Quebec Trial - Car Stops to help ducks, Motorcycle hits car (fatality) | Page 14 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Quebec Trial - Car Stops to help ducks, Motorcycle hits car (fatality)

matt123 said:
I agree,If he wasn't gesturing to the duck lady but signaling to the bike behind him to slow down ,sneezing,checking his mirrors or adjusting his visor would he still be have fault?It's not illegal to gesture while riding a bike.Saying he wasn't paying attention is just nitpicking a dead mans final moments.The operator of the parked car that he hit was in fact the distraction. Following that logic maybe we need to stop waving to and back at other bikes as they pass by?
I also dont buy that he was speeding in a socially unacceptable manor,the fact is 10kph is expected by most drivers around you on the highway and 15 over will not get you ticketed by the police conducting speed traps.No one will ever know exactly how fast he was going or what he was thinking but we do know a car was parked illegal with out good reason on the highway It should be clear that an informed jury of her peers believes nothing that he did makes her any less culpable in this situation.
Click to expand...

In summary, the crash MIGHT not have happened of the rider was riding more cautiously but it WOULDN'T have happened if duck lady didn't stop.

IMO that puts the greater weight of the outcome is on duck lady. As I understand it that didn't affect the judgement but will it soften the sentence?

We'll know in a couple of weeks.
 
I belive there should be no mitigating factors as a 16yr girl is dead

nobbie48 said:
In summary, the crash MIGHT not have happened of the rider was riding more cautiously but it WOULDN'T have happened if duck lady didn't stop.

IMO that puts the greater weight of the outcome is on duck lady. As I understand it that didn't affect the judgement but will it soften the sentence?

We'll know in a couple of weeks.
Click to expand...

I respect your thoughts but hope what you heard is wrong.I do not believe anything that Roy did or did not do should affect her sentence.in fact I find Roy's death and the duck lady's feelings secondary.
The focus should be and hopefully is the death of an innocent 16 year old child that will never experience what life has to offer.Roy has payed the price for any contribution he may have made to the death of his daughter but the duck lady has not.
IMO because of that child she must stand alone in her sentencing without mitigating factors.
 
Last edited:
Re: I belive there should be no mitigating factors as a 16yr girl is dead

matt123 said:
I respect your thoughts but hope what you heard is wrong.I do not believe anything that Roy did or did not do should affect her sentence.in fact I find Roy's death and the duck lady's feelings secondary.
The focus should be and hopefully is the death of an innocent 16 year old child that will never experience what life has to offer.Roy has payed the price for any contribution he may have made to the death of his daughter but the duck lady has not.
IMO because of that child she must stand alone in her sentencing without mitigating factors.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it should, just that it might affect the sentence. It depends on the judge and how he sees it and the legal restrictions placed on him.

Unless someone is at the trial they may have trouble understanding the nuances of the testimonies.
 
Re: I belive there should be no mitigating factors as a 16yr girl is dead

nobbie48 said:
I'm not saying it should, just that it might affect the sentence. It depends on the judge and how he sees it and the legal restrictions placed on him.

Unless someone is at the trial they may have trouble understanding the nuances of the testimonies.
Click to expand...


Sorry,I didn't mean to infer what your opinion is just that I can respect it.As you already said it wouldn't have happened if she had not stopped in the roadway.I personally think she should have been and possibly was convicted in the death of that girl alone regardless of any other circumstance.I cant say enough how Roy's actions even if contributory are not mitigating in regards to the passenger.
I also think she should get some jail time and not walk away unscathed.
I can feel sorry for her but doubt that her appeal will stick as empathy is irreverent to conviction.Since ignorance cannot be used as a defense what defense does she have?I would think none.
 
Re: I belive there should be no mitigating factors as a 16yr girl is dead

She has filed for an appeal. An appeal has not been granted. For an appeal to be authorized there must be a hearing at which the defence can make reasonable allegations of a mistake in law, by the original trial judge.
 
