Woman faces life in prison for stopping to save ducklings

mad muffin

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2663995/Canada-woman-stops-ducks-guilty-2-deaths.html

A Canadian woman who held her license for three years at the time, stopped in the fast lane, no hazards, door wide open, to save ducklings.

Father and daughter on a motorbike crashed into the back of her car and killed. The mother was on a bike behind them and saw the accident.

Emma Czornobaj was convicted by a jury on Friday on two counts of criminal negligence causing death, a charge that carries a maximum life sentence, and two counts of dangerous driving causing death, which comes with a maximum of 14 years in jail.

What do the fine folk of AH think? Is life in prison too harsh a sentence?

Personally I don't think it's too harsh for such a mindless act.

foggy_lad

She should serve at least 10-15 years because someone that stupid is a clear danger to society and will do the same again if not incarcerated!

AngeGal

Ideally the role of prison is partly punishment and partly rehabilitation. This crime doesn't need rehabilitation, she'll never be so reckless again. She has no criminal record and has to live with having killed two people. Sufficient punishment would be one year house arrest, driving license suspended for five years.

desultory

Woman faces life in prison for being a dozy fûcker would be a more appropriate title.

Alf. A. Male

Conviction is right, poor motorway design is wrong.

Chattastrophe!

I hate those misleading headlines ... she's not in prison for stopping to save ducklings, she's in prison for causing an accident which killed two people.

catallus

AngeGal wrote: »

Ideally the role of prison is partly punishment and partly rehabilitation. This crime doesn't need rehabilitation, she'll never be so reckless again. She has no criminal record and has to live with having killed two people. Sufficient punishment would be one year house arrest, driving license suspended for five years.

How do you know she isn't some duck-saving maniac, wilfully putting the lives of people in danger to save all things that waddle and quack?!

spurious

That poor woman, to see her child and husband killed in front of her.

Surely the driver wasn't that stupid everyday? Had she gargle on board? That may have made such lunacy seem like a good idea. Not that it is an excuse.

Life, as in until she dies would probably be a bit harsh, but 7-10 years or so? Certainly justified.

mad muffin

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

I hate those misleading headlines ... she's not in prison for stopping to save ducklings, she's in prison for causing an accident which killed two people.

Tomato, tomato.

pauliebdub

I wouldn't have too much sympathy for her to be honest, it was such a thoughtless reckless thing to do. She deserves everything she gets, hopefully a lengthy prison sentence.

Mikros

Women faces life for criminal negligence that resulted in the death of two people doesn't have the same ring to it does it?

There is no chance she will be given a life sentence. What she done was criminally stupid, reckless and had terrible consequences, but there was no bad intent in her actions. A 5 year jail sentence with a significant amount suspended together with a lifetime ban on driving would seem a likely outcome.

My name is URL

She should be marinated and cooked in a tandoori oven, like the feathery scumbags she tried to save

FreshKnickers

If it were my wife and child killed she might be safer in the nick! :eek:

Wabbit Ears

Death penalty is what she deserves. No rational person believes its not an incredibly dangerous thing to do to stop in the fast lane of a motorway like that. That isn't a momentary lapse in judgement, that isn't being a bit ditsy, that's doing something that pretty much could not have had any other outcome. Its on par with dropping cinder blocks off a motorway flyover in its complete disregard for human life and what can happen when people are travelling at motorway speeds.

What she did is unforgivable.

Toots

National Post reported Czornobaj, who doesn't have a criminal record, was willing to plead guilty as recently as April but refused to do jail time.

WHAT?? She's responsible for the deaths of two people, and she somehow thinks if she says "yup, it's my fault" that makes it all ok?

No matter how good her intentions were, it's beyond me how anyone of even barely reasonable intelligence would think it would be a good idea to park in the overtaking lane of an active highway, not bother to put your hazard lights on, then exit the vehicle (leaving the door wide open) so that you could corral some ducklings and bundle them back to your house!

It sounds to me like she's not right in the head and she should be permanently banned from driving any sort of vehicle. Even a push bike would probably be a lethal weapon in her hands.

As for the prison sentence is it a case of 'life' like we have over here, where it's not actually life, it's more like 10 years? Or is it actually the rest of her natural life? I'd say lock her up and maybe consider parole when she's well into the menopause and won't be able to contribute to the gene pool.

Awkward Badger

Lifetime ban from driving maybe but a life sentence would be just utterly pointless. It was stupid and negligent and resulted in deaths but a life in prison wont change anything or benefit anyone.

desultory

Pugsly wrote: »

Lifetime ban from driving maybe but a life sentence would be just utterly pointless. It was stupid and negligent and resulted in deaths but a life in prison wont change anything or benefit anyone.

