Humboldt Broncos tragedy.

[Ace]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Not stopping at a marked intersection?

I would think that is considered negligent....no?

I mean Im no lawyer for sure but if that doesnt qualify, how is anyone ever blamed or found at fault in any vehicle collision?

Probably, but what gets me is that this particular intersection was already recommended to have rumble strips (that were not in place). Does that not make the province negligent at the same time. I have no familiarity with the area at all, but i would assume based on this, that this is a secondary highway with next to no stops, making the stopping location somewhat unexpected and out of the norm. If the driver is double checking the tarps, the rumble strips would have likely alerted him and avoided this.

[midniteowl]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

Frankly in the community - performing community service of some sort. Find causes that means something to the people who died and have him perform community service for X number of hours each week for a specified period of time. He obviously is someone who has done something awful, but it wasn't something born out of intent or hatred, it was a crap driver who wasn't paying enough attention to the road. He wasn't drunk, high, or texting, he wasn't paying enough attention to the road - which having driven down Saskatchewan roads - can occur very easily.

Empathy isn't a finite resource by the way, you can't run out of it. You just choose not to care about the driver.

Well if that's your interpretation, that's fine, I don't want to start an argument. All I want to say is I care for the victims and their families.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by midniteowl

my heart is overtaken by their grieves, it has no room for empathy for the driver.

and yet Marilyn Cross can find empathy and compassion

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko

Sure he plead guilty and takes responsibility but this was also a choice of his for HIS best interests as well. You don't think him and his lawyer didn't talk about this and say "it will make you look good", "judges like defendants taking responsibility" etc etc etc he's also saying the "right things" in hopes he gets a lighter sentence, don't kid yurself that he isn't.

This is a bad look.

[midniteowl]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

and yet Marilyn Cross can find empathy and compassion

Yes she is an angel and I'm not.

[JackIsBack]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I really feel bad for the driver. I know what it's like to be towing something and being concerned and distracted by the load. The thing is, stopping to recheck your tarps or straps doesn't totally alleviate the concern. There is inherent need to see it while you're in motion to confirm the load is secure. A driver cannot just strap it down and then assume all is well. Anyone with any degree of concern for others on the road will constantly check the mirrors to make sure there aren't tarps flapping or load shifting.

Just one hour ago I helped a guy who was driving a flat deck pick up his lost cargo. He went around a corner and the man lift he was hauling fell off the deck onto the road. I saw the heavy duty straps he used to strap it down. I don't know why it came loose, but he sure as hell didn't do it on purpose.

The thing is, that could have ended much worse than it did. He was rounding a corner on a single lane one way road, so there was no chance of it landing on another car, but if that had happened somewhere else, it very well could have, and that thing was goddamn heavy. It easily could have ended much worse than simple embarrassment and likely repairs to the machine.

I fully include the driver as one of the victims of this terrible tragedy. The first time I towed a trailer with a Bobcat on it, I think I spent more time looking in the rearview than out the windshield. It's a very uneasy feeling to be new to towing and hauling and I definitely think that the trucking industry should be increasing the amount of training drivers get. This driver got sent out on his first solo run after only two weeks of sitting shotgun. Ironically, his concern for another other kind of accident is what led to the actual accident.

Heartbreaking for everyone involved, including the driver.

Very good point. I mean... I attach my itty bitty trailer to my truck and it's a concern for me - now imagine multiplying that by 1000 or more, yes, I can see your point and totally agree with it all.

[JackIsBack]

Originally Posted by Ace

If the driver is double checking the tarps, the rumble strips would have likely alerted him and avoided this.

Who cares what distracted him.... your point is so incredibly spot on, the rumble strips would have almost certainly avoided this accident.

