posted on March 13, 2001 09:27:20 AM
Reaching the fact that is wasn't an accident is simple. There is nothing in the reports that states an intervening cause. Laura Bush had control of the vehicle, ignored a stop sign, striking another vehicle, and killing the occupant.
What interveing agency makes this event an accident?
Again we seem to assign as an "accident" an event that is a common experience, and one which we have empathy for the agent. These an "accident" do not make.
[ edited by reamond on Mar 13, 2001 09:28 AM ]
[ edited by reamond on Mar 13, 2001 09:30 AM ]
Your posts are becoming disruptive. Please take a step back, remember that others have a right to their opinions, and keep the principles of basic etiquette in mind as you post.
EDITED TO ADD: Everyone, please remember to address the topic, not the individual.
Thanks for your cooperation
Pat
[ edited by pattaylor on Mar 13, 2001 09:33 AM ]
posted on March 13, 2001 09:31:53 AM
reamond, you have not seen the accident report, or have you? It certainly hasn't been released. So, you don't know what you're talking about.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:32:05 AM
But this event shows nothing that was not unintended, nor happenstance, except perhaps the result.
If you read the reports, the report has been released. How do you think the reporters knew that the form space where the speed was listed was obscured, or that the space for a citation was left blank. It also states the road and weather conditions.
[ edited by reamond on Mar 13, 2001 09:34 AM ]
posted on March 13, 2001 09:38:11 AM
What an outrageous attempt to (further) discredit President Bush.
Laura Bush's (unintentional) and tragic accident occurred 38 years ago. According to available information, although Laura and George W. attended the same school, Laura Welch did not meet George W. until 1977, 14 years after the tragic accident.
Additionally, Laura's father was a homebuilder and Laura eventually taught elementary grades and served as a librarian in public schools. Hardly a picture of great wealth and influence.
It is not uncommon that vehicle accidents remain a misdemeanor classification even when there is a fatality involved. It is also not uncommon that a citation might not be issued in accordance with the investigating officer's discretion and extenuating circumstances. It is possible that the stop sign was obstructed and that Laura did not see the sign or the sign became visible at a distance that did not allow the necessary braking distance to prevent entering the intersection.
If you want to "Monday morning quarterback" a 38-year old incident with suppositions and conclusions based on extremely limited access offered only by the media, try this hypothesis:
The stop sign may have been obstructed by something located on private property adjacent to the sign, or the sign was obstructed by something that the controlling government body was responsible for. In such circumstances, it is not unusual for the investigating officer to assign the proper degree of the fault to another factor and not issue a citation the driver of the vehicle having caused the accident. It happens. Sometimes, the government body will request the officer (not) issue a citation to suppress the publicity in order to eliminate or reduce the possibility that the governmental body might be sued for their fault in the matter.
You do not charge a person with a felony offense if the elements of the offense do not exist [only] because someone was maimed or killed. Accordingly, as tragic as a vehicle caused fatality may be you do not throw people in prison [only] because someone was maimed or killed.
As for the constant questions of, "What if the person was not white…….?" The question is usually not relevant, very tiresome, and used as a diversionary smoke screen.
I would give [even] give a Democrat a pass on this one.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:39:41 AM
Hello Reamond,
You think that this wasn't an accident?
That this 17 year old girl was perhaps trying to kill her supposed boyfriend?
Seems to me that running a stop sign in order to broadside your intended victim is a very poor way to go about a deliberate murder. Such a feat would require considerable driving and reaction skills; a clear line of sight and a rather unsuspecting victim.
Not to mention that in 1963 seat belts were at best a novelty and even if used there would still be a much greater risk to the driver of the car doing the ramming. Not to mention that the car was new in 1963 according to the link you posted. Trash a new car to get even with someone?
And if they were a couple on the outs and she saw her chance to put a scare into him or to actually hurt him, then wouldn't his parents have had something to say about the incident? At the time or now when opportunists seem to be dredging it up and offering it to a conspiracy happy public?