What about someone who drags a rail tie out into the road at night because they are sick of sport bikes? Then a middle aged couple on a Harley crest the hill and smokes the tail tie and get all ****** up?


The guy riding is responsible for not hitting things right??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
caboose56 said:
More like Grannysmith versus Gala.

"Good intentions" does not absolve is of responsibility for our actions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Agreed... No, it doesn't.
She wasn't trying to hurt or kill the riders...
"Someone who drags a rail tie out into the road at night because they are sick of sport bikes"... is not being negligent.. they're knowingly and intentionally trying to hurt/kill someone.
 
Yes, I don't recall, something more serious than negligence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
raginduck said:
Agreed... No, it doesn't.
She wasn't trying to hurt or kill the riders...
"Someone who drags a rail tie out into the road at night because they are sick of sport bikes"... is not being negligent.. they're knowingly and intentionally trying to hurt/kill someone.
Click to expand...

I don't get it, if a drunk driver kills someone, they shouldn't go to jail because they didn't mean to? Lol
 
Re: I belive there should be no mitigating factors as a 16yr girl is dead

Rob MacLennan said:
She has filed for an appeal. An appeal has not been granted. For an appeal to be authorized there must be a hearing at which the defence can make reasonable allegations of a mistake in law, by the original trial judge.
Click to expand...

Yes,this is what I meant when I said it wouldn't stick.Her lawyer was not making sense in the clip and seemed to be of the opinion that the charge and instructions were to harsh since she didn't mean to cause harm.I'm not saying she should max out but she should get something.Can an attempt at an appeal affect sentencing in regards to remorse should it fail?And why not wait until after sentencing to file?Im not so sure Id want to irritate the judge at this point.
 
Last edited:
Re: I belive there should be no mitigating factors as a 16yr girl is dead

matt123 said:
Yes,this is what I meant when I said it wouldn't stick.
Click to expand...

Woah dude you should be on CNN
 
Re: I belive there should be no mitigating factors as a 16yr girl is dead

caboose56 said:
"Good intentions" does not absolve is of responsibility for our actions.
Click to expand...
as a driver/rider your suppose to watch the road and keep an eye out for obstacles. Like parked cars, deer, debris etc.

No one expects you to watch out for I.E.D.'s, or clothes line stretched across a roadway. If some one deliberately sets a trap, like rail tie across a lane, you can't expect a driver/rider to be prepared for that.

matt123 said:
Yes,this is what I meant when I said it wouldn't stick.Her lawyer was not making sense in the clip and seemed to be of the opinion that the charge and instructions were to harsh since she didn't mean to cause harm.I'm not saying she should max out but she should get something.Can an attempt at an appeal affect sentencing should it fail in regards to remorse?And why not wait until after sentencing to file?
Click to expand...
You can only make an appeal if the judge made a mistake, or new evidence has been drought up. (there's other reasons) you can't appeal because you don't like the decision.
And no an appeal doesn't effect sentencing. An appeal is a mistake in the procedure of justice, not a denial of guilt.
 
Last edited:
Re: I belive there should be no mitigating factors as a 16yr girl is dead

dasiffy said:
as a driver/rider your suppose to watch the road and keep an eye out for obstacles. Like parked cars, deer, debris etc.

No one expects you to watch out for I.E.D.'s, or clothes line stretched across a roadway. If some one deliberately sets a trap, like rail tie across a lane, you can't expect a driver/rider to be prepared for that.
Click to expand...

So debris that falls off a truck we should be prepared for but a deliberate trap no?

Makes sense...................


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Re: I belive there should be no mitigating factors as a 16yr girl is dead

^ so many periods. <not sure="" if="" serious="">-not sure if serious-

:/</not>
 
kellen said:
I don't get it, if a drunk driver kills someone, they shouldn't go to jail because they didn't mean to? Lol
Click to expand...

We have discussed in other threads the inequalities where left turn idiots take out bikes and get minor fines. Sometimes justice sucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom