UPDATED at 5:04 p.m.
Ronald J. Wendt II, 25, of Alexander, is guilty of DWI and aggravated vehicular homicide in the death of 18-year-old Katie Stanley on Aug. 14, 2009, a Genesee County jury concluded today.
The jury also convicted Wendt of the nine other counts against him, including vehicular manslaughter, 2nd, which carries a possible 25-year prison term.
The jury deliberated less than two hours after hearing more than four days of testimony in which defense attorney Thomas Burns tried to establish that Wendt wasn't legally intoxicated at the time of the accident and that the actions of the driver of the other car, Rachel Enderle, 27, of Dansville, contributed to the accident.
"I don't want to get into anything about the case other than to say I'm disappointed in the verdict," Burns said. "That's about all I have to say."
While the speed of the verdict surprised Burns, District Attorney Lawrence Friedman said the quick decision shows the people had a solid case on all charges against Wendt.
"I'm very pleased for Katie's family and the other victims of the crash," Friedman said. "Justice was served."
In the hours before the accident, Wendt worked with a friend baling hay in Attica. Toward the end of the workday, they began drinking beer. According to William D. Marchisin, 35, of Darien, Wendt and he each had as many as six beers prior to the accident, including one about 15 minutes beforehand.
The duo was going to stop off at My Saloon for "just one more" when Wendt decided to make a left-hand turn off Route 20 right in front of Enderle's oncoming car.
Stanley, also of Dansville, was riding in the right rear passenger seat.
Friedman acknowledged that people drink and drive in Genesee County every day and they rarely wind up involved in a fatal car accident.
"Obviously, the vast majority believe nothing like this happens, but that's the reason we have these laws," Friedman said. "I'm sure this defendant never expected anything like this could ever happen to him, but that's what the problem is, you never know. Anybody who is driving while intoxicated could find themselves in this situation."
Sentencing is scheduled for 9:30 a.m., Nov. 15. Friedman said he hasn't even started to think about a sentencing recommendation.
Burns said there will be an appeal, but as is his policy, he won't represent Wendt in the appeal.
Photo: File photo of Ron Wendt.
This is really upsetting. I
This is really upsetting. I love how celebrities get away with EVERYTHING yet this young man (who i feel his lawyers had a GREAT case for him) has to pay the price, i hope he doesnt have to do the full 25 years. Give him house arrest for a few years and let him be. Whatever happened with his passenger lying under oath? thats a federal offence isnt it? Why is he not being charged for that? In past posts on here it sounds like there is something shady going on here not only that but i feel the other driver involved should have charges against them too. Where are citations? Where is justice in all of that? why is only ONE person paying the price when others were involved as well. This jury sucked..
I agree Bob.
I agree Bob.
Oh my goodness.. truly
Oh my goodness.. truly upsetting. I know Ron, went to school with him. He is a good guy. And i know he's been beating himself ragged about that poor girl dying.. I pray they are lenient on him, the justice system is so twisted and bendable, please restore some of my faith in it... Oh how this turns my stomach.. Let's allow a girl who molested a little boy go because she blamed it on the child... Or a father who punched his son in the face go because no one saw him do it, only saw the black eye.... But possibly send him up for 25 yrs.. I can't believe batavia..
Since this has been updated i
Since this has been updated i feel the need to expess my OPINION. What kind of friend is this William D. Martchisin for letting his friend drive in the first place if Ron was supposedly over the limit? Friends don't let friends drink and drive. Was it that Ron wanted to have one more drink or a hey give me a ride so i can go have another drink? I have seen the named "passenger" in many bars and i know this man can throw them back like water and is always wanting more. Anyway i look at it i do not just seen Ronald as the only person who played a role in this accident. There are so many unanswered questions in this case which is why i find it so hard the jury came to this desicion so fast. It was like they were stuck in the box rather than looking outside of it.
I agree, Bob. These facts do
I agree, Bob. These facts do not add up. If someone (driver) had a serious accident, what kind of friend (passenger) would leave the scene? Not only leave the scene of the accident (which I think everyone knows is wrong) but to leave their FRIEND!? Then, why would Ron go right up to the police officer and say it's me you're looking for... I mean, duh. They would eventually know who they are looking for unless you are not the one they are looking for and are pretending you are.
