343 replies to this topic

[Robert Giacometti]

I'm confused, isn't this the same judge who said these kids were a danger to scoiety a few weeks ago?

What changed between then & now?

Interesting comment from the Judge that the police investigation of the accident will take months. What happens if the police investigation determines the kids weren't speeding?

There was another story in the Bee recently about a 19 year old street racing in Elk Grove about a year ago, police estimate he was going nearly 100 mph and hit a car who pulled out to make left turn. This driver had NOT been charged for up to 10 months after the accident while police & DA were investigating. There was a comment expressing some concerns because the victims car pulled out in front of the car going 100 mph.

I saw a defense attorney on TV last week talking about some other trial, where the defense attorney was indicating its a normal tactic to try & keep the accused locked up as it gives the DA a better chance to get the defendants to agree to accept a lesser charge.

Interesting turn of events.

[LexHillsmom]

I'm confused, isn't this the same judge who said these kids were a danger to scoiety a few weeks ago?

What changed between then & now?

Having them home with a suspended license is appropriate, IMHO. Frankly, I'm glad a Judge actually looked at the facts about the boys in this case and could not reconcile the "danger to society" law with reality.

Part of the reason California is in such a financial rut is because we spend our tax dollars locking up too many of the wrong people and letting the real bad guys out because the system is overcroweded. This is a whole other thread.

Besides, if these kids had been adults they would have walked out of jail the same day the incident happened.

[CoolBear]

We should just face the truth; these boys will be brave heroes at the end of this mess. They killed a menacing driver, protecting us from a threat. Our heroes should sue the police and the family of the murdered woman for their trauma.

Our society has become so sick. It just amazes me how people can justify their actions. Some of the replys leave me astonishment. Sick, sick, sick.....

[Family Friend]

What changed between then & now?

It is very unusual for the court to release someone after the arraignment hearing. Normally, once a suspect is required to stay in custody that will remain the order until a trial is finished. A major change in the case is required for the court to change their decision.

Here is my understanding on the procedure.

There are two phases to the investigation.

1) Before the first hearing - in phase one, the Folsom Police investigate the accident, form opinions and conclusions, and then recommend to the DA the charges that they would like filed. This report is forwarded to the DA just before the arraignment hearing.

2) After the first hearing - in phase two, the investigation is now the responsibility of the DA. The DA has their own detectives/investigators and in this case have asked for the California Highway Patrol to investigate the accident and recreate the scene.

This is my opinion on what changed.

In phase one - As we begin to look at the Folsom Police investigation we need to start with the fact that the first Folsom Police Officer to arrive at the accident had a daughter in the teacher's class. This was told to me that night by Folsom Police Officer Knudsen and Toschi.

It is very important for me to say right now - that this doesn't change any of the facts about the accident. I am not saying that the Folsom Police are corrupt, but I think that it did change how the police handled the investigation in these ways:

From the moment that the first officer arrived this wasn't viewed as an accident by Folsom Police.
The Folsom Police never investigated if an accident happened.
The Folsom Police investigation was limited to proving that the boys were street racing.
The Folsom Police didn't have the information they needed to prove street racing, so they kept going to the media every night asking for witnesses.
Mainly, it explains why the Folsom Police had the passion and desire to attack the boys character in the media.

In phase two - Now it's the DA's turn to investigate the accident. The only new report completed since the first hearing is that the Applebee's video has been analyzed. That means to my knowledge there have only been a few changes in the case:

The DA has watched the video that shows how the boys were driving the last few hundred feet before the accident.
The day before the second hearing, they determined how fast the boys were driving based on the video.
The person in charge of the investigation has changed.

At the very least, there was something in the video that has lead the DA to want more information. The CHP is being asked to investigate two things:

To recreate the scene to determine if there was an accident.
Investigate the skidmarks to determine how fast the dodge was traveling before the accident.