It'll benefit everyone who drives that there will be one less moron on the roads.

Capt'n Midnight

Alf. A. Male wrote: »

Conviction is right, poor motorway design is wrong.

What's wrong with the motorway design ?

Awkward Badger

desultory wrote: »

It'll benefit everyone who drives that there will be one less moron on the roads.

Bit of a length to go to to keep someone off the roads isn't it ? Rather than as I said just handing down a lifetime driving ban ?

LizzieJones

Stupid woman. You don't stop on a major highway unless you're broken down and even then you try to get over to the side.

Arthur Beesley

mad muffin wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2663995/Canada-woman-stops-ducks-guilty-2-deaths.html

A Canadian woman who held her license for three years at the time, stopped in the fast lane, no hazards, door wide open, to save ducklings.

Father and daughter on a motorbike crashed into the back of her car and killed. The mother was on a bike behind them and saw the accident.

Emma Czornobaj was convicted by a jury on Friday on two counts of criminal negligence causing death, a charge that carries a maximum life sentence, and two counts of dangerous driving causing death, which comes with a maximum of 14 years in jail.

What do the fine folk of AH think? Is life in prison too harsh a sentence?

Personally I don't think it's too harsh for such a mindless act.

What do I think? Misleading thread title.

mad muffin

Arthur Beesley wrote: »

What do I think? Misleading thread title.

<raises hands>*newyork accent*we got a bad ass here

mikeym

I wonder was the woman drug tested at the scene of the accident.

Cookie_Monster

Stopping in the 'fast lane' of a motorway for any reason other than a catastrophic car failure is monumentally stupid. She was fully aware of what she was doing and had no consideration for anyone else when she did it. Fully deserved punishment.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

What's wrong with the motorway design ?

it's acting as a duck trap

poppyvally

Them dux should have seen the"no trespassing " sign

colm_mcm

It's tragic for the surviving wife, And there are 2 people dead - but IMO the sentence is disproportionate.
What is the purpose of jail time again, is this person really a danger now?

Stupid people do stupid things every day. Every week I see stupid things motorists do that could end up as fatalities.

Not saying she should get off scot free, maybe a lifetime driving ban - but sticking her in prison isn't the answer.

poppyvally

colm_mcm wrote: »

It's tragic for the surviving wife, And there are 2 people dead - but IMO the sentence is disproportionate.
What is the purpose of jail time again, is this person really a danger now?

Stupid people do stupid things every day. Every week I see stupid things motorists do that could end up as fatalities.

Not saying she should get off scot free, maybe a lifetime driving ban - but sticking her in prison isn't the answer.

Some daft oul hippie gets out of their car in a fast lane to save ducks. Fuk her she cost 2 lives!

RoisinDove

Urgh. This is why I do not trust people who are overly obsessed with animals. There's something not right in the head of someone who thinks it's OK to stop on a highway, risking dozens of lives, to make sure a few ducklings get home safe. And chances are they would have been grand if she hadn't interfered. People like this generally want to feel good about themselves...she was probably looking forward to getting home and posting on Facebook about the cute little duckies she'd rescued. Stupid, selfish, ditzy cow.

Bongalongherb

I see a problem with all of this. The motorcyclist should have been aware of 'expect the unexpected'... Maybe speeding without due care ?. If it was a cow or other sized object on the road, shouldn't the motorcyclist be driving with due care ?.

I find this story lacking in respect to the speed this motorcyclist was driving. The punishment this idiot woman received is also idiotic. I'm sure she will never get over her stupidity anyway for the rest of her life, but as was said... I cannot see a life sentence appropriate at all.

The motorcyclist should have been aware of the rules of the road, and as such, should have kept distance apart in the case of 'expect the unexpected' IMO.

Vito Corleone

No information on the welfare of the ducklings. You stay classy Daily Mail.

dharma200

The fast lane in a motorway. Car stopped. Door open. Two dead people.

Jail. Simple.

There should also be a sentence handed down for the thread title. My internet is pretty slow tonight and it's fecking annoying to load up a page just for it to be misleading. Super annoying.

Rory28

Bongalongherb wrote: »

I see a problem with all of this. The motorcyclist should have been aware of 'expect the unexpected'... Maybe speeding without due care ?. If it was a cow or other sized object on the road, shouldn't the motorcyclist be driving with due care ?.

I find this story lacking in respect to the speed this motorcyclist was driving. The punishment this idiot woman received is also idiotic. I'm sure she will never get over her stupidity anyway for the rest of her life, but as was said... I cannot see a life sentence appropriate at all.

The motorcyclist should have been aware of the rules of the road, and as such, should have kept distance apart in the case of 'expect the unexpected' IMO.

So much rage at this. You blame the biker?

