Is This Justice?

[Disenchanted61]

Costa’s attorney said he saw no signs barring truck traffic but prosecutors said Costa willfully ignored countless warnings that should have given him pause, including an off-duty firefighter flagging him down to say smoke was spewing from his wheels.

“It was miles and miles and miles of smoke billowing from his brakes telling him something was wrong,” assistant district attorney Carolina Lugo said. “There were just so many opportunities to stop.”

A post-crash inspection revealed that five of the 10 truck brakes either weren’t working or not adjusted correctly. The five working brakes showed signs of overheating or cracking on the pads, according to court documents.

Judge sentences Mass. truck driver to 7 years for deadly runaway crash in California - The Washington Post

With the additional details presented by "Tank," could the charge fall under (negligent homicide)?
And if so, what are the parameters of sentencing based on this possibility.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Intense, I have no intention of "trying to open" any kind of "Pandora's box" on this issue. That being said, I found this news article from late summer of 2009, and I am quasi-certain it could be the same incident we are discussing here:

"Big Rigs Banned from Angeles Crest Highway after Fatal Crash."

KTLA News 10:43 p.m. PDT, August 6, 2009

LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE -- Five months after a runaway truck killed two people, Governor Schwarzenegger signed a bill that permanently bans big rigs from a stretch of the Angeles Crest Highway.

On April 1st, a big rig lost its brakes and slammed into several cars and a bookstore in La Canada Flintridge, killing a father and daughter and injuring 12 others.

Following the crash, the state imposed a temporary ban on commercial trucks from travelling the highway.

Several other runaway truck accidents have occurred on the Angeles Crest Highway, causing many to believe the road just isn't equipped to handle the big rigs safely.

"There was never a reason for big rigs to use this narrow, steep road that ended in our quiet town,'' said Assemblyman Anthony Portantino (D- La Canada Flintridge), who authored the bill.

Knowing that we now have a formal and lasting truck ban will put our citizens at ease and is the first step to ensuring we never experience the pain and fear caused by a runaway truck," Portatino commented.

The new law bans vehicles with three or more axles or weighing more than 9,000 pounds from State Route 2 between La Canada-Flintridge and County Route N2, and also allows for fines that start at $1,000.

That was implemented 2 years ago by their city council and seems it works for them. If someone linked to this article last night, I did not see it. I also have seen no updates other than what was posted here.

Thank you for posting Dangerous Roads here. My family moved to Southern Cal and lived there for 5 years starting the year after I graduated from high school. Even back then, driving there was no fun for me. There was smog that caused allergies, fog that caused traffic pileups from time to time everywhere, and too many traffic accidents to count on the highways and biways of Southern California, just due to too many people on the roads at any given time. I am sorry the accident happened. It apparently triggered passage of a state law to stop trucks from using the road. The way real estate goes up in overpopulated areas, they may never be able to correct the grade on that road unless it is one day deemed also too dangerous for regular cars.

The trouble with not doing something right in the construction of safe roads used for the public travel, is that it may never be corrected and be ever a source of regularly-occuring fatalities.

did i not tell you.....a few deaths....things get changed....

 

[Jarlaxle]

Eight miles or so northeast of Los Angeles, the San Gabriel mountains cut across the San Gabriel Valley, separating the greater Los Angeles Area from the High Desert. Now, there are three or four ways to traverse the San Gabriels if you want to drive up, into Northern California. Sixty years ago, there were only a couple of ways to do it.

One of those ways was (and still is) a steep and winding two-lane road called the Angeles Crest Highway. It is very steep going up, in a northerly direction and it is equally steep going down in a southerly direction from the summit into the town of La Canada-Flintridge.

Two years ago, a truck driver by the name of Marcos Costa, was bringing his big rig down the Angeles Crest, headed for La Canada-Flintridge. Somewhere along the way, the brakes went out on his rig. Marcos was unable to stop the huge truck and it ended up hitting a passenger vehicle occupied by Angel Posca and his 12-year-old daughter. They both died in the crash.

Last week, Marcos Costa was sentenced to seven and one-half years in state prison, following his conviction for vehicular manslaughter and reckless driving. Prior to this accident, Marcos Costa had led an exemplary life, never getting into any kind of trouble.

Whenever I read something like this, I want to throw up. One of the first things that is taught to first year criminal law students is the concept of mens rea. Here is how Wiki defines that term:

Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind". In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty unless the mind be also guilty". Thus, in jurisdictions with due process, there must be an actus reus accompanied by some level of mens rea to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged (see the technical requirement of concurrence). As a general rule, criminal liability does not attach to a person who acted with the absence of mental fault. The exception is strict liability crimes.

Note the last sentence of that quote - strict liability crimes. Strict liability crimes do not require a guilty mind. All you have to do to be guilty of a strict liability crime is commit the prohibited act. Once again, Wiki:

The liability is said to be strict because defendants will be convicted even though they were genuinely ignorant of one or more factors that made their acts or omissions criminal. The defendants may therefore not be culpable in any real way, i.e. there is not even criminal negligence, the least blameworthy level of mens rea.

It should be noted that the vast majority of strict liability crimes do not involve serious offenses or confinement in jail or prison as punishment. Parking tickets are strict liability crimes.

Which brings me to vehicular manslaughter. Any way you want to slice it, a death caused by an automobile accident does not involve mens rea or criminal intent. It is an ACCIDENT. The last thing in the world that Marcos Costa wanted to have happen that day two years ago, was what did happen. Furthermore, once his brakes failed, he was powerless to prevent it and probably did everything he could to stop it from happening.

Yet Marcos now goes off to state prison for seven and one half years. This is not justice.

Of course the deaths were tragic. Of course if Marcos and/or his employer were at fault in any way for the accident, they should be required to pay appropriate damages to the injured family of the people who died by way of a CIVIL action in a CIVIL court.

Think on this - vehicular manslaughter is the only crime I know of where your wife can get in her car, go to the store, and wind up in state prison without ever being allowed to return to the family home until she has served her sentence.

What are we doing here?

p.s. - I am aware that the brakes on the truck failed, which was the primary cause of the accident. I am also aware that that should not have happened and whoever allowed it to happen is at fault for what took place because of their negligence in not keeping the brakes in good shape. That does not mean that this was done with any criminal intent, however and, unless criminal intent is proven, this case belongs only in a civil court, not a criminal court.

The DRIVER caused the brakes to fail, by not going down the hill properly. It really is that simple. He rode and cooked his brakes, period.

 

[Jarlaxle]

There is a great deal of assumption and knowledge above that I seem to have missed.

The first thing I thought of on reading this was were there runaway ramps? Seems there weren't.

"Meanwhile, Caltrans said today it is considering a temporary ban on trucks on the portion of Angeles Crest Highway where the big rig was traveling. It also said it will soon install new safety signs.

Doug Failing, Caltrans District 7 manager, said the La Cañada section of the road -- also known as state Highway 2 -- used to have a runaway truck lane for vehicles going too fast as they approach Foothill Boulevard. But in the last few years, the agency landscaped around the lane, and it is no longer used as a runaway truck lane.

Fricking SERIOUSLY?!

Caltrans has been talking about finding a new location for a runaway lane, perhaps further north on Angeles Crest in county unincorporated territory." ALIPAC Forums-viewtopic-TRUCK DRIVER, MARCOS COSTA, RUMORED NOT TO SPEAK ENGLISH

Should not have been driving, if so...since a requirement to hold a CDL is speaking English!

 

[Jarlaxle]

Negligent acts are not criminal and should not be punished criminally.

even if the Negligent one knows that his negligence just may cause someone some harm?......leaving a Loaded Gun where a bunch of 6 year olds can find it is Negligence also.....if one of them finds it and shoots and kills one of the other kids......who should get blamed for the kid dying?,the kid who shot the gun or the guy who left the gun there?......

The loaded gun in this case, Harry, is likely a grossly unsafe and unfit highway for public transportation, particularly large trucks.

The man driving the trucks is not the person who let that highway to hell be used by the public. The Highway Department is.

So...are you in favor of closing any road that cannot be safely used by a loaded semi?