Boating Accident/Death off Diamond Island

Skip · 04-30-2009, 05:48 AM

A Superior Court judge has found that the NHMP did indeed have probable cause in drawing Blizzard's blood sample and the evidence will be admissable in her trial. A short story can be found HERE with a full story to follow in the Citizen later in the day.

Mee-n-Mac · 04-30-2009, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip

A Superior Court judge has found that the NHMP did indeed have probable cause in drawing Blizzard's blood sample and the evidence will be admissable in her trial. A short story can be found HERE with a full story to follow in the Citizen later in the day.

And here's a link to the aforementioned full story.

VtSteve · 05-01-2009, 03:06 PM

Just from reading the stories, and of course, Skip's great interpretation, I'd have to say from my perspective it looks like the MP and other authorities did a pretty good job. For a case of this kind, and the issues and the people involved, it looks like they covered their bases carefully.

Of course there will be more details to come out this year. But looking back since it happened, I think many here were pretty much on target with the general nature of the discussion. More importantly, many of us were on target with what is required for safety in boating.

ApS · 05-02-2009, 09:45 AM

For more than a decade, scientists have already known about the toll alcohol takes on boaters.

Quote:

Accident Analysis & Prevention: Human error in recreational boating

Background:
"...One contributor to this [boating fatality] toll is alcohol-influenced operation of boats. Our study objective was to determine the prevalence of alcohol-influenced motor boat operation, and describe its relationship to demographic factors and other risk behaviors.

Methods:"...a randomly dialed national telephone survey contacted 5238 adult respondents who reported on their operation of motor boats, alcohol use, and other potential injury risk behaviors. Data were weighted to obtain national estimates and percentages.

Results: Of 597 respondents who operated a motor boat...31% (206 respondents) reported doing so at least once while alcohol-influenced.

Alcohol-influenced operation of a motor boat was significantly more likely among males, individuals between 25 and 34 years of age, and those with greater than a college education.

Alcohol-influenced motor boat operation was also more common among those who drove motor vehicles while alcohol-influenced, and those who drove a motor vehicle without using a seat belt.

Conclusions: To decrease alcohol-influenced boating, new strategies should be developed. Strategies used to decrease drinking and driving motor vehicles may prove adaptable to preventing alcohol-influenced boating. More effective means of monitoring alcohol-influenced boating is needed.

Alcohol use by passengers on boats should not be overlooked as a problem.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...c82b3d4de1bfae

Questions:
Weren't each of the three aboard this boat 34 years of age?

Does Common Sense take a break between the ages of 25 and 34?

Do other Winnipesaukee-users in this age group ignore their automobile seatbelt usage also?

VtSteve · 05-04-2009, 06:49 AM

Common sense isn't all that common when viewing the big picture. Those of us that think we have common sense, pretty much knew what the causes of this tragedy were. Not that many choices really. It's a little late in these threads to bring it all back. Just reading the Conclusions part of the study you posted should be enough to get you back on track.

Bear Islander · 05-04-2009, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve

...It's a little late in these threads to bring it all back...

After the accident we were told to keep quiet and not speculate because it was all too new. And I agreed.

Now it is to LATE to talk about it?

It will never be to LATE to learn from a tragedy like this.

VtSteve · 05-04-2009, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

After the accident we were told to keep quiet and not speculate because it was all too new. And I agreed.

Now it is to LATE to talk about it?

It will never be to LATE to learn from a tragedy like this.

I fully agree BI. I didn't mean it that way at all, (decided not even to mention what I meant. Don's a gracious host. Many know what I meant). It's always important to discuss what can happen in the real world, regardless of circumstances. All we can do as boaters is be cautious, and try to learn from mistakes like these.

Accidents can and do happen, even when people are trying to be cautious. I'm sure everyone has an occasional lapse or two, and we all have to remain as diligent as possible.

In that spirit, I'd recommend the following. How about a safe boating thread? It could contain a helpful series of navigation posts, broken out however it evolves. Perhaps a more static discussion of rules and regs, dos and don'ts.

Some that is pretty fluent and experienced at chart/GPS integration could benefit newbies as well as old timers.

I just thought that a constructive section could be erected.

Jeti · 05-06-2009, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I fully agree BI. I didn't mean it that way at all, (decided not even to mention what I meant. Don's a gracious host. Many know what I meant). It's always important to discuss what can happen in the real world, regardless of circumstances. All we can do as boaters is be cautious, and try to learn from mistakes like these.

