181 replies to this topic

[supermom]

Developing.....how does badfolsomdrivers.com sound ???

how about: bad boys we got you on tape?

[robotking]

how about: bad boys we got you on tape?

That kid should of got at least 3yrs.I feel that kids and people in general do certain things because they feel even if the get caught they wont have to big of a punishment.I believe if you punish him hard and then make it known to all the kids in school even lower grades.That this will work as a deterent to others.Kids i knew in another town were always stealing booze from supermarkets i asked them what about if you get caught?they said first the store has a no chase policy.Second even if they're caught they wont do anything to them even if the store pushes it.The liberal judges let them go.After all they are only minors.Gangster kids beating and terrorizing others are suspended for a few days and back doing the same crap.I say hit them hard for the greater good of all kids.Sure some will go down hard but many more will be saved.Same with people throwing trash out their windows.I bet if the law was litter get caught lose your car.Then we would see a whole lot less litter.Lane change a few feet in front of another car without signaling 2k fine.less jack-offs not signaling.Tail gateing? 2k fine less tail gators.More cameras on the roads and common areas and less of everything.my 2 cents

[Family Friend]

Thanks for that post - hope people read it and understand it - especially Family Friend who has been wrong about it all since day one about this all.

I understand that you might not agree with my opinion, but what statement have I made that is wrong?

I only asked for a complete investigation of the facts and a ruling from a judge. I said that based on the facts it would be a light sentence - And that was the truth.

I said that the boys were speeding, but not racing - And that was the truth.

I said that I don't understand the remarks about the speakers and don't believe it happened as described. In court the DA stated that he couldn't find any credible witnesses regarding this part of the accident and doesn't know how the rumor started. Of his three credible witnesses 2 said they didn't see it and the most credible witness said it absolutely didn't happen. So that was the truth.

In the DUI case the parents are all over the news complaining about the sentence.

In our case the family that has all the information didn't complain about the verdict to the press. The complaining has only been done by people on internet boards that only have the media's side of the story.

The uninformed masses want to complain about the DA, the judge, and defense lawyers screwing the public with a weak verdict.

Instead of thinking that maybe the verdict was correct based on the facts.

[ChipShot]

That kid should of got at least 3yrs.I feel that kids and people in general do certain things because they feel even if the get caught they wont have to big of a punishment.I believe if you punish him hard and then make it known to all the kids in school even lower grades.That this will work as a deterent to others.Kids i knew in another town were always stealing booze from supermarkets i asked them what about if you get caught?they said first the store has a no chase policy.Second even if they're caught they wont do anything to them even if the store pushes it.The liberal judges let them go.After all they are only minors.Gangster kids beating and terrorizing others are suspended for a few days and back doing the same crap.I say hit them hard for the greater good of all kids.Sure some will go down hard but many more will be saved.Same with people throwing trash out their windows.I bet if the law was litter get caught lose your car.Then we would see a whole lot less litter.Lane change a few feet in front of another car without signaling 2k fine.less jack-offs not signaling.Tail gateing? 2k fine less tail gators.More cameras on the roads and common areas and less of everything.my 2 cents

Hey, you're singin' my song. But let's face it, the goo-goo Libs in society do NOT want to properly punish the scumbags. We need to "be sennnnnnnsitive". Maybe they were spanked too hard as a child, so we need to "understand". It's so sickening, and all it does is encourage more and more crime...escalating into violent crime. Wonderful. Great country, eh? Why the hell do we have laws...what difference does it make. Pretty pathetic.

[Golf Wonk]

The uninformed masses want to complain about the DA, the judge, and defense lawyers screwing the public with a weak verdict.

Instead of thinking that maybe the verdict was correct based on the facts.

My complaint is not that the sentence was out of the ordinary, I've become accustomed to these types of sentences. What I think everyone who is objecting, is objecting to, is the manner in which these criminals, and yes they are criminals whether you choose to believe it or not, are being treated. Quite honestly, I would be for no jail time and 100,000 hours of community service. How about filling up the rest of their lives with speaking at schools, volunteering to help care for people disabled by similar accidents and other such things. They should be able to carry on with their lives, they just owe a monsterous debt to society. Don't forget "friend" they took the life of another human being, the most henious crime there is.

[jmfl]

One of the teens got 6 months in the Iron Point accident. Do you think it's enough?

He could end up serving as little as 4 months!

From news10:

"...His defense attorney, Kevin Adamson, said he'll petition the court to allow Anderson to serve his time in Sacramento County's adult jail instead of juvenile hall. In the adult system, he could earn two months off of his sentence for good behavior."

[volkl]

I understand that you might not agree with my opinion, but what statement have I made that is wrong?