That is a good point as well.
That is a good point as well. Who flees a crime scene when there are several witnesses and your face/name are well known around this town. For one you look even more guilty, for two your so called "friend" is left behind to go down in flames when they may have not of even been the one who started the fire..... so to speak lol. I understand people panic but you only panic for so long, once the adrenaline wears off and you come back to reality there is no excuse...so when a young girl dies does that make it okay to lie? or when a young girl dies you testify you thought the scene was "secure" enough to leave? What gives you the right to say any crime scene is secure? The lies just keep coming on William's part.
Maybe the judge is more
Maybe the judge is more intelligent than what I have come to expect from judges. Is he elected? Is this an election year? I hope not.
I just went back a few
I just went back a few articles and found that it is Judge Noonan. I trust his judgement from past cases reported here. He seems fair and this case appears much less so, I hope I'm right. "Drive defensively, the life you save may be your own." It seemed like a corny slogan at the time but it saved my ass a dozen times in forty years.
Keep in mind, none of us were
Keep in mind, none of us were sitting in the jury box. None of us heard all of the evidence.
As thoroughly as we reported the story, we're still compressing to keep stories from being tedious and overly long. There are things that get left out. I hope we've had the good judgment not to leave out anything critical, but that doesn't mean something stood out to the jury that didn't stand out to us.
The two worst jobs in the
The two worst jobs in the world, judge and jury.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE
Regardless of the outcome of
Regardless of the outcome of this trial, if Miss. Stanley would have been wearing her seat belt, it's very likely she'd still be alive.
There are a lot of "only ifs"
There are a lot of "only ifs" in this case. I imagine that's the case in many tragic accidents.
Seat belts save lives Howard.
Seat belts save lives Howard.
Two lives wasted for one dumb
Two lives wasted for one dumb split second decision, whether high or sober. But high means prison if a jury thinks you were, even if you were not. That's called justice under the rules of the American Taliban. I always thought of it as revenge. But I'm a damn liberal who should never be a judge, or on a jury. I think everyone is innocent, unless you prove otherwise, because they are.
Howard,I sent you a seat belt
Howard,I sent you a seat belt movie clip I'd like you to post. Thanks.
wow, 25 years for an
wow, 25 years for an accident? why wouldn't the lawyer grill the passenger more on his different stories, especially with rumor of him being the driver of the truck.
Unless you were there there
Unless you were there there will always be unanswered questions. I know in my heart what happened. And even though I am sad that this whole incident happened. You must understand we all make decisions(hundreds a day) that can alter our lives forever. I think about Katie Stanley and her family and the fragility of life every day. I know this happened in a horribly tragic manor but we all need to realize that every decision we make, we live with the consequences, whether good or bad. I was the passenger in the car who struck Wendt and I seen and remember every second. And to the speed assumptions... I know my cousin Rachel is a very intelligent and defensive driver, and she lives everyday of her life knowing that a beautiful young girl lost her life while she was in control. But knowing the reason for this was NOT her, and not her driving skills but rather someone who decided they would pull in front of on coming traffic because they "thought they had enough time". And now knowing decisions while impaired are most of the time wrong. Everybody in this situation wishes it never happened, but this is why we all need to realize we can never be cautious enough while driving on the road. Because all to often incidents such as this one happen. I pray for Ronald and his family can learn and grow through this tough time and my heart will always be with the Stanley's and their amazing support and their beautiful daughter that is now watching over all of us.
WOW!! I can't believe he's
WOW!! I can't believe he's been found guilty of all 11 counts.
I'm so confused, and perhaps someone can help me to understand; but wasn't he exactly the legal limit?
How then did they come to arrest him for DWI? Perhaps I've missed something? 0.8 = one drink = legal limit?
I'm very sorry for the loss of such a young life, and am sure that this will haunt everyone forever; however, is it really fair for an equally young life to be ruined (possible 25 years??!!!!!!!) for a stupid mistake??! Perhaps he was tired? Perhaps he did think he had enough time? Whatever the case, how sad it all is; he still doesn't deserve 25 years behind bars!