In my opinion, your suggestion that this was anything but an accident surpasses all reason.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:44:07 AM
The stopsign was underground, and only raised by remote control after an accident if it involved either a poor black driver or Laura Welch and Michael Douglas. Therefore an accident is not an accident unless there is an accident report that has not been released in entirety to the press. Once it is an accident the type of accident doesn't matter because there was intent to cause death by accident so it wasn't an accident.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:44:30 AM
coda- I'm just inquiring how we have reached that the event was an accident. So far we seem to want to avoid how we have determined that it was an accident, and just say it was an accident.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:45:42 AM
Actually, this whole thread surpasses all reason. He's not going to be satisfied until we all agree that the "poor little Tate boy" was just practicing wrestling moves that he saw on t.v. - poor little guy, he just didn't understand what he was doing to that little girl.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:47:04 AM
krs- an intentional act does not require that the results were intended, or the likely results were even known by the actor.
posted on March 13, 2001 09:52:39 AM"an intentional act does not require that the results were intended, or the likely results were even known by the actor."
Oh (?). Then what are you talking about?
By the way, it's not uncommon for spaces to be left blank on preliminary reports. If the cop on the scene wasn't trained to estimate speeds then he'd leave that blank, and if it was as yet unknown by him (or her) whether a citation would ultimately be issued, that space would be left blank as well. These accident reports may wind up in court, for all he knows, and if they do any information entered in error would weaken a case.
Perhaps you might want to support your apparent opinion that this event was not accidental.
I re-read that link and I see I forgot to mention that Laura had a passenger with her.
Depending on which side of the argument you take I suppose that the passenger was either part of a murder or revenge conspiracy or was more evidence that the accident was indeed an accident.
Maybe the two girls were cruising along that evening yacking about what 17 year old girls, seniors in high school and at the height of the football season in Texas are prone to yack about? And Laura happened to notice the stop sign too late or not at all?
I haven't seen anything other than failure to yield in this accident. Are you contending that because this girl wasn't written up on a traffic violation and charged with at least involuntary manslaughter that our system of justice is fatally flawed?
You said "I'm just inquiring how we have reached that the event was an accident. So far we seem to want to avoid how we have determined that it was an accident, and just say it was an accident".
WE don't dtermine anything, but to insist that the alternative to an accident is the case, that being a willful act of murder by ramming, is just plain dumb. It requires that a person believe that any person in right mind would take the personal risk of bashing a car into another when the outcome could not be known.
You've yet to add to your illogical arguments that you believe that Laura Welch was suicidally inclined, and for this event to be anything but an accident she would have to have been, or at least have been willing to sacrifice her own life in order to take another's.
Regarding the Clinton's matter, certain offenses, especially when "Official Misconduct" is a factor, often do not have a statute of limitation.
Have you personally read all the investigative documents respective to Laura Welch's accident, or are you reaching conclusions based sketchy media releases?
Additionally, most accident (forms) are used for a preliminary and summarized investigation, do not contain in-depth information, and are often ill prepared because of the limitations of the accident form.
posted on March 13, 2001 10:05:28 AM
krs- You've never heard of a teenager doing suicidal acts ? Or acts to get back at a boyfriend. Or acts that were not well thought out.
Regarding the friend in the car- she states merely that it was an accident and gave no further statements.
Gabbing to a friend in a car and not paying attention is an intentional act. Just as we are realizing that using a cell phone while driving is an intentional act.
The results in the examples were not intended. To be an accidental result, it would be a result that could not be known due to intervening acts outside the realm of our experience. None of these results are outside the realm of our experience.
[ edited by reamond on Mar 13, 2001 10:08 AM ]
posted on March 13, 2001 10:06:30 AM
LOL @ december3. It's going to be okay, we all have threads/experiences like you're experiencing. It will get better. I promise.
bobbi355 - You may be right. (about until we agree....) but now it's looking like maybe this is coming from the investigations that Hillary went through. Who knows......
posted on March 13, 2001 10:12:50 AM
Who, what, where, when, why.
Prelim on the scene, summary by trained accident investigator as soon as practicable. Review by next level to determine preventable or non-preventable, with recommendation of remedial action. Review again at higher level. Recommendation accepted or modified and implemented with followup. Full report submitted after all of that is done.
The news hasn't seen but a small part of the whole of it, reamond, and probably won't.
I promise.