PDA

View Full Version : MA-First conviction under "texting while driving" law - 2.5 years in jail.




Anti Federalist
06-06-2012, 07:19 PM
Where there was no evidence that there was any texting going on when the accident happened.

Too bad for him he wasn't a cop.



Mass. teen guilty in fatal texting-while-driving crash

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-06-06/massachusetts-texting-driving-sentence/55431460/1

HAVERHILL, Mass. (AP) – A Massachusetts teenager was sentenced Wednesday to spend a year in jail for a fatal traffic accident that happened while he was texting.

Aaron Deveau of Haverhill was sentenced to 2 ½ years behind bars with a year to serve and the remainder suspended for the February 2011 crash that took the life of Donald Bowley Jr., 55, of Danville, N.H., and seriously injured Bowley's girlfriend.

Prosecutors say the then-17-year-old high school student sent 193 text messages the day of the crash, including some just a minute or so before impact and dozens more after it.

A Haverhill District Court jury convicted Deveau of motor vehicle homicide and negligent operation while texting. Family members of both Deveau and Bowley, sitting just feet from each other in court, cried and hugged as the verdict was read.

Deveau apologized to Bowley's family. He was among the first people convicted under a law that took effect in September 2010 that created the criminal charge of texting while driving negligently and causing injury. Deveau faced that charge for the injuries caused to Bowley's girlfriend.

Now 18, Deveau, who had faced a maximum of four years behind bars, also was ordered to perform 40 hours of community service and surrender his driver's license for 15 years.

Police say Deveau's car crossed the center line on a Haverhill street and crashed head-on into Bowley's vehicle. Bowley, a father of three, died 18 days later of injuries authorities say he suffered in the crash. His passenger and girlfriend, Luz Roman, had an extensive stay in the hospital recovering from her injuries.

"This has been giving me a lot of pain. There are no words to describe," Roman said outside of court Wednesday.

Bowley's sister, Donna Burleigh, said, "We hope this sends a message that it's not OK to text and drive."

Deveau testified Tuesday, saying he was not sending or receiving text messages in the moments before the collision. He said he put his phone on the passenger seat and was distracted and thinking about his homework when the crash occurred. He told police after the crash that he swerved to avoid another vehicle in front of him that suddenly hit its brakes.

His lawyer, Joseph Lussier, said prosecutors failed to prove that Deveau was texting at the time of the crash. Lussier said the number of texts Deveau sent that day was irrelevant.

Vessol
06-06-2012, 07:24 PM
Bowley's sister, Donna Burleigh, said, "We hope this sends a message that it's not OK to text and drive."


DING DING DING.

We have a reasoning for falsely convicting the kid. Draconian measures are often used as an excuse to justify laws.

Massachusetts
06-06-2012, 07:33 PM
I think texting while driving laws are perfectly fine. They aren't an invasion of civil liberties. Texting and driving legitimately puts others rights and livelihood in danger. His negligence led to somebody's death. Seems cut and dry to me.

Anti Federalist
06-06-2012, 07:37 PM
I think texting while driving laws are perfectly fine. They aren't an invasion of civil liberties. Texting and driving legitimately puts others rights and livelihood in danger. His negligence led to somebody's death. Seems cut and dry to me.

He wasn't texting at the time of the collision.

That said, any distraction can put "others at risk".

Now, let me ask, if it's all about making the people he injured "whole" again, how is that to be accomplished by throwing this young man in a rape cage for a couple of years, and rescinding his right to drive for 15 years?

Think he'll ever hold a decent job with a felony record?

Make any decent money that could help those he injured?

Or is it all just about "revenge" and "cracking down" and criminalizing stupid mistakes?

Because if it is, then every damn one of us is going to prison, and soon.

Massachusetts
06-06-2012, 07:43 PM
He wasn't texting at the time of the collision.

That said, any distraction can put "others at risk".

Now, let me ask, if it's all about making the people he injured "whole" again, how is that to be accomplished by throwing this young man in rape cage for a couple of years, and rescinding his right to drive for 15 years?

Think he'll ever hold decent job?

Make any money that could help those he injured?

Or is it all just about "revenge" and "cracking down" and criminalizing stupid mistakes?

Because if it is, then every damn one of us is going to prison, and soon.