(Unless of course he WAS indeed completely intoxicated, which IS a very stupid and selfish mistake- which he should be punished for! BUT- this doesn't appear to be the case as he was only 0.8?!!)
And yes! Perhaps I would feel differently if it were my daughter who was killed, but all of the comments on here reassure me that I am not being unreasonable!
The Honourable Judge Noonan has indeed been seemingly fair and just in all past articles that I too have read; one can only hope and expect that Mr. Wendt won't be made an example of in such a high profile case.
Tim - I'm so sorry that you and your loved ones are going through this. You make a lot of good points - I commend you for your honesty and for your strength!
@ Sarah Thank you. And though
@ Sarah Thank you. And though I have no say in the sentencing. I do believe the Judge will be fair with his decision. He has seen thousands of these cases and will be very thorough and just in this one as well, that I am sure of. Everyone involved will live the rest of our lives with that night replaying. And I can only hope this brings closure to the families who have struggled throughout this past 13 months and counting. I will always have scars and a very debilitating hip injury that will forever remind me of this. But that is nothing compared to the loss the Stanley's have faced. I have faith that everything will be done in a very fair and just manor from here on out.
George, You said, "under the
George,
You said, "under the rules of the American Taliban". Are you comparing us to them?
Tim, thanks for commenting.
Tim, thanks for commenting. It's good to get your perspective.
John, I'm saying the
John, I'm saying the Christian radical religious right is hellbent on revenge and imposing their definition of morality on all of America. I think the similarities between them and the Taliban are glaring.
George, And how does that
George,
And how does that relate to the conviction? Are you comparing a conviction for DWI and homicide to, "imposing their morality"?
George, I can relate to your
George, I can relate to your opinion, but a jury of his "peers" handed down the verdict.John, I don't believe George was talking about the conviction, but instead the laws and interpretations of law that brought about the charges against Mr.Wendt.
Howard, was Mr.Wendt's attorney assigned counsel, or retained counsel?
So for all of you who feel
So for all of you who feel Wendt shouldnt go to jail, answer this, what kind of country would we live in if everyone went around driving with a BAC level of .08 or higher and killed someone. Its been proven that Wendt was intoxicated and crossed over into the Enderle vehicle. Yes, Katie may be alive today if she had her seatbelt on, but at the time of the accident, she was 18 and a BACK seat passanger. There is not law saying she has to wear her seatbelt, so bringing the "what ifs" in are pointless. I could easily say what if Wendt hadnt drank beer, would he have been able to tell how close the oncoming car was? All of you pity Wendt when the evidence has been showen, he clearly was intoxicated and caused this crash. He deserves the punishment that comes. The judge, along with the jury has been nothing but fair.
Frank, Mr. Burns was
Frank, Mr. Burns was retained.
correct me if im wrong but
correct me if im wrong but didnt the driver of the car say she was speeding because she didnt know the limit changed. so in my opinion both drivers were at fault. maybe wednt shoudnt have made that turn and maybe rachel should have paid more attention to the speed limit
Stacey, In my mind it was not
Stacey,
In my mind it was not proven that he was driving with that high of a BAC and besides that just a few years ago it was .1 and if this would have happened then it wouldn't be an issue.
Jason, when alcohol is
Jason, when alcohol is present, the driver who is under the influence will be charged, thats the way the law is set up. The legal arguement will always be; could this accident have been avoided if there were no alcohol involved? That question can not be answered because alcohol was involved. I realize many feel this is unfair,
but if you think of it in terms of split second decision making, it makes the law seem reasonable.
This type of tradgedy can remind all of us, there is no safe amount of alcohol one can consume, and then decide to get behind the wheel, drink all you want, just don't put yourself in this position, you may not be able to live with the results.
Peter, True, a few years ago
Peter,
True, a few years ago he would not have been charged with DWI, and would have been charged with driving while impaired. But he would still have been charged with vehicular homicide or manslaughter, and that is the really important charge.
