Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > MO vs. World

Thread Tools
Old 08-22-2003, 04:17 PM   #51
Founding Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 142
Default Re: Congressman Crash Update II / Devil's advocate

I still think there is a chance that, given his driving record and attitude toward driving (now they're going through his speeches, in which he often jokes about his driving habits), it is possible he consiously decided to run the stop sign. I'm not saying it is likely, but possible.

If Mr. Janklow argues that he was distracted or spaced out before he runs the stop sign, he's got a shot at avoiding 2nd degree manslaughter. I'm not saying that I think he doesn't deserve 2nd degree manslaughter, just that he'll have a better chance at avoiding it. That's why I think it matters why he was on that backroad. It potentially shows a conscious decision to break the law.

Can anyone familiar with the northern Sioux Falls area tell us if there would be a reason to be on that road instead of I-29?

If the law believed that action proves intentions, there would be no different degrees of murder, or manslaughter.
grover750 is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Old 08-22-2003, 04:46 PM   #52
Founding Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 142
Default Phantom 3rd Driver

The latest from the argus leader:


This "3rd driver" statement from Janklow is interesting. Seems that is standard MO after accidents is to quickly blame a phantom 3rd driver.

The statements in this article from Chris Hutton, the U of SD law professor, don't make any sense to me:

Chris Hutton, a law professor at the University of South Dakota in Vermillion, said the presence of a third vehicle could make a difference in a legal proceeding as a mitigating factor.

"We have laws on the book, but if an emergency situation arises and doing something would prevent a greater harm, you're supposed to do that," she said. "If there's another car and he swerved to get out of the way and prevented an accident that would be good."

Janklow's perception of the situation also is important she said.

"We don't expect people to be perfect. We expect them to be reasonable," she said. "If he thought there was a car, he should take action. If it's totally unreasonable to think that happened, that probably wouldn't be given much weight (in court)."

Can anyone construct a situation in their heads where a third vehicle would explain running a stop sign at 70 mph? Was he getting rammed from behind?

All reports say both vehicles were in their correct lane. If there had been someone stopped at the stop sign, the accident would have occurred in the left lane of the N-S highway, not the right.

I think Janklow's son understands this, which is why he's discounting his father's statements.
grover750 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2003, 05:15 AM   #53
Registered Member
naco_traficante's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 466
Default Re: This just in

Thank Kpaul. Glad the AMA weighed in on this.
naco_traficante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2003, 06:25 AM   #54
The Toad

seruzawa's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default Re: Difference

I wish it were true. I know too many demos who repeat demo politicians lies (like Hillary's unhinged vast right wing conspiracy) as if they were gospel.

And I know a load of pubbies who can't stand BushII, foreign wars and the assault on our civil liberties brought by the Homeland Security Act (which was proposed by the demos, by the way).

"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off