each of them I guess.
|
Current time is 04:15 am | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...   |
|