While not everyone might like it, the only opinion that really counted was the jury's.
i understand the alcohol
i understand the alcohol issue but lets say she was doing the speed limit. its safe to assume that she would not of been in the spot she was when wendt made that turn he would of had plenty of time and none of this would of happened
Why is there so much of an
Why is there so much of an issue here? He was drinking and driving and killed someone! He should rot in jail. Or maybe someone should kill his daughter and see if he would want that person to walk free. I don't think he will get 25 years and nor should he, but to say he doesn't deserve jail time is insane.
his werent the only actions
his werent the only actions that caused her death. his, the driver and even her own decision to not wear a seat belt all led to her death
Jeffery Lonnen- Thank you! I
Jeffery Lonnen- Thank you! I could not agree with you more.
Peter O'Brien- You are entitled to your own opinion on what was proven and what wasn't. I feel no need to go against the NYS Sherrifs and doubt how well of a job they did. And as far of the law being a .1 a year ago, that doesnt mean anything anymore. It was changed for a reason. The law is now .08 so there is no reason to think of what it used to be.
As far as Rachels speed, it is not exact on how fast she was going. There has been a range from 46pmh-55mph. Theyve proven that to the eye Wendt had a view of her vehicle for quit some distance, and yet he was in too much of a hurry to stop and wait. If i were driving down the road, i cant know the speed that someone is approaching me but i am fully capiable of being able to tell if i have enough time to make the turn. For some reason Wendt was unable to do so. And after the jury heard all the facts and opinions, they came upon the decision that he was found guilty of all 11 counts. I believe this was a fair trial.
Early on I realized there was
Early on I realized there was more to this story than the simple story line of "drunken driver kills young woman."
It would have been easy to look at this issue that way and just let the story go.
There were numerous factors to consider in this case, which is why I think it was good it went to jury trial.
But having sat through much of the trial, it's hard not to come to the conclusion that Ron drank some, that his judgment was impaired because of it, that he tried to make a turn he should not have tried to make, and a person died as a result. None of the other links in the chain matter as much.
Not forgetting Katie and her family and friends, it's hard not to have some sympathy for Ron. He's still a young guy from a good family whom I'm sure would not have wanted to be involved in this at all.
He did, frankly, what a lot of young guys his age do all the time -- work, have a few beers, stop off for a night cap.
But I think this quote from Mr. Friedman is a good one to remember:
"Obviously, the vast majority believe nothing like this happens, but that's the reason we have these laws," Friedman said. "I'm sure this defendant never expected anything like this could ever happen to him, but that's what the problem is, you never know. Anybody who is driving while intoxicated could find themselves in this situation."
stacey it was her own words
stacey it was her own words that said she was speeding because she wasnt paying attention to the speed limit change. now im not sure on this road but when there is a reduction in speed their is sometimes a sign that says reduce speed ahead and there is also the speed limit sign. what had her so distracted that she didnt see the speed limit sign
Drink effects your eye sight
Drink effects your eye sight and your reaction time balling hay all day in the sun and drinking gets you drunk quicker. Ever sit in a hot tub an drink in the hot water when u get out after an hour and 2 drinks your wasted. in the hot sun its the same effect. This man knew he shouldnt have drove his reaction time was effected as was his eye sight and his perception of distance. He took his chance and look what it got him. This should not be justified for him. He made his choices. It is not right to drink in drive ever not after any number of drinks.
As far as his actions are
As far as his actions are concerned its the drinking that i have a problem with. He made the turn right in front of her. If she was speeding yah that is wrong but that has nothing to do with the fact that he was drunk and turned right in font of the her! HIS FAULT. Speed, no seat belt have nothing to do with what caused the accident! And the accident caused her death. So there for he killed her not the not seat belt or speed!
Are you comparing a
Are you comparing a conviction for DWI and homicide to, "imposing their morality"?
Yes, John I am. An eye for an eye? Should he get the death penalty? I'm sure many people think he should. Revenge is not justice.
If he were just a crappy reckless driver, as so many people are, there would have been no punishment. The imposing morality part comes in when a jury is ready to hang him high for drinking a beer. Thanks M.A.D.D. you truly are mad (as in insane.) Just my opinion.
as some one who lost both
as some one who lost both parents to a drunk driver, I feel the heart break of the family. Your heart hurts as if it was broke in two must be where the says comes from. You have to ask your self do you believe in fate - one second one way or the other, or god needed this young woman with him. I disliked god for along time. Or everyday people make mistakes. Young people today want everything now, instant gratification, want the phone call or text meg, want that beer right now, want to be home right now. After you lean to live with the hurt, you start to think what good would it do to put away a young man for years, he has to live with what happened just like you. The young man who hit my parents complete a shock camp and as far as I know lives a decent life. Hurting this man to make you feel better will never change what happened.