I understand where you are coming from. I suppose driving in general is technically putting down people in danger. I personally hate driving.

Perhaps rather than sending him to jail they could have just laid down civil charges.

tod evans
06-06-2012, 07:44 PM
Just say no to more laws:mad:

donnay
06-06-2012, 07:45 PM
I think texting while driving laws are perfectly fine. They aren't an invasion of civil liberties. Texting and driving legitimately puts others rights and livelihood in danger. His negligence led to somebody's death. Seems cut and dry to me.

Regardless, he could have been changing the radio channel that distracted him for a split second. It's bad enough the accident caused a death, but this seems like revenge justice.

Keeping our liberty often means their are plenty of risks we have to take. But I am willing to take the risks in order to keep my liberty.

Vessol
06-06-2012, 07:48 PM
I understand where you are coming from. I suppose driving in general is technically putting down people in danger. I personally hate driving.

Perhaps rather than sending him to jail they could have just laid down civil charges.

Civil charges don't have the same oomph to political propaganda as kidnapping happy jail time does.

TheTexan
06-06-2012, 07:48 PM
I think texting while driving laws are perfectly fine. They aren't an invasion of civil liberties. Texting and driving legitimately puts others rights and livelihood in danger. His negligence led to somebody's death. Seems cut and dry to me.

I think instead of making texting and driving illegal, we need to force car & phone manufacturers to install a phone disabling device, so that while the car is moving, the phone doesn't work.

Oh, but hmm... people who 'root' their phone could probably get past that. We'll have to make rooting your phone illegal too.

But then how would we know who has rooted their phone? They could easily hide that... we'll need to have semi-annual phone inspections to make sure their phone isn't rooted.

But then what if people have two phones? And only get one phone inspected, and keep the other rooted? We'll need to make sure every phone is registered in the national phone registry database.

Anyone caught having a phone that's not in the national registry can spend 6 months in a rape cage.

Noone gets hurt, problem solved. I think this is a better solution than yours, just IMO

Anti Federalist
06-06-2012, 07:49 PM
I understand where you are coming from. I suppose driving in general is technically putting down people in danger. I personally hate driving.

Perhaps rather than sending him to jail they could have just laid down civil charges.

Driving used to be fun, and there wasn't a young man that I could think of growing up that wasn't chomping at the bitt to start.

Now, just like so many other things, it's just a big brother hassle.

But yeah, if this was about justice, having no sinister or criminal malice would mean to me that civil restitution would be justice served, not prison, abuse and a felony record that, in today's Matrix, will ruin you forever.

DamianTV
06-06-2012, 08:04 PM
How about we switch from Texting to Smoking Pot?

I think pot oughta be outright legalized. But does smoking pot and driving and injuring someone while actually under the influence relieve the person of the responsibility of their actions? How many traffic fatalities are out there that the driver was not charged with negligent homicide that had nothing to do with texting, smoking pot, drunk driving, and just the fault of a stupid driver? Are we going to pass laws against driving while Stupid?

How about New Jersey? Just passed yet another law that prohibits Driving While DROWSY!

We have enough laws on the books to hold people responsible for anything any time anyone is even so much as accused of a crime. The burden of proof has fallen from the courts to prove guilt to the victim to prove innocense. And any time it is profitable for the State to say that someone is Guilty due to their own financial irresponsibility, the burden of the Courts Debts are incurred by those that are forced to pay Citations for False Accusations because the victims are unable to prove they are innocent to a corrupted court and legal system.

Danke
06-06-2012, 08:09 PM
Why not suspend his right to own a cellphone for a couple of years. Cheaper for the taxpayers.

Krugerrand
06-06-2012, 08:21 PM
I think we should ban radios in cars. It may save one life!

Vessol
06-06-2012, 08:23 PM
I think we should ban radios in cars. It may save one life!

Well if we can't ban cars, make it impossible for the drivers to look anywhere but the road, have mandated head restraints.

I've often recommended the same for airplanes. Let's stop terrorists by stripping all flight passengers and putting them in TSA-approved outfits and strapping them into a plane where they can't move. 100% effective!

donnay
06-06-2012, 08:26 PM
Everything in Massachusetts is illegal!

Krugerrand
06-06-2012, 08:30 PM
Well if we can't ban cars, make it impossible for the drivers to look anywhere but the road, have mandated head restraints.

I've often recommended the same for airplanes. Let's stop terrorists by stripping all flight passengers and putting them in TSA-approved outfits and strapping them into a plane where they can't move. 100% effective!

Require people be sedated and placed into caskets. The airlines would be all for this, just think of how many more people they could jam into one plane. And, think of the children's lives it would save. Anybody that disagrees hates children.

aGameOfThrones
06-06-2012, 08:34 PM
Why not suspend his right to own a cellphone for a couple of years. Cheaper for the taxpayers.

Then he'll just borrow one. BTW, 90% occupancy rate!

Henry Rogue
06-06-2012, 08:36 PM
My Wife sitting next to me in the car is distracting. She should be band.
whoops, banned.

John F Kennedy III
06-06-2012, 08:44 PM
I think texting while driving is one of the dumbest things a person could do.

John F Kennedy III
06-06-2012, 08:48 PM
My Wife sitting next to me in the car is distracting. She should be band.

What kind of band?

Danke
06-06-2012, 08:48 PM
I think texting while driving is one of the dumbest things a person could do.

Neckbeards are interfering too. Ban them.

donnay
06-06-2012, 08:49 PM
My Wife sitting next to me in the car is distracting. She should be band.

For some men that would be a delight!

Nic
06-06-2012, 08:49 PM
What an over-reach. While we're making up laws, I think we should ban kids from being in cars. They're distracting. Oh, and ban women drivers too, my girlfriend is pretty dang scary behind the wheel.

Danke
06-06-2012, 08:51 PM
They're distracting. Oh, and ban women drivers too, my girlfriend is pretty dang scary behind the wheel.

I can support this.

papitosabe
06-06-2012, 08:56 PM
I think texting while driving laws are perfectly fine. They aren't an invasion of civil liberties. Texting and driving legitimately puts others rights and livelihood in danger. His negligence led to somebody's death. Seems cut and dry to me.

I agree... I don't know how many times I've noticed people behind me almost hit me,while texting, mostly in heavy traffic...not sure if putting makeup on is on the books or not but it should be

Krugerrand
06-06-2012, 08:59 PM
I agree... I don't know how many times I've noticed people behind me almost hit me,while texting, mostly in heavy traffic...not sure if putting makeup on is on the books or not but it should be

There are reckless driving laws on the books. Why should there be greater penalty for the distractions that YOU don't like? These laws only empower the police state.

Anti Federalist
06-06-2012, 10:48 PM
There are reckless driving laws on the books. Why should there be greater penalty for the distractions that YOU don't like? These laws only empower the police state.

Because, like most people on the road, everybody driving faster than him is a maniac, everybody driving slower is an idiot.

Kregisen
06-06-2012, 11:08 PM
I think texting while driving laws are absurd. We have driving ordinances as it is - there is no need or point in adding 1,001 ways to be a distracted driver.

I'm from Arizona and recently just drove a 1,500 mile trip up to Seattle. Driving in rush hour in Seattle requires full attention, so being distracted with anything, including a cell phone, means you will be more likely to hit someone or something. On the other hand, there was a 6-hour stretch in northern california through hundreds of farms and orchards on a perfectly straight road with 0 traffic. If it weren't for my ipod I would have killed myself. In this scenario, if I want to read a text, or hold my phone up on my steering wheel to send a message while still looking at the open straight road, that is not making ANYTHING less safe.

There are different circumstances and different levels for everything. A law like this that presents a one-size-fits-all solution will not work.

LibertyEagle
06-06-2012, 11:26 PM
I agree... I don't know how many times I've noticed people behind me almost hit me,while texting, mostly in heavy traffic...not sure if putting makeup on is on the books or not but it should be

Yes, and they should make testicle scratching, while driving, against the law too. Many lives would be saved. ;)

specsaregood
06-06-2012, 11:49 PM
There are reckless driving laws on the books. Why should there be greater penalty for the distractions that YOU don't like? These laws only empower the police state.

I think the point is that some distractions are spur of the moment, unplanned, unavoidable. Whereas DUI,texting/talking on the phone are situations where the driver chooses to put themselves in that situation.