Accidents can and do happen, even when people are trying to be cautious. I'm sure everyone has an occasional lapse or two, and we all have to remain as diligent as possible.

In that spirit, I'd recommend the following. How about a safe boating thread? It could contain a helpful series of navigation posts, broken out however it evolves. Perhaps a more static discussion of rules and regs, dos and don'ts.

Some that is pretty fluent and experienced at chart/GPS integration could benefit newbies as well as old timers.

I just thought that a constructive section could be erected.

she is toast and should serve time for being wasted and taking the life of another.... Lots of time!! The fact that she lawyer ed up and tried to block key evidence is a sign of guilt. Its pathetic really..

Skip · 05-07-2009, 05:55 AM

After a pre-trial hearing yesterday, Blizzard has been succesful in obtaining a five month delay for the start of the trial, moving it from May until at least October. She is also having her attorney file a number of motions to once again throw out the blood tests which would, as the State has claimed, show she was impaired at the time when she struck the island.

The full story can be read HERE in this morning's Citizen.

VitaBene · 05-07-2009, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip

After a pre-trial hearing yesterday, Blizzard has been succesful in obtaining a five month delay for the start of the trial, moving it from May until at least October. She is also having her attorney file a number of motions to once again throw out the blood tests which would, as the State has claimed, show she was impaired at the time when she struck the island.

The full story can be read HERE in this morning's Citizen.

But she has the best defense that money can buy..... at what cost to the taxpayers???

secondcurve · 05-07-2009, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VitaBene

But she has the best defense that money can buy..... at what cost to the taxpayers???

That is an excellent point, all of this is costing the tax payers a fortune.

We have the best legal system in the world, but obviously this case shows some of its imperfections. Blizzard drove her boat into an island at a high rate of speed and killed someone. If that isn't reason enough for law enforcement to get blood samples without a warrant I'm not sure what is.

Skip · 05-07-2009, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by secondcurve

That is an excellent point, all of this is costing the tax payers a fortune.

We have the best legal system in the world, but obviously this case shows some of its imperfections. Blizzard drove her boat into an island at a high rate of speed and killed someone. If that isn't reason enough for law enforcement to get blood samples without a warrant I'm not sure what is.

Excellent point.

And yes, while we do have the best system in the world, sadly there are two tiers of justice in this country. One for those with money, and another for those without.

The delays, constant frivolous motions coupled with attempts to garner pity for the defendant are all made possible by the amount of money you have to attempt to delay or de-rail the inevitable.

To me it is also great testament to the true character of the defendant.

And that's my editorializing for the day.....

SIKSUKR · 05-07-2009, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeti

she is toast and should serve time for being wasted and taking the life of another.... Lots of time!! The fact that she lawyer ed up and tried to block key evidence is a sign of guilt. Its pathetic really..

Pathetic is people who that have made judgements without knowing facts. She was wasted? The one person that would know better than any of you was on the boat and said she only had a few and in her opinion Erica was not impaired at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by secondcurve

Blizzard drove her boat into an island at a high rate of speed and killed someone.

The same onboard witness said they were traveling at appr. 25 mph. This is a high rate of speed?

Stephanie was a friend of mine so I feel the pain of losing her but some of you posting here are way out of line.

VtSteve · 05-07-2009, 11:47 AM

I have no idea what the reality of the situation was on that fateful morning, and hope never to be in the same position myself. I think it's just wisdom on the part of the lawyers to get the trial postponed until after summer. They probably feared a circus of publicity, with the new law and the beginning of summer happening at the same time. BUT, I note in the article that she is scheduled to have more surgery in early July. So I'll leave that up to the judge's discretion that the continuance made sense.

Without knowing the facts, I'd just have to rely on my gut feelings as to the continued attempts to get the results ruled inadmissible. Too many factors involved. If the results were a .01 it would be a negative, obviously a zero would be ideal. Given their attempts, it's obviously not a zero. A big negative regardless of the actual level.

Sure, it would be nice for all involved in the case to sit down and hear the truth. The consequences can be scary, and with enough resources, sometimes there are none. I don't know any of the people involved, nor their character or personal behaviors. I'd like to think that if such a thing happened while I was skipper, I'd man up and just tell the story. Especially so given the relationships of those involved. I hope I never will know what I'd do, and hope nobody else does either.

