Boating Accident/Death off Diamond Island

VtSteve · 03-05-2010, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trfour

Trial set to start Monday; http://citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...9873/0/CITIZEN

That was a pretty good article, someone did their homework.

fatlazyless · 03-06-2010, 06:23 AM

If Attorney Jimmie Moir can bring home the bacon, I definately expect to see him roar past Buoy 3 in a nice, new Formula SS-370 express cruiser with the name DEFINING NEGLIGENCE on the stern.

Defining negligence....Attorney Jimmie Moir got the Thornton 25-year old guy out of the state prison...who in 2006 crossed the center line in the Rt 49-Thornton S-curve and killed three 54 year olds who were riding on two Harleys....defining negligence

In a 3-1 split decision, in June 2009, the judges on the New Hampshire supreme court reversed a lower court conviction of negligence because in the opinion of Supreme Court Justice Linda Dalianis, the driver crossing the center line for some unknown reason is not negligence.

Two 50-something couples, driving two Harley Davidsons, two men and two women, in June 2006, were struck head on, in the middle of the daytime, by a car that wandered across the center line, killing three and injuring the fourth.

After serving about three years of a twelve year sentence, Attorney Jimmie Moir won his client in an appeal before the NH Supremes.....because that incident did not constitute negligence.......defining negligence!

DEFINING NEGLIGENCE....sounds like a good name for a nice big boat!

...ladies & gentlemen of the jury.....what is negligence? ....the failure to use reasonable care....doing something that a reasonable & prudent person would not do...

ApS · 03-06-2010, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve

That was a pretty good article, someone did their homework.

Update from yesterday found at that link:
http://citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art.../0/CITNEWS0101

In this entire case so far, a new word now appears:

Quote:

"Jurors...will see the boat she was allegedly driving when it struck the rocky shoreline of Diamond Island."

secondcurve · 03-06-2010, 10:39 AM

That is very interesting. I have been thinking about what type of defense has the potential to be successful in this case and I've been unable to come up with anything that seems to provide a reasonable doubt. Intoxication will be indisputable one way or the other with blood evidence and even if totally sober how can't she be found negligent after running into an island at a high rate of speed? It seems like an open an shut case, but it could be possible that she wasn't driving the boat.

secondcurve · 03-06-2010, 10:42 AM

Attorney James Moir of Concord, who is representing Blizzard, filed a motion asking trial Judge Kathleen McGuire to ask prospective jurors a number of questions before they could be selected to sit on the panel. Key among them was whether they had formed any opinions regarding people "who own or operate large powerboats" and if they had an opinion concerning whether there should be a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee.

Talk about a Red Herring!!!!!

Newbiesaukee · 03-06-2010, 11:49 AM

I am not an attorney and I have been following the thread from the beginning and prefer the system to run its course. But, I do not see that these are unreasonable questions for either the defense or the prosecution to ask a jury pool in this case;and it might cut both ways. A person who has strong feelings either pro or con the speed limit or who owns or doesn't own a "large" power boat might have very different feelings but these feelings could influence their deliberations...one way or the other. The idea is to have none of these feelings and to be impartial. I realize that reasonable people with strong feelings CAN be impartial. Unfortunately, the real world may not work that way, but I do not see it as a "red herring" as the feelings and conscious or unconscious feelings may have a direct bearing on the impartiality of a juror. To me, it is not different to ask a juror in a rape case if he or she has a close relative who has been raped; or, in a malpractice case if anyone is a physicican or is closely related to one. If you were on trial in this case, would you want a strong advocate for speed limits to be on your jury? I would like to believe that jurors are impartial regardless, but it ain't necessarily so.

Pineedles · 03-06-2010, 11:50 AM

Both this trial and the disposition of SB 464 are happening next week. Trial starts Monday and is expected to last till March 11th. SB 464 is being considered on March 11th.

03-06-2010, 06:23 AM	#2
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,904 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 304 Thanked 1,045 Times in 762 Posts	...defining negligence! If Attorney Jimmie Moir can bring home the bacon, I definately expect to see him roar past Buoy 3 in a nice, new Formula SS-370 express cruiser with the name DEFINING NEGLIGENCE on the stern. Defining negligence....Attorney Jimmie Moir got the Thornton 25-year old guy out of the state prison...who in 2006 crossed the center line in the Rt 49-Thornton S-curve and killed three 54 year olds who were riding on two Harleys....defining negligence In a 3-1 split decision, in June 2009, the judges on the New Hampshire supreme court reversed a lower court conviction of negligence because in the opinion of Supreme Court Justice Linda Dalianis, the driver crossing the center line for some unknown reason is not negligence. Two 50-something couples, driving two Harley Davidsons, two men and two women, in June 2006, were struck head on, in the middle of the daytime, by a car that wandered across the center line, killing three and injuring the fourth. After serving about three years of a twelve year sentence, Attorney Jimmie Moir won his client in an appeal before the NH Supremes.....because that incident did not constitute negligence.......defining negligence! DEFINING NEGLIGENCE....sounds like a good name for a nice big boat! ...ladies & gentlemen of the jury.....what is negligence? ....the failure to use reasonable care....doing something that a reasonable & prudent person would not do... __________________ .... Banned for life from local thrift store!

03-06-2010, 11:50 AM	#7
Pineedles Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Moultonborough & CT Posts: 2,549 Thanks: 1,074 Thanked 672 Times in 369 Posts	Interesting coincidence? Both this trial and the disposition of SB 464 are happening next week. Trial starts Monday and is expected to last till March 11th. SB 464 is being considered on March 11th.

03-06-2010, 10:39 AM	#4
secondcurve Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 2,128 Thanks: 1,349 Thanked 564 Times in 291 Posts	That is very interesting. I have been thinking about what type of defense has the potential to be successful in this case and I've been unable to come up with anything that seems to provide a reasonable doubt. Intoxication will be indisputable one way or the other with blood evidence and even if totally sober how can't she be found negligent after running into an island at a high rate of speed? It seems like an open an shut case, but it could be possible that she wasn't driving the boat.

03-06-2010, 10:42 AM	#5
secondcurve Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 2,128 Thanks: 1,349 Thanked 564 Times in 291 Posts	Attorney James Moir of Concord, who is representing Blizzard, filed a motion asking trial Judge Kathleen McGuire to ask prospective jurors a number of questions before they could be selected to sit on the panel. Key among them was whether they had formed any opinions regarding people "who own or operate large powerboats" and if they had an opinion concerning whether there should be a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee. Talk about a Red Herring!!!!!

03-06-2010, 11:49 AM	#6
Newbiesaukee Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Coral Gables, winter; Long Island, summer Posts: 1,363 Thanks: 961 Thanked 575 Times in 300 Posts	I am not an attorney and I have been following the thread from the beginning and prefer the system to run its course. But, I do not see that these are unreasonable questions for either the defense or the prosecution to ask a jury pool in this case;and it might cut both ways. A person who has strong feelings either pro or con the speed limit or who owns or doesn't own a "large" power boat might have very different feelings but these feelings could influence their deliberations...one way or the other. The idea is to have none of these feelings and to be impartial. I realize that reasonable people with strong feelings CAN be impartial. Unfortunately, the real world may not work that way, but I do not see it as a "red herring" as the feelings and conscious or unconscious feelings may have a direct bearing on the impartiality of a juror. To me, it is not different to ask a juror in a rape case if he or she has a close relative who has been raped; or, in a malpractice case if anyone is a physicican or is closely related to one. If you were on trial in this case, would you want a strong advocate for speed limits to be on your jury? I would like to believe that jurors are impartial regardless, but it ain't necessarily so.