You've made quite a few incorrect and biased statements all while admonishing others to wait for the facts to come out. How about a quick reminder should you truly be delusioned into thinking that you've been objective and factual in all this:

http://www.tomatopag...d...&pid=174632

The video has been talked about many times by me, idunno and now stuney. The video shows her behavior and the boys cars just before the accident.

The boys could plead not guilty based on her actions and that she pulled out in front of them causing the accident.

Sure sounds like you are blaming the victim to me. "Right of way" is forfeited when you do ~90mph in a 45mph zone.

http://www.tomatopag...d...&pid=174269

The Applebee's video shows that when she was driving through the parking lot and passed the front entrance of the restaurant the boys cars are already in view. She barely misses hitting two people walking in the parking lot because of her speed.

Then as she leaves the view of the camera before she gets to the stop sign and almost immediate the accident happened.

When you time the video she didn't have time to come to a complete stop. Let alone look both ways before entering the road.

What is your source? How is it that you have been privvy to this alleged video and yet there has been no other coverage of it? Your "analysis" of the video tape begs for credentials. Are you using hyperbole when you assert that "she barely misses hitting two people" and are you jumping to conclusions when you assert that she did not have time to "look both ways"? An objective observer would have stated the distance in feet from the pedestrians and the elapsed time on the video from point A to point B. I, for one, have zero confidence in your objectivity and accuracy given this previous post from you:


http://www.tomatopag...d...&pid=145728

I agree with you to, any reasonable person will, but the 70-80 mph speed the media has reported is not a fact in this case.

The Folsom Police shared a lot of opinions with the media that are not in the Police Report that they turned into the DA.

The Police have a video that shows the cars were not traveling that fast.

And I am not sure what the skidmarks mean. There are two different lengths involved. The Folsom Police have not turned this report in, but have shared the results to the media. I have no idea what training the Folsom Police have been given in this field. I would guess it is a very specialized field that isn't normally needed by the Folsom Police Department and that they don't have an expert on staff.

I do know that the online calculator tells me that:

If two tires leave a 166 foot skidmark - that equals 58 mph
and
If two tires leave a 80 foot skidmark - that equals 37.9 mph

That gives me an average speed of 47.95 mph - barely over the speed limit.

I can't find a calculator that let's me type in two different skidmark lengths, so I can't verify that number, and I know it can't be that simple to figure out.

I could guess a number like everyone else, or wait for the CHP to investigate and give me an expert opinion.

First, it shows that you have a complete misunderstanding of basic physics. Stopping distance is proportional to the square of velocity. Thus taking a linear average of two speeds to interpolate is flawed. Secondly, most vehicles can stop from 60mph in well under 166 feet (the average these days for sedans is in the 130' range; for the model in question it is 120' under normal operating conditions). Third, and most significantly, you've completely neglected the residual velocity at impact. The car was still in motion with enough velocity to kill the victim and spin her car around when the skid marks come to an end. To suggest they were doing 48mph when the brakes were applied is insulting and/or naive. In fact, IIRC, the police determined the velocity to be closer to 90mph (my initial estimate was 90+). You implied that they were definitely going below 70mph. Gotta like the built-in forum features that show all posts for a particular user when they try to evade responsibility for past posts.

PS - I agree with those who recommend a much harsher sentence. This is not about rehabilitating the teenager and what type of sentence will give him the greatest chance to lead a productive life. This is about punishment and deterence. It's too late to be of assistance for Mrs. McNew but it may save someone else when would-be street racers ("co-speeders" if you prefer) decide the adrenaline rush is not worth 5-10 years in prison.

[ducky]

You've made quite a few incorrect and biased statements all while admonishing others to wait for the facts to come out. How about a quick reminder should you truly be delusioned into thinking that you've been objective and factual in all this:

What is your source? How is it that you have been privvy to this alleged video and yet there has been no other coverage of it? Your "analysis" of the video tape begs for credentials. Are you using hyperbole when you assert that "she barely misses hitting two people" and are you jumping to conclusions when you assert that she did not have time to "look both ways"? An objective observer would have stated the distance in feet from the pedestrians and the elapsed time on the video from point A to point B. I, for one, have zero confidence in your objectivity and accuracy given this previous post from you:


First, it shows that you have a complete misunderstanding of basic physics. Stopping distance is proportional to the square of velocity. Thus taking a linear average of two speeds to interpolate is flawed. Secondly, most vehicles can stop from 60mph in well under 166 feet (the average these days for sedans is in the 130' range; for the model in question it is 120' under normal operating conditions). Third, and most significantly, you've completely neglected the residual velocity at impact. The car was still in motion with enough velocity to kill the victim and spin her car around when the skid marks come to an end. To suggest they were doing 48mph when the brakes were applied is insulting and/or naive. In fact, IIRC, the police determined the velocity to be closer to 90mph (my initial estimate was 90+). You implied that they were definitely going below 70mph.