Laura, maybe you're wasted
Laura, maybe you're wasted after two drinks in the hottub... not everyone
Stacey,
Its not exact how much alcohol was in his system at the time of the accident either. Why is her speed ok to be in a range and not his BAC? A range that includes legal amounts of alcohol.
No one is saying it wasn't a fair trial.
"You are entitled to your own opinion on what was proven and what wasn't." Really? Thanks for validating that. I wasn't sure I had a right to my opinion.
If we are truly throwing out
If we are truly throwing out theoretical. We have to blame the old owners of the "Broken Prop" . If they had not sold it to someone that wanted people to come to their bar Mr. Wednt would have never been near it.
Peter it takes ten times more
Peter it takes ten times more than 2 drinks I have a high tolerance I grew up in a family full of drunks. My point is it intensifies the way it effects you.
George, You totally miss the
George,
You totally miss the main point. If it was just a DWI, we would not be this interested.
He was convicted of killing somebody, that's the main issue. Somebody is dead.
Do you think he should just be scolded for causing her death. What do you think is a "moral" punishment?
speed is a deffinite issue in
speed is a deffinite issue in the accident. speed effects the force of impact. force= mass*velocity. fatal g forces for the average female is death above 65 g's. now a 145lbs female in a car going at 55 would have a force of impact of 7.34 tons which is equivalent to 91.75 g's, same female going 40mph would have a force of impact of 3.88 tons which is equivalent to 48.5 g's. oh yeah and these figures are without a seatbelt. so if rachel was going the proper speed and was still at the same spot when wendt turned the passenger and a much greater chance of survival. and if she was wearing her seatbelt you can reduce those figures by 80%. so 55mph = 18.35g and 40mph = 9.7g. both easily survivable. so jeff yes both the speed and the seatbelt are an issue in the accident
Jason - My point is all math
Jason - My point is all math aside. If he would not have turned infront of them then she wouldnt be dead! End of point.
You know what let the guy go
You know what let the guy go free! And i hope next time its your daughter not wearing her seat belt in the back seat dead. I bet you will have a different opinion then.
and if she went the speed
and if she went the speed limit she would not of been there when he turned then she would not be dead, end of point
well jeffery i follow the
well jeffery i follow the speed limits and teach my children to wear there seatbelts so if something like this did happen i knew i did everything in my power to protect my family and the peoples lives i have taken responsibility over by driving them. i dont take my car out of park till everybody is buckled. if they dont like it they dont drive with me
I just think this was a
I just think this was a terrible accident. Punishment is due the guilty party, but there are limits. Two weeks ago a Guatamalan immigrant, illegally in Austin, got a twenty five year sentence for running a red light and killing a man in his mid sixties, who had just arrived in town for a business meeting and was travelling to the hotel. The difference is, the driver had been deported after a drunken driving conviction, twice before, and he ignored a cop with his lights and siren blaring while he drove twenty miles an hour and threw beer bottles out of his Cadillac Escalde SUV window for several blocks before gunning the engine, running a red light and killing the businessman. His alcohol content was very high and he was a total scofflaw. If you reserve twenty five year sentences for cases like that, it's justified.
.. Had she been going the
.. Had she been going the speed limit, he would have had to time to turn. Him knowing the area, would have known what was or was not enough time to make a turn. Unless of course an on coming car was speeding.. I'm not saying Ron doesn't deserve punishment. I'm saying he's not the only one. and that b.s excuse of "Well she has to live with is everyday that a young girl died"... you think Ron doesn't. This is just sad for everyone involved. Everyone looking to blame someone else. Even if the blame should be spread equally. We have to pin it on one person to make ourselves feel better... God Bless America...
finally somebody gets what i
finally somebody gets what i was saying
100% agree with liz.
100% agree with liz.
Speed limit or not his time
Speed limit or not his time conception was impaired. He was drinking all day in the sun.