But the circumstance surrounding an accident in bad weather which involves driving onto an island demands answers. The best case scenario is that someone screwed up, went off course and juts plain blew it. There are a lot of different scenarios between that and what anyone would consider the worst case for the skipper. Only those on board really know what went down.

I'm not a legal mind by any means. But my personal judgment on the warrant and the samples is this. I believe the Judge did good by pointing out that the circumstances gave probable cause to obtain them. In addition, I cannot fathom a legal system working the way her lawyer stated it does. That meaning, a Judge would presumably not authorize a warrant to obtain the samples if her best friend states she did not "appear" under the influence, and just took her statements at face value. If the system worked that way, cases would never be prosecuted.

beantowntechy · 05-07-2009, 01:29 PM

I am a former veteran and I love my country to death, but I wouldn't be so quick to label our legal system as the best in the world. I'll refrain from giving any examples as I don't want to go off subject (and open up a can of worms), but I'm sure everyone can think of 50 bad examples.

Anyway, my condolences to all those impacted by this tragedy.

Pineedles · 05-07-2009, 02:58 PM

I have no personal connection to any of the parties involved, but I can't help from being upset at the seemingly "blood thirsty" feelings on behalf of some. What personal gain does anyone get from the defendant's conviction or for that matter the penalty that may be imposed. There has been suffering going on and whatever the potential penalty received is, no matter how severe, it will pale in comparison to the pain of knowing that you have caused the death of a friend.

DC Pointer · 05-07-2009, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pineedles

I have no personal connection to any of the parties involved, but I can't help from being upset at the seemingly "blood thirsty" feelings on behalf of some. What personal gain does anyone get from the defendant's conviction or for that matter the penalty that may be imposed. There has been suffering going on and whatever the potential penalty received is, no matter how severe, it will pale in comparison to the pain of knowing that you have caused the death of a friend.

I second that Pineedles. I have been following this thread since the beginning. Never really had much to say or add. But I agree wholeheartedly. Most are not "blood thirsty," but few are. The people involved in this TRADGEDY are tormented enough. I was taught not to "spit up in the air." Have some class.

sa meredith · 05-07-2009, 04:08 PM

Well guys, I'm not sure where to fall on this one. While I am not "blood thirsty", I do find some things troublesome.
First of all, I just don't think, at this point, it is speculation to say her actions caused the death of another person. This seems obvious.
Secondly, she was most likely under the influence during these actions. This seems clear because of the motions to suppress the blood sample evidence. (I don't think you would try to suppress evidence that worked in your favor)

We are now a year after the fact (or very close anyway) and now learn her attorney has made a successful attempt to push the trial back another 6 months. Only her $$$$ (or family's $$$) and sharp attorneys are delaying justice. Would the same be true if blue collar "work a day" Joe, who could not pay for a good defense, crashed his boat and killed a fishing buddy??? I say no, no, a thousand times no.
I'm sorry, but I find her attempt to suppress the blood sample evidence, based on the fact that MP did not have probable cause, absolutely shameful. She drove a speed boat into an island. Enough said. Probable cause??? Damn right!
I honestly feel bad for all involved. Really. The girls and their families. And yes, Erica, I'm sure, is already paying the penalty and finding it difficult to live everyday life.
But I've read enough about delays and suppressing legit evidence. I say, it is time to face the music.
Just my thoughts....

Sman · 05-07-2009, 04:31 PM

What if for some legal reason they toss out the blood test and/or she was not drunk, is she still facing jail time for a different charge?

I understand alchohol makes any punishment far more extensive, but is it the differnce between prison time and no prison time?

VtSteve · 05-07-2009, 04:56 PM

Nobody seems to care about the Why in the delay. The article clearly states that she is due for another surgery in early July. It would only make sense to delay a trial that may very well last through and past that time period.

Not my opinion, just the whole point for the delay.

Mee-n-Mac · 05-07-2009, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Well guys, I'm not sure where to fall on this one. While I am not "blood thirsty", I do find some things troublesome.
First of all, I just don't think, at this point, it is speculation to say her actions caused the death of another person. This seems obvious.
Secondly, she was mostly likely under the influence during these actions. This seems clear because of the motions to suppress the blood sample evidence. (I don't think you would try to suppress evidence that worked in your favor)
{snip}
Just my thoughts....

Let me play contrarian. What if the BAC evidence says she was at 0.025. While not meeting the legal definition for being "intoxicated" the prosecutor might argue that she was impaired (which is the term bandied about in the story). The defense now has to defuse a hot button issue and I suspect any jury is predisposed to be more negative when alcohol is involved. So the, well a, question becomes how impaired was she and then did this impairment even factor into the incident. I know people who get stupid after a couple of drinks and others who aren't overly affected. Imagine a case where you have 2 beers with lunch and then as you leave the parking lot you are hit by another car. The state decides to prosecute you for driving impaired (in addition to whatever else happens to the other guy). You claim it was only 2 beers ! The state claims that you might have avoided the other car except for the alcohol and besides you were still "impaired". What would you want your attorney to do ?

As for hitting the island I wonder when does it become a crime and when is it an accident ? Some years ago an ederly man hit Rattlesnake I (very low speed) and broke some bones IIRC. Pretend it had been a broken neck and not his. I think the stated cause was that a neighbor had turned on some lights which the boater had confused for his own and thus he came into the wrong part of the island. So was this an accident or was his speed excessive for the situation, resulting in hitting the island with (in our newly revised scenario) severe injuries (or a death is you care to equalize the 2 situations) ? No matter what the skipper screwed up and is culpable but is he/she guilty of a crime ?

In this case I just don't know enough to make an informed judgement. If the rain and/or fog had knocked visibilty down enough then she shouldn't have been on plane. I lean in that direction. But I don't know what the conditions were there and then. I know that 3 hours earlier the cloud cover was hovering over the lake making it dark but there wasn't a problem seeing, at lake level, up Alton Bay.

If I've understood her course that night (and I'm not sure I do, I think she was running the slot between Diamond and Rattlesnake coming from Wolfeboro) then I find it hard to understand how she misjudged her position relative to the NW end of Rattlesnake so much as to hit Diamond I. FL 25 is there to help. Did she not see it ? If so why not ? Did she just misjudge the turn needed to clear Diamond or did she see some lights on shore and mistakenly think she was in the clear when she wasn't. Was she paying attention at the helm or gabbing it up with her friends ? Did any alcohol in her affect any of her abilities or would the same thing have happened if she hadn't touched a drop ?

I just don't know enough to make a call.

Steveo · 05-08-2009, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

If I've understood her course that night (and I'm not sure I do, I think she was running the slot between Diamond and Rattlesnake coming from Wolfeboro) then I find it hard to understand how she misjudged her position relative to the NW end of Rattlesnake so much as to hit Diamond I. FL 25 is there to help. Did she not see it ? If so why not ? Did she just misjudge the turn needed to clear Diamond or did she see some lights on shore and mistakenly think she was in the clear when she wasn't. Was she paying attention at the helm or gabbing it up with her friends ? Did any alcohol in her affect any of her abilities or would the same thing have happened if she hadn't touched a drop ?

I just don't know enough to make a call.

Just an FYI:

That was not her course. She was coming from the Weirs area (Penelton Beach) heading SE. She was trying to go between Diamond and the mainland (nears Ames Farm) and was heading to her camp on Sleeper Island. She hit the very southwestern tip of Diamond.

Phantom · 05-08-2009, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

If I've understood her course that night (and I'm not sure I do, I think she was running the slot between Diamond and Rattlesnake coming from Wolfeboro) .

Mee-n-Mac -- As I understand it her course was NOT what you describe.

My understanding: Erica left Wolfboro and boated to her father's house to play a Fathers Day prank with pictures on his front lawn at Pendleton Shores. From there she left and headed to to friends house (where I believe she was staying) on (or near) Sleeper Island. Thus if you mentally follow her course that would take her from her fathers house -- for sake of argument call it the Govenors Isl Bridge -- eithor North or South of the Witches (it doesn't matter), North of Locke Island and then almost a straight line (keeping Diamond & Rattlesnake to the North) to Sleeper. She obviously did not have her bearings (or conditions pervailed) where she was too far "left" of course.

Other than clearing THAT up, I have no intent of being sucked into this thread.

NHDOLFAN · 05-08-2009, 12:39 PM

If Erica's pain and suffering is enough to elude legal ramifications, then she should save her parents, the parents of the deceased and the state the time and money that would be involved.

While she killed someone, her quality of life has changed forever from what I have read. Could she be better off under house arrest for a period of time, be made to teach boater safety courses with an emphasis on the affects of alcohol and perform community service? The community service could encompass her talking with students at local schools and such about her decisions and the impact they had.

Just some thoughts to what I believe is going to be a long drawn out trial with a lot of $$$ spent that could be put to better use!

Mee-n-Mac · 05-08-2009, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steveo

Just an FYI:

That was not her course. She was coming from the Weirs area (Penelton Beach) heading SE. She was trying to go between Diamond and the mainland (nears Ames Farm) and was heading to her camp on Sleeper Island. She hit the very southwestern tip of Diamond.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phantom

Mee-n-Mac -- As I understand it her course was NOT what you describe.

My understanding: Erica left Wolfboro and boated to her father's house to play a Fathers Day prank with pictures on his front lawn at Pendleton Shores. From there she left and headed to to friends house (where I believe she was staying) on (or near) Sleeper Island. Thus if you mentally follow her course that would take her from her fathers house -- for sake of argument call it the Govenors Isl Bridge -- eithor North or South of the Witches (it doesn't matter), North of Locke Island and then almost a straight line (keeping Diamond & Rattlesnake to the North) to Sleeper. She obviously did not have her bearings (or conditions pervailed) where she was too far "left" of course.

Other than clearing THAT up, I have no intent of being sucked into this thread.

Thanks for the correction ! That makes more sense now and paints a somewhat different picture.

secondcurve · 05-07-2009, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

Pathetic is people who that have made judgements without knowing facts. She was wasted? The one person that would know better than any of you was on the boat and said she only had a few and in her opinion Erica was not impaired at all.

The same onboard witness said they were traveling at appr. 25 mph. This is a high rate of speed?

Stephanie was a friend of mine so I feel the pain of losing her but some of you posting here are way out of line.

25MPH is a High rate of speed in many circumstances. I think the facts speak for themselves.

Jeti · 05-08-2009, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

Pathetic is people who that have made judgements without knowing facts. She was wasted? The one person that would know better than any of you was on the boat and said she only had a few and in her opinion Erica was not impaired at all.

The same onboard witness said they were traveling at appr. 25 mph. This is a high rate of speed?

Stephanie was a friend of mine so I feel the pain of losing her but some of you posting here are way out of line.

Lets cut through the fog here! The state is charging her with alternate counts of negligent homicide; that she was either under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the crash or that she failed to keep a proper lookout. She is also charged with one count of aggravated driving while intoxicated. The fact that she is pushing back and trying to kick out the evidence is speaking volumes, that is what I am reading from all of this. Remember just my opinion......Prosecution, has witness and blood evidence that seems to prove their case I will assume.

If she was not impaired, and not drinking or drunk, I would assume that she would not have a problem with presenting the results. Lets hope that judgment is fair and balanced. If the evidence that is about to be presented shows no impairment, then I stand correct and will own it. However, if shows negligence I think the maximum sentence should be warranted. I lost a brother to a drunk driver, so pathetic as my comments my seem to you, I have little tolerance for such actions!

Tank151 · 05-11-2009, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeti

she is toast and should serve time for being wasted and taking the life of another.... Lots of time!! The fact that she lawyer ed up and tried to block key evidence is a sign of guilt. Its pathetic really..

Another Judge and Jury heard from? Why don't you wait for the facts Judge Judy!!!

sa meredith · 05-12-2009, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tank151

Another Judge and Jury heard from? Why don't you wait for the facts Judge Judy!!!

While I think his/her post was a bit harsh... "...lots of time" etc.,
I think it completely reasonable for people to be losing patience waiting for this situation to draw to a close. Close to a year now (which indeed seems about right) but now another 5 months. Ok, yeah, another surgery...fine.
And then what about in 5 months...what then?
What bothers me more than anything, really, is this: The defense taking a postion that the MP did not have probable cause to collect a blood sample. Just baffling...she hit an island, in the middle of the night, at 20/25 MPH, and there were beer cans found on the scene....if this in not probable cause, I'd like someone (maybe Skip) to explain what is.

VtSteve · 05-12-2009, 01:09 PM

They have to do something to bide the time, and earn a bit more. Defense attorneys often have a huge job to do in the wake of a mountain of evidence. I would think they'd start with the laws governing the gathering and acceptability of evidence, and they apparently have. It's a nasty case all around, and I doubt she'll come out smelling like a rose regardless of the outcome.

My own personal opinion is simply based on what everyone outside the case knows. Given that, I'd say they not only had probably cause to gather the samples, but would have been negligent had they not done so. It is sad to see some cases where insurmountable evidence is thrown out due to improper procedures being used. I'm not the Judge, and I certainly don't have the information they do.

It's a sad case all around for everyone, and I'd be happy I'd be delighted to never read about another on remotely similar to it. But sadly, every year there are several like it. While the percentage of boating accidents and/or fatalities is very, very low given the number of boats in the country, incidents like this really hurt the most. She has a family and friends, and it was Father's Day weekend, that's what I remember the most.

Jeti · 05-12-2009, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tank151

Another Judge and Jury heard from? Why don't you wait for the facts Judge Judy!!!

Negligent homicide is a class B felony and the penalty could be up to 7 years in prison. Negligent homicide that occurs while operating a vehicle or boat while under the influence of alcohol or drugs is a class A felony and the penalty could be up to 15 years in prison

04-30-2009, 05:48 AM	#1
Skip Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dover, NH Posts: 1,615 Thanks: 256 Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts	Blood tests admissable..... A Superior Court judge has found that the NHMP did indeed have probable cause in drawing Blizzard's blood sample and the evidence will be admissable in her trial. A short story can be found HERE with a full story to follow in the Citizen later in the day.

05-01-2009, 03:06 PM	#3
VtSteve Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,320 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 230 Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts	Seems Like a Pretty Good Job Just from reading the stories, and of course, Skip's great interpretation, I'd have to say from my perspective it looks like the MP and other authorities did a pretty good job. For a case of this kind, and the issues and the people involved, it looks like they covered their bases carefully. Of course there will be more details to come out this year. But looking back since it happened, I think many here were pretty much on target with the general nature of the discussion. More importantly, many of us were on target with what is required for safety in boating.

05-07-2009, 05:55 AM	#9
Skip Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dover, NH Posts: 1,615 Thanks: 256 Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts	Blizzard gets trial delayed for five months After a pre-trial hearing yesterday, Blizzard has been succesful in obtaining a five month delay for the start of the trial, moving it from May until at least October. She is also having her attorney file a number of motions to once again throw out the blood tests which would, as the State has claimed, show she was impaired at the time when she struck the island. The full story can be read HERE in this morning's Citizen. Last edited by Skip; 05-07-2009 at 06:31 AM.

05-07-2009, 01:29 PM	#15
beantowntechy Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 2 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	What, best system in the world? I am a former veteran and I love my country to death, but I wouldn't be so quick to label our legal system as the best in the world. I'll refrain from giving any examples as I don't want to go off subject (and open up a can of worms), but I'm sure everyone can think of 50 bad examples. Anyway, my condolences to all those impacted by this tragedy.

05-07-2009, 04:08 PM	#18
sa meredith Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 986 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 32 Thanked 352 Times in 137 Posts	maybe yes, maybe no Well guys, I'm not sure where to fall on this one. While I am not "blood thirsty", I do find some things troublesome. First of all, I just don't think, at this point, it is speculation to say her actions caused the death of another person. This seems obvious. Secondly, she was most likely under the influence during these actions. This seems clear because of the motions to suppress the blood sample evidence. (I don't think you would try to suppress evidence that worked in your favor) We are now a year after the fact (or very close anyway) and now learn her attorney has made a successful attempt to push the trial back another 6 months. Only her $$$$ (or family's $$$) and sharp attorneys are delaying justice. Would the same be true if blue collar "work a day" Joe, who could not pay for a good defense, crashed his boat and killed a fishing buddy??? I say no, no, a thousand times no. I'm sorry, but I find her attempt to suppress the blood sample evidence, based on the fact that MP did not have probable cause, absolutely shameful. She drove a speed boat into an island. Enough said. Probable cause??? Damn right! I honestly feel bad for all involved. Really. The girls and their families. And yes, Erica, I'm sure, is already paying the penalty and finding it difficult to live everyday life. But I've read enough about delays and suppressing legit evidence. I say, it is time to face the music. Just my thoughts.... Last edited by sa meredith; 05-09-2009 at 12:51 PM.

05-04-2009, 06:49 AM	#5
VtSteve Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,320 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 230 Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts	Common sense isn't all that common when viewing the big picture. Those of us that think we have common sense, pretty much knew what the causes of this tragedy were. Not that many choices really. It's a little late in these threads to bring it all back. Just reading the Conclusions part of the study you posted should be enough to get you back on track.

