110-year sentence to be reconsidered for truck driver responsible for fatal crash (msn.com)
Dude couldn’t read/understand the road signs and wasn’t certified or experienced on driving the big rig; directly caused the death of 4 people and injured several others.
Was driving downhill too fast, ignored turn-offs, didn’t use engine brake or air brake. Overheated the brakes and caused a brake failure.
Some people are saying 110 years is too harsh, others are saying it is warranted.
Thoughts?
I doubt this post is accurate for a lot of reasons, but sure. I’m admittedly having trouble finding details about what exactly caused the truck crash.
The girl on the left deserves a longer sentence no doubt.
The guy was going downhill when ‘his breaks went out’. Here’s the problem I have with that…
She knowingly did what she isn’t supposed to do. He didn’t intentionally cause the crash, but chose to accept the responsibility of driving a vehicle he was clearly incapable of operating properly. 1
10 years is overkill, and 4 years is too lenient. Lets call it a day and say 20 years and neither will ever be allowed behind the wheel of a vehicle with more than 2 wheels again.
Or how about one of the parents kills her the day she gets out and I, as a member of the jury, do not convict?
That seems a tad extreme, but I can’t promise I wouldn’t do the same if she’d killed my daughter.
I wouldn’t convict the parent either though
I heard about this. I think I saw a video of a super long line of semis backed up on an interstate leading into CO, refusing to enter the state in protest against his sentence or something. I didn’t really know what the story was.
If he wasn’t knowledgeable enough or trained enough to safely perform the job, the company he worked for shouldn’t have allowed him to drive the vehicle. He couldn’t read the road signs? If there’s a language barrier, that’s fine, but then don’t put him behind the wheel of a large vehicle. Don’t know how to safely maneuver semis on downhill roads or operate breaks? Don’t drive semis. Whoever allowed this to happen should also be a part of this trial, imo.
He bypassed multiple runaway truck ramps, and chose to crash into cars instead of off the side of the road or into a parked big rig on the shoulder. I don’t think there is any doubt he was negligent in his operation of the truck (proper gearing, speed limits, etc).
However 110 years is fairly ridiculous for what should be manslaughter, and the guy is obviously sincerely devasted and sorry for what happened. The punishment seems more vindictive than appropriate, but it sounds like the judges hands were tied by mandatory minimum requirements.
I drive a mountain pass on a major interstate a lot and see atrocious and dangerous driving from truckers all the time. It’s a vital job, but penalties for dangerous driving from them need to be harsher and better enforced IMO.
110 years is too much, but I don’t really understand the vocal support this guy is receiving from the trucking community for illegal, dangerous driving and killing people. Not the hill I’d choose to die on. Do they really want him as the face of trucking??
I can agree with pretty much your whole post here. The issue is precedent I think - he was charged with ~40 criminal charges and was convicted of 29 of them, simply because he was guilty. The precedent of forgiving some of those charges, or reducing their penalty, would affect the average semi driver too. So those same truckers driving dangerously down the mountains would receive lesser sentences/penalties for the sake of someone who broke 29 laws in one shot.
It’s a catch-22, and i’m certainly no legal expert, but I think I find myself agreeing that the judge had no choice in the 110 year sentence - and that it shouldn’t change. If we want the truckers to be safe(r), reducing the punishments for violating these laws certainly won’t help with that. I don’t see a way out of reducing this guy’s sentence without also taking it easier on other truckers who drive dangerously too.
I truly don’t understand the amount of support he has behind him either though, and you’re right - his face will become the face of trucking should this continue.
110 years is too long, but no way the sentence should be commuted.
It’s very simple to me. I’ve seen it my whole adult life.
There is a prevailing attitude across industries that “What I do is more important than your life. Now get out of my way or I’ll kill you.”.
This is just a flashpoint where people have become more vocal about it.
It seems kind of brutal and vulgar, but if you look at human behavior, especially with regard to motor vehicles, you can see that message very clearly.
Ah yes, as a Flight Operations Quality Assurance Inspector, I can assure you that ‘sending it’ without regard to safety is the best approach. That’s why every time a bird is getting work done to it - I don’t even look to make sure it was done right, I just give 'er the old blind sign-off and let 300 passengers get on it. I mean, the airplane only needs okay brakes to land anyways.
If more people acted like doing their jobs wrong could kill people, that’d be great.
It’s a shame. If another engineer knowingly cut corners and fudged some calcs to meet a deadline/budget, and then their design failed and killed people I have no doubt my industry wouldn’t be defending them. It would be an ethics case study in college on what not to do.
I understand the outcry about the length of sentence. But I just don’t understand why the trucking industry seems to be coming to his defense. I thought they would try and distance themselves to show his dangerous actions (even if not malicious) are not acceptable and not indicative of the trucking profession. But instead it seems like they are circling the wagons.
It would.
And props to the airline industry for putting emphasis on not killing people by the hundreds very often. 
It’s weird though with motor vehicles. I know a guy who, in a drunken fit of rage ran over his girlfriends husband while fighting about her.
Charged with vehicular manslaughter and DUI, he served about 6 years.
Had the woman above jumped out of her car and opened fire on a pack of children while yelling “Get out of my way.” There would be 3 new laws and a memorial erected in the kids honor.
But instead she ran them over, so, slap on the wrist.
So, what your saying is… If I have a grudge against someone so bad that I must end them - that I should run them over with a car then cry about it in court? 
I don’t get that either, but I appreciate that you put emphasis on “seems”. There is an important distinction between what hundreds of thousands of people doing it may think and the portrayal of what they think.
I’ll plead the 5th, but you’re on the right track.