SpicyTurkey
06-07-2012, 12:24 AM
We're a danger to ourselves. I think we should make us illegal.

KCIndy
06-07-2012, 12:46 AM
Yes, and they should make testicle scratching, while driving, against the law too. Many lives would be saved. ;)


HEY! Scratching my testicles hasn't been fatal for over 90% of those who have done it, so lay off! ;) ;)









OMG did I really just write that??

Hospitaller
06-07-2012, 01:16 AM
Regardless, he could have been changing the radio channel that distracted him for a split second. It's bad enough the accident caused a death, but this seems like revenge justice.

Keeping our liberty often means their are plenty of risks we have to take. But I am willing to take the risks in order to keep my liberty.

There is no risk in liberty

DamianTV
06-07-2012, 01:17 AM
Why not suspend his right to own a cellphone for a couple of years. Cheaper for the taxpayers.

Because there is no such thing as an Exclusive Right. By the very definition of the word Exclusive, the root word is to exclude, which means that not everyone has the same right, thus it is not a right at all and a priviledge. Either everyone has the right to drive with a cell phone, or no one does.

KCIndy
06-07-2012, 01:30 AM
There is no risk in liberty

How about the risk of losing it? I would say we're about there. :(

papitosabe
06-07-2012, 01:34 AM
There are reckless driving laws on the books. Why should there be greater penalty for the distractions that YOU don't like? These laws only empower the police state.

still don't mind this one...cops never enforced texting via reckless driving laws, so this one is ok in my book...sorry this one ruffles your feathers so much..

DamianTV
06-07-2012, 01:41 AM
It isnt so much about the law itself, but the doors that it opens. If you open this door, very soon you will be immediately and automatically ticketed for not driving with both hands on the steering wheel at all times. Is that really the door you want to open?

DerailingDaTrain
06-07-2012, 02:01 AM
Is he going to jail for texting or for involuntary manslaughter?

Anti Federalist
06-07-2012, 02:47 AM
Is he going to jail for texting or for involuntary manslaughter?

...

A Haverhill District Court jury convicted Deveau of motor vehicle homicide and negligent operation while texting. Family members of both Deveau and Bowley, sitting just feet from each other in court, cried and hugged as the verdict was read.

Deveau apologized to Bowley's family. He was among the first people convicted under a law that took effect in September 2010 that created the criminal charge of texting while driving negligently and causing injury

Anti Federalist
06-07-2012, 02:48 AM
I agree... I don't know how many times I've noticed people behind me almost hit me,while texting, mostly in heavy traffic...not sure if putting makeup on is on the books or not but it should be

So says the yawning, placid masses as you're jailed for something dumb that you may have done.

enoch150
06-07-2012, 04:44 AM
Is he going to jail for texting or for involuntary manslaughter?

This thread is ridiculous.

These are the penalties for driving while texting:

Over Eighteen http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXIV/Chapter90/Section13B

First Offense: $100.00 Fine
Second Offense: $250.00 Fine (within twelve months)
Third Offense: $500.00 Fine (within twelve months)

Junior Operators http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXIV/Chapter90/Section8M

First Offense: $100.00 Fine, 60 day license loss, and Driver Training Course
Second Offense: $250.00 Fine, 180 day license loss
Third or more: $500.00, 1 year license loss

And according to this blog: http://jessicafoleylaw.com/2010/09/28/overview-of-the-no-texting-law/

IF THERE IS AN ACCIDENT OR INJURY FROM MOBILE PHONE USE:

First Offense: 60 day license suspension
Second or subsequent: 1 year license suspension

Should it be a law? No. But the kid isn't going to jail for 2.5 years for texting.

olehounddog
06-07-2012, 05:06 AM
Yes, and they should make testicle scratching, while driving, against the law too. Many lives would be saved. ;)
Just leave roid scratching alone.

tod evans
06-07-2012, 05:40 AM
My Wife sitting next to me in the car is distracting. She should be band.

+rep

Revolution9
06-07-2012, 05:51 AM
I agree... I don't know how many times I've noticed people behind me almost hit me,while texting, mostly in heavy traffic...not sure if putting makeup on is on the books or not but it should be

The citation is "Driving While Farding". Seriously.

Rev9