Bongalongherb

The scene of the accident is a highway, so why did the motorcyclist not see her car stopped ? was he actually speeding ? possibly indeed. He would have a clear sight of the car stopped... Accident scene picture below. It's important to find out if the motorcyclist was speeding, and if not, how did he fail to brake in a safe distance ?

Bongalongherb

Bongalongherb wrote: »

I see a problem with all of this. The motorcyclist should have been aware of 'expect the unexpected'... Maybe speeding without due care ?. If it was a cow or other sized object on the road, shouldn't the motorcyclist be driving with due care ?.

I find this story lacking in respect to the speed this motorcyclist was driving. The punishment this idiot woman received is also idiotic. I'm sure she will never get over her stupidity anyway for the rest of her life, but as was said... I cannot see a life sentence appropriate at all.

The motorcyclist should have been aware of the rules of the road, and as such, should have kept distance apart in the case of 'expect the unexpected' IMO.

I've just glanced at the story as well and she had already stopped and then the bike crashed into the stopped car, the rear of the car, not the open door.
The problem is that she stopped in the (overtaking) left lane.
She created a static hazard, the bike rider should have been more aware of his surroundings. But where she stopped was dangerous in the extreme.

At the very least she should get a driving ban, maybe a few years for "involuntary" manslaughter, all said the rider of the bike isn't blameless.

Pwindedd

Bongalongherb wrote: »

I see a problem with all of this. The motorcyclist should have been aware of 'expect the unexpected'... Maybe speeding without due care ?. If it was a cow or other sized object on the road, shouldn't the motorcyclist be driving with due care ?.

I find this story lacking in respect to the speed this motorcyclist was driving. The punishment this idiot woman received is also idiotic. I'm sure she will never get over her stupidity anyway for the rest of her life, but as was said... I cannot see a life sentence appropriate at all.

The motorcyclist should have been aware of the rules of the road, and as such, should have kept distance apart in the case of 'expect the unexpected' IMO.

I have to agree with this somewhat, if you do not have enough stopping distance to bring your vehicle to a halt safely then you are either driving too close or too fast. The reason for her stopping is immaterial, even though it was on this occasion monumentally stupid.

She should lose her license agreed - but jail time. No. She has to carry this with her for life. That's sentence enough in my opinion.

Cookie_Monster

Bongalongherb wrote: »

The scene of the accident is a highway, so why did the motorcyclist not see her car stopped ? was he actually speeding ? possibly indeed. He would have a clear sight of the car stopped... Accident scene picture below. It's important to find out if the motorcyclist was speeding, and if not, how did he fail to brake in a safe distance ?

Stop trying to blame the victims.
The article states they weren't speeding and the she didn't even bother with hazard lights.

You cannot be expected to travel at such low speed on a motorway as to be able to stop in such a short distance, we may as well drop the limits to 40kph otherwise.

Bongalongherb

Deleted User wrote: »

I've just glanced at the story as well and she had already stopped and then the bike crashed into the stopped car's open door.
The problem is that she stopped in the (overtaking) left lane.
She created a static hazard, the bike rider should have been more aware of his surroundings. But where she stopped was dangerous in the extreme.

At the very least she should get a driving ban, maybe a few years for "involuntary" manslaughter, all said the rider of the bike isn't blameless.

Don't get me wrong, she is a complete idiot, and I feel for the father and daughters loss, but I was just pointing out that the motorcyclist should have been aware of obstacles of any kind on the highway because while driving a motorbike, one bit of debris on the road can be life and death if hit. With his daughter on-board he should have been driving slower in the slow lane.

Bongalongherb

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Stop trying to blame the victims.
The article states they weren't speeding and the she didn't even bother with hazard lights.

You cannot be expected to travel at such low speed on a motorway as to be able to stop in such a short distance, we may as well drop the limits to 40kph otherwise.

Sorry, I disagree with your comment.

dharma200

Nice one. A woman stops her car dead on the motorway for some freaking ducks, two people are killed, and your intonating it is their fault....
I've heard it all now.

mad muffin

dharma200 wrote: »

The fast lane in a motorway. Car stopped. Door open. Two dead people.

Jail. Simple.

There should also be a sentence handed down for the thread title. My internet is pretty slow tonight and it's fecking annoying to load up a page just for it to be misleading. Super annoying.

Again with the thread title?! What title would you suggest?

Bongalongherb

Bongalongherb wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, she is a complete idiot, and I feel for the father and daughters loss, but I was just pointing out that the motorcyclist should have been aware of obstacles of any kind on the highway because while driving a motorbike, one bit of debris on the road can be life and death if hit. With his daughter on-board he should have been driving slower in the slow lane.

I agree, as I said "the rider isn't blameless" that road looks similar to any of the motorways here so visibility is usually good, what is missing from the story and I've looked at a couple of the reports is was it day or night when the crash happened? the photos of the crashed car were taken at night.

RoisinDove

mad muffin wrote: »

Again with the thread title?! What title would you suggest?

Something accurate?

She's not facing life in prison for stopping to save ducklings.
She's facing life in prison for stopping her car in the overtaking lane of a highway for no good reason, which led to the death of two people.

Bongalongherb

dharma200 wrote: »

Nice one. A woman stops her car dead on the motorway for some freaking ducks, two people are killed, and your intonating it is their fault....
I've heard it all now.

Where in any of my posts did I specifically say it was the fathers (motorcyclists) fault. I didn't, read my comments again.

Bongalongherb

The Canadian Press reports Andre Roy, 50, who was traveling with his 16-year-old daughter, Jessie, on his Harley-Davidson, was driving an estimated 70 mph to 80 mph in a roughly 60 mph zone.His wife was following behind them at a slower speed and avoided injury.

Czornobaj had stopped her car in the left lane of a provincial highway after spotting roughly seven ducklings on the median, reports CTV

The Montreal Gazette notes that the case is an unusual one, in that Czornobaj faces a life sentence though there was no criminal intent tied to her actions.

This is akin to some folk here... blindly looking for the harshest penalty without studying or reading properly into the account.

Source: http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/06/23/woman-who-stopped-car-help-ducks-faces-life-prison-causing-fatal-crash

foggy_lad

Pugsly wrote: »

Lifetime ban from driving maybe but a life sentence would be just utterly pointless. It was stupid and negligent and resulted in deaths but a life in prison wont change anything or benefit anyone.

Pugsly wrote: »

Bit of a length to go to to keep someone off the roads isn't it ? Rather than as I said just handing down a lifetime driving ban ?

she will do the same thing again if it came to it because a duck is worth more to her than any human life, People like her can be banned for life from driving but bar paralysing her how can she be stopped from driving if she wants to?

Awkward Badger

foggy_lad wrote: »

she will do the same thing again if it came to it because a duck is worth more to her than any human life, People like her can be banned for life from driving but bar paralysing her how can she be stopped from driving if she wants to?

She made one horrendous mistake and cost two people their lives. You're talking about her like she's some serial killing maniac.

mad muffin

RoisinDove wrote: »

Something accurate?

She's not facing life in prison for stopping to save ducklings.
She's facing life in prison for stopping her car in the overtaking lane of a highway for no good reason, which led to the death of two people.

Yeah, good luck with fitting that into a thread title. You still haven't suggested a better one.

Thread title is accurate enough to get the gist.

Bongalongherb

foggy_lad wrote: »

she will do the same thing again if it came to it because a duck is worth more to her than any human life, People like her can be banned for life from driving but bar paralysing her how can she be stopped from driving if she wants to?

In all fairness Foggy Lad, I would bet she will never even think of such a stupid thing again, because she is going to have to deal with it for the rest of her life. Nowhere does it say that she is mentally unstable, she just made a hell of a stupidly bad mistake.

Life in prison of which was forwarded to her was just anger on all parts toward her because it was the most stupid thing to do. The court and the jury put no thought into the fact that it was not a criminal intention. This is why a life sentence is completely over the top.

Rips

Meanwhile in Ireland, a boy who gets drunk and violently attacks and stabs someone to death is sentenced to 7 years for murder ...

Stupid - yes, Guilty - yes!! Lifetime driving ban and a hefty suspended sentence seems more appropriate.

As far as the other motorists being at fault here, there doesn't seem to be enough detail, even at a slower speed, there was still the potential for serious injury and death. Its seems clear from the state of the car that they made no attempt to even avoid collision. I'd wonder if the two bikes weren't travelling side by side or quite close together, effecting the father's ability to swerve and put other members of his family at risk. Carrying a passenger on a motorbike while speeding on a motorway, not exactly clever either. Driving in the overtaking lane?

Tragic and stupid all round IMO

emeldc

In the US you can make what could be seen as a mistake no matter how stupid and they lock you up and throw away the key.
Over here Mommy can teach her 5 year old daughter to do things a 5 year old shouldn't know about and then allow your neighbour to do as he wishes with her and all she gets is 14 yrs with 4 suspended, out in 7. It's a fcuked up world.

RoisinDove

mad muffin wrote: »

Yeah, good luck with fitting that into a thread title. You still haven't suggested a better one.

Thread title is accurate enough to get the gist.

No it isn't. It's completely misleading.

It implies she's facing jail for trying to save the ducklings.

She isn't.

She's facing jail because two people died due to her stupidity.

The ducklings don't really come into it.

Did you really need that explained?