Now, this is how a true accident reconstructionist speaks. MAIT or expert witness?

[Family Friend]

You've made quite a few incorrect and biased statements all while admonishing others to wait for the facts to come out. How about a quick reminder should you truly be delusioned into thinking that you've been objective and factual in all this:

I have been pretty clear on my background from the start - when I stated that I am a family friend and that I know all of the boys.

More than once I have said that - Here is my background, here is my opinion, and I am biased. When did I claim to offer an objective opinion?

To everyone's relief, including my own, I was not called as an expert witness in this case. On many of my posts I have asked for someone to explain how this can happen? Is this possible? Or simply that I will wait for the CHP to investigate and give me an expert opinion.

I never claimed that the boys were innocent of all the charges. I have always felt that the boys should be punished. If everything that the media claimed was true then the boys should have gotten the max. penalty - without a doubt. If you read my old posts you will find this statement.

The media story, however, was simply not accurate. For the most part, I have agreed with the FPD and CHP reports. I have mainly argued about reports that were not complete at the time and the media's inaccurate telling of the events.

I believe that the judge looked at all the facts to make his verdict. While it seems like other people believe that the judge ignored the facts to make his verdict.

You don't have to listen to me, believe me, or respect my opinion. I do want to point out though that the judges verdict reflects my opinion so I must not be completely delusional.

[Jolene]

I said that the boys were speeding, but not racing - And that was the truth.

Then why did they admit to it, in a court of law? From the News10 Article posted a few pages back:

"The charges are enhanced with allegations of street racing, speeding, reckless driving, and exhibition of speed in the January 13 crash, all of which he admitted in Sacramento juvenile court."

(Emphasis mine.)

If he hadn't done it, then he sure as heck shouldn't have been admitting to it. Not when he could have simply admitted to the other three charges and probably gotten the same sentence.

The guy admitted to street racing, I'm thinking that's the most damning evidence and most factual proof that he was. Can we stop arguing that point now?

[Family Friend]

Then why did they admit to it, in a court of law? From the News10 Article posted a few pages back:

"The charges are enhanced with allegations of street racing, speeding, reckless driving, and exhibition of speed in the January 13 crash, all of which he admitted in Sacramento juvenile court."

(Emphasis mine.)

If he hadn't done it, then he sure as heck shouldn't have been admitting to it. Not when he could have simply admitted to the other three charges and probably gotten the same sentence.

The guy admitted to street racing, I'm thinking that's the most damning evidence and most factual proof that he was. Can we stop arguing that point now?

This is a prime example of the damning media statements, not the evidence.

If he plead guilty to street racing the headline would be - Street Racer pleads guilty. Instead, the media headline is still - alleged street racer pleads guilty.

He plead guilty to all of the charges in court. He didn't plead guilty to any allegations.


Re-read that sentence from the Sacramento Bee again with the understanding that he did not plead guilty to the allegations of street racing, speeding, reckless driving, or exhibition of speed

Once he plead guilty to something it would no longer be alleged.

Since he plead guilty to ALL of the charges - That means there were NO CHARGES of street racing, speeding, reckless driving, or exhibition of speed.

[Dave Burrell]

This is a prime example of the damning media statements, not the evidence.

If he plead guilty to street racing the headline would be - Street Racer pleads guilty. Instead, the media headline is still - alleged street racer pleads guilty.

He plead guilty to all of the charges in court. He didn't plead guilty to any allegations.


Re-read that sentence from the Sacramento Bee again with the understanding that he did not plead guilty to the allegations of street racing, speeding, reckless driving, or exhibition of speed

Once he plead guilty to something it would no longer be alleged.

Since he plead guilty to ALL of the charges - That means there were NO CHARGES of street racing, speeding, reckless driving, or exhibition of speed.

You can call it two cars driving together really fast together - the rest of us call that street racing

[ChipShot]

Those punk kids are juvenile delinquents. And they'll grow-up to be adult delinquents. It's almost a certainty.

[chris v]

Those punk kids are juvenile delinquents. And they'll grow-up to be adult delinquents. It's almost a certainty.

Yeah, welcome to the real world, thats not how it plays out. I read a statistic somewhere that stated that 86% of all juveniles get arrested at one point in their juvenile careers. I've had trouble when I was younger and I am definately not an adult delinquent.

[bishmasterb]

Those punk kids are juvenile delinquents. And they'll grow-up to be adult delinquents. It's almost a certainty.

Definitely. Just think if Bush and Cheney had actually been locked up for their drunk driving busts, this country would be half a Trillion less in debt, and it's population would be about 3,700 greater.