For example, The Folsom Police and everyone else online can find a calculator to determine that if two tires leave a 166 foot skidmark that the car is driving 58-59 mph. The CHP will answer the more complicated question - if one tire has a 166 foot skidmark and the second tire has an 80 foot skidmark how fast was the car going.

After their investigation is complete, the DA and CHP might have the same finding as the Folsom Police or they might come up with a different conclusion.

Either way, I don't feel that having an impartial investigation is expecting to much.

[Robert Giacometti]

We should just face the truth; these boys will be brave heroes at the end of this mess. They killed a menacing driver, protecting us from a threat. Our heroes should sue the police and the family of the murdered woman for their trauma.

Our society has become so sick. It just amazes me how people can justify their actions. Some of the replys leave me astonishment. Sick, sick, sick.....

CoolBear, can you believe some of these people? They are actually waiting for the facts, ie, How fast was the car actually going before the impact & who had the right of way, before forming an opinion.

These people, who let facts get in the way of hype....they need help!

[camay2327]

No matter how you slice it, they killed the young lady.....

It is also to bad that their names are not out there just because they are underage. They should be treated as adults...

[stacycam]

The boys weren't actually "released" were they? They are still wearing anklets and can only go to school. I take that as house arrest. Kind of like Junior Soprano.

[Tugboat]

No matter how you slice it, they killed the young lady.....

It is also to bad that their names are not out there just because they are underage. They should be treated as adults...

I really think you need to investigate a little more before condemning the boys. I know the area, twisty road, so fast maybe, but no way excessive. I'm sure the true fault is a women more interested in talking on the cell phone then watching the road. This woman didn’t yield to on-coming traffic, therefore causing the accident. Speed of the boys may have played small part, but negligence on the women driver can not be challenged.

[folsombound]

I really think you need to investigate a little more before condemning the boys. I know the area, twisty road, so fast maybe, but no way excessive. I'm sure the true fault is a women more interested in talking on the cell phone then watching the road. This woman didn’t yield to on-coming traffic, therefore causing the accident. Speed of the boys may have played small part, but negligence on the women driver can not be challenged.

And you know all this because??

[Dave Burrell]

And you know all this because??

must have been in the car with her

[SandPebble]

must have been in the car with her

Poor Tugboat.....

You have to learn about this page if you feel a "victim" contributed in any way, you get flamed.

No one is saying the "racers" are blameless, however regardless of the severity of injury or loss of life, when making a factual determination of fault, I assure you there will be comparative negligence here.

Duck and cover............

[Tugboat]

must have been in the car with her

Because I am an open minded person who seeks the truth. I will not just jump to conclusions saying the boys were racing, or burden the majority of fault. And I not going to say the women exited a parking lot driveway and knowingly pulled out in front of two cars speeding

What I am saying is she didn’t exercise good judgment when entering the road way. I have deducted that a distracting cell phone may have been the primary cause of her mistake…..(sorry if I’m offending cell phone users….an yes, I also use my cell when driving.) I just hope she wasn’t talking to one of her children when the accident occur, however, this is likely the call. “Hi honey, I leaving the Outlets now, I’ll be home……….

Sorry if you don’t like where the truth points

[tessieca]

Tugboat is probably a friend or relative of one of the accused boys.

[Dave Burrell]

Tugboat is probably a friend or relative of one of the accused boys.

That'd be my guess too

Especially when saying he/she is an open minded person and won't jump to conclusions but in a prior post wrote this...

"I'm sure the true fault is a women more interested in talking on the cell phone then watching the road. This woman didn’t yield to on-coming traffic, therefore causing the accident"

[Tugboat]

Tugboat is probably a friend or relative of one of the accused boys.

I don't know the boys, nor the actual situation, however, unlike most, I know the area of incidence, driving conditions at time of accident (I happened by just after time of accident.) and the law. I not saying the boys are without fault, however I am saying the woman driver bears the major greater percentage of fault. As SandPebble expressed “comparative negligence” (shared fault for those needing help) will apply here. So let’s stop lynching the kids.