Judge: Hey, I know you killed two people but we really need that synchronized swimming gold medal. Of course you can start your sentence after the Olympics. Nothing can stand in the way of your training. Now if you had killed three people I would have had to draw the line and get serious. As it stands, the facts are you only
killed two people.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040126/ap_on_sp_ol/oly_swimmer_manslaughter_1
I dunno, it’s not like it was a hit and run. From the story, she was in an accident where she lost control of the car and the two passengers, her boyfriend and a kid in the car were killed.
It’s not quite as black and white as you think, unless you know more than the article says.
She goes out drinking, still has it in her system the next day when she kills 2 people and now she’s being rewarded. And we wonder why we have so many people killed by drunk drivers in this country …
I would think that more of your outrage would be directed at the fact that the sentence is only three months.
I’m suprised that she’s still on the Olympic team. For swimming at least drinking will get you kicked off the team. I’m not sure what the exact rules are for synchronized swimming, but I would guess they are close.
Her partner is the one that should get kicked off the team. Why didn’t she also get drunk and into an accident and kill two people? Pathetic.
I dunno, she wasn’t even legally drunk. She could have been stone cold sober and still have crashed (it doesn’t exactly say WHY she lost control of the vehicle).
And it’s reasonable she thought a night was enough to cycle the alcohol out of her system (I wouldn’t know, I don’t and can’t drink) so she might reasonable thought she was cool in driving.
I’m of the mind that there really isn’t enough information for me to get upset about the case.
Given just the information linked to I would say she doesn’t even deserve the jail sentence, it was an accident!
Everyone is different, but I’ve gotten dead drunk at night, and woken up with a sour stomach and a headache the next morning, but fully awake and alert. Heck, I’ve driven to work feeling worse when I had the flu and just had to finish a project I was working on back at the office.
If she WAS intoxicated to the point where it interfered with her ability to operate a vehicle, then I’d say lock her up, but it doesn’t seem even the judge (or jury) were much convinced given the light sentence.
OK so, not only is it bad to drive while drunk, but now it’s bad to drive the day after drinking? What is this??
She wasn’t legally drunk. So she wasn’t breaking any law there. She lost control of her car…
So I don’t understand your outrage at this. I don’t even know why she was charged. It sounds like it was an accident.
On one hand, I don’t understand it either, but yet I do. We are no longer a people who accept the notion that tragic events take place for no reason other than bad karma or wrong place at the wrong time.
Anymore, there are two classes: victims and those responsible. At any and all cost, we must identify and villify the latter for alleged or imagined issues to have closure. Og forbid that we accept something to have happened without a witch to burn or horse to flog. :rolleyes:
Not necessarily. You can still get a DUI if your blood alcohol is below the legal limit.
FWIW, I’m in the “not enough information here to judge” group.
It’s illegal to drive with a hangover now? 
Put me in the “not enough info about the case in the article to judge properly” corner, please.
If you’re so hungover that it affects your ability to control the car, they are going to take that into account when reviewing the situation.