Also, I went by the area
Also, I went by the area today and there is not a "reduced speed limit ahead" sign before the 40 MPH however, there are TWO 40 MPH signs BEFORE you even get to the bar. The first one you can CLEARLY see from a distance, you would have enough time even if you were doing something else - it can be seen for some time, and the second one you see right at the top of the hill. So how is it she miss TWO signs? Signs that would reflect brightly at night from headlights. What the heck do people pay attention to when they drive if they dont see these signs (multipul signs to be exact in this situation), they are there for a reason.
Are you just basing this on
Are you just basing this on your personal experience? As far as i am concerned, in my opinion, i would say you would drink more because your body is hot and dehydrated. It would be based on consumption not the alcohol being more "strong" than any other time. It just depends on how much alcohol, what you weigh, how long between drinks and your experience dealing with it all!
All the debate in the world
All the debate in the world won't change the results of this accident. What is does though is teach, wear your seatbelt, drive the speed limit, and don't drink and drive.
We started wearing seatblets
We started wearing seatblets when you has to order them as extras in a new car. Anyone who does not wear a seatbelt is asking for trouble. Mr. Wendt was DUI, but the girl who died was not. She had a proven lifesaving device at her disposal and chose not to use it.
As to the speed limit. I live a couple of miles from where the accident occurred and I have to remind myself each time I drive through there to slow down. In my opinion, there should be a flashing sign stating reduced speed limit ahead.
All that being said, I am not excusing Wendt's BAC. But it is a sad day for ALL involved.
It's graphic, but every
It's graphic, but every teenager should see this video!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Kv2SULi-wg&NR=1
Does everyone realize that he
Does everyone realize that he was also driving an unregistered, uninsured, and uninspected vehicle? Also not displaying a front plate? Intoxicated or not, the vehicle he was driving had no reason to even be on the road, thus solidifying the case even more. Lets take another approach...say alcohol wasn't even a factor in this case. Do you still believe that someone who decides to get behind the wheel of a vehicle that isn't even legal, does the same thing, should be held accountable for the loss of an innocent life? I do. The fact is, is that this man didn't just make one bad decision, he made several. I'm not defending either side. I'm simply saying, as I have stated in previous posts, that we all have the power to make decisions that will affect the lives of others, and good or bad, in the end, we have to take responsibility for those actions.
Laura your comment that one
Laura your comment that one cannot drive after drinking any number of drinks is not in keeping even with the law. You further say he had to have been affected because of drinking all day. As I recall, Mr Wendt drank 5 beers over the course of several hours, in keeping with the legal limit. Saying "he took his chance" is not really fair in his case. 2 years ago in Byron, a woman misjudged her distance and turned in front of a truck. Both of her children were killed. She was not under the influence of alcohol. It was an accident. I am not convinced that this was any different. In fact, I tend to agree with Liz...the guy lives in that area and probably knew it was a safe turn, not realizing the oncoming car was speeding. My job has taken me through that area twice in the last week, and one thing I did notice was that anyone on the porch of that place (like the one witness) could not have seen Mr Wendt until the last second! He probably sped up when making that turn when he saw how fast the other car was approaching as opposed to what she said that he never slowed down or something like that. Unfortunate accident, but I am inclined to believe Judge Noonan will see the extenuating circumstances, he is a pretty good Judge and makes fair decisions taking all things into account. I am not condoning drinking and driving for sure, just not convinced this was the cause of this accident.
BTW, what are all the
BTW, what are all the charges... 11 charges?
Good Point, Mike.
Good Point, Mike.
Mike he said he had 5 beers
Mike he said he had 5 beers he was balling hay which is a really good work out so he was sweating and thirsty and in sun. I used to ball hay and my dad would drink and hes been drinking along time but in that sun working hard like that it never took much. Weather he was over the limit or not he should not have gotten behind the wheel.
A couple of points of
A couple of points of clarification --
: Wendt had insurance. In fact, his insurance company is defending him in the lawsuit filed by the Enderle's. His proof of insurance was introduced at trial.
: Also, while an officer testified that he didn't believe Wendt's truck was registered, there was never any proof provided that it wasn't registered.
I remember being told early on that the citations on these issues were dropped.