05-07-2009, 11:47 AM	#14
VtSteve Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,320 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 230 Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts	I have no idea what the reality of the situation was on that fateful morning, and hope never to be in the same position myself. I think it's just wisdom on the part of the lawyers to get the trial postponed until after summer. They probably feared a circus of publicity, with the new law and the beginning of summer happening at the same time. BUT, I note in the article that she is scheduled to have more surgery in early July. So I'll leave that up to the judge's discretion that the continuance made sense. Without knowing the facts, I'd just have to rely on my gut feelings as to the continued attempts to get the results ruled inadmissible. Too many factors involved. If the results were a .01 it would be a negative, obviously a zero would be ideal. Given their attempts, it's obviously not a zero. A big negative regardless of the actual level. Sure, it would be nice for all involved in the case to sit down and hear the truth. The consequences can be scary, and with enough resources, sometimes there are none. I don't know any of the people involved, nor their character or personal behaviors. I'd like to think that if such a thing happened while I was skipper, I'd man up and just tell the story. Especially so given the relationships of those involved. I hope I never will know what I'd do, and hope nobody else does either. But the circumstance surrounding an accident in bad weather which involves driving onto an island demands answers. The best case scenario is that someone screwed up, went off course and juts plain blew it. There are a lot of different scenarios between that and what anyone would consider the worst case for the skipper. Only those on board really know what went down. I'm not a legal mind by any means. But my personal judgment on the warrant and the samples is this. I believe the Judge did good by pointing out that the circumstances gave probable cause to obtain them. In addition, I cannot fathom a legal system working the way her lawyer stated it does. That meaning, a Judge would presumably not authorize a warrant to obtain the samples if her best friend states she did not "appear" under the influence, and just took her statements at face value. If the system worked that way, cases would never be prosecuted.

05-07-2009, 02:58 PM	#16
Pineedles Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Moultonborough & CT Posts: 2,549 Thanks: 1,074 Thanked 672 Times in 369 Posts	I have no personal connection to any of the parties involved, but I can't help from being upset at the seemingly "blood thirsty" feelings on behalf of some. What personal gain does anyone get from the defendant's conviction or for that matter the penalty that may be imposed. There has been suffering going on and whatever the potential penalty received is, no matter how severe, it will pale in comparison to the pain of knowing that you have caused the death of a friend.

05-07-2009, 04:31 PM	#19
Sman Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 103 Thanks: 3 Thanked 27 Times in 8 Posts	what if What if for some legal reason they toss out the blood test and/or she was not drunk, is she still facing jail time for a different charge? I understand alchohol makes any punishment far more extensive, but is it the differnce between prison time and no prison time?

05-07-2009, 04:56 PM	#20
VtSteve Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,320 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 230 Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts	Maybe it's right? Nobody seems to care about the Why in the delay. The article clearly states that she is due for another surgery in early July. It would only make sense to delay a trial that may very well last through and past that time period. Not my opinion, just the whole point for the delay.

05-08-2009, 12:39 PM	#24
NHDOLFAN Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 73 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	If Erica's pain and suffering is enough to elude legal ramifications, then she should save her parents, the parents of the deceased and the state the time and money that would be involved. While she killed someone, her quality of life has changed forever from what I have read. Could she be better off under house arrest for a period of time, be made to teach boater safety courses with an emphasis on the affects of alcohol and perform community service? The community service could encompass her talking with students at local schools and such about her decisions and the impact they had. Just some thoughts to what I believe is going to be a long drawn out trial with a lot of $$$ spent that could be put to better use!

05-12-2009, 01:09 PM	#30
VtSteve Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,320 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 230 Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts	They have to do something to bide the time, and earn a bit more. Defense attorneys often have a huge job to do in the wake of a mountain of evidence. I would think they'd start with the laws governing the gathering and acceptability of evidence, and they apparently have. It's a nasty case all around, and I doubt she'll come out smelling like a rose regardless of the outcome. My own personal opinion is simply based on what everyone outside the case knows. Given that, I'd say they not only had probably cause to gather the samples, but would have been negligent had they not done so. It is sad to see some cases where insurmountable evidence is thrown out due to improper procedures being used. I'm not the Judge, and I certainly don't have the information they do. It's a sad case all around for everyone, and I'd be happy I'd be delighted to never read about another on remotely similar to it. But sadly, every year there are several like it. While the percentage of boating accidents and/or fatalities is very, very low given the number of boats in the country, incidents like this really hurt the most. She has a family and friends, and it was Father's Day weekend, that's what I remember the most.