This whole thing is just
This whole thing is just sad.
An 18 year old girl lost her life and now a 25 year old man will lose most of his...
Life is filled with little moments...and it's the choices that we make in those moments that can determine our future. I'm sure both of these young people would like to have that moment in time back again. They can't though, neither of them.
What's done is done. I have heard and seen enough from Judge Noonan to know that he is a fair and compassionate man. Mr. Wendt will be punished for his part in this, but I doubt for the full 25 years. Regardless, a punishment is in order, as a jury of his peers concluded.
We can all sit here and speculate, for that's all this is. Mr. Wendt committed a crime, someone died because of it and now he will face jail time. While our sympathies for Mr. Wendt's future is understandable, the critism of Katie's use of a seatbelt are just mundane and frankly stupid.
Sure, Katie should have had her seatbelt on, but there are a ton of other factors that should, or shouldn't have happened, that are the real cause of her death.
I hope everyone can heal from this.
Noonan Fair. HA! thats a
Noonan Fair. HA! thats a good one. he is one of the most biased self absorbed judges i have ever seen
she would of survived if she wore her seatbelt
While wearing a seat belt is
While wearing a seat belt is sensible, the lack of a seat belt does not cause accidents.
The three other people in the car suffered serious, life-altering injuries.
Wendt also faced charges related to these injuries as well.
my point is not that the
my point is not that the accident wouldnt of happened if shw wore her seatbelt its that she would of survived as my other post showed and it is also the drivers responsibility to make sure everybody is buckled up
Ok after reading all the
Ok after reading all the comments and story here I just have to make a quick comment or two. 1st lets not bring the drama in....if I am not mistaken and I'm sure Howard will correct me, if he is given 25 yrs then he will actually be doing 5 to 7 before he can be paroled. So lets cut the oh he loses 25 yrs of his life.
Nothing concrete ever stated that the kids were actually speeding, she said she thought she was, even the guy following said he was, however the driver behind the kids was able to stop before hitting the back of the kids car so he couldn't have been following that closely, and with distance the speed can be misinterpreted. Seatbelt is a non issue, she was of age and it was her choice, it didnt contribute to the accident so it means nothing in the case as far as I'm concerned, others in the vehicle were wearing seatbelts and were still pretty severely injured.
Now on to the drinking.... I drink myself, I know how dangerous it can be and I make arrangements to either stay where I am drinking, or have a sober ride. No exceptions and no excuses, it that or I dont drink. Now as far as the harshness of the prosecution of dui offenses, well they are necessary as we have been so lax on the enforcement in the good ol days that its come to be expected. Let me pose it another way, if he had taken a perscription drug and drove would he still be as responsible, most would say if he was aware that it could effect his skills and judgement then yes...well we ALL know alcohol does.
He drank, he was going into the bar and took a chance with an oncoming car, if he wasnt impaired he would have realized he didnt have enough time, he took a chance driving after having drank that afternoon.
Oh and on the hot day and hay baling argument. When you drink while working hard it does in fact effect you quicker, and stays with you longer because your body is trying to replace fluids and re hydrate you. And the body is going to slow down as much as possible the elimination of liquids and divert everything to the body to keep energy and hydration levels good. Plus your metabolism is going full bast when baling hay, so anything you take is gonna slam into you quick, why do you think people dont take cold medicine or other medicines while doing this......Hell drinking coffee can slam you hard when doing this kind of work.
So with all the armchair quarterbacking going on, the facts remain. We dont have the whole picture, and we sit and give opinions. Which aren right or wrong they just are. But a jury was presented with facts, and made their determination from them.
The driver took a chance, it didnt work and he ended up taking a life, he is lucky he didn't die as well.
Liz, Had my car I was in was
Liz,
Had my car I was in was going 50 or 25 we still would have crashed. The time he decided to turn we were literally about to pass him. It was a last second decision that was made while he was impaired. And if we didn't crash into him the car behind us would have. We were almost sandwiched in between two vehicles. It was a sad situation but yet if the shoe were on the other foot, I would take full responsibility for my actions as well. Because that's how I was raised. Again, we all must deal with the consequences of every decision we make. It's a sad way to learn that lesson in such a manor. But that is why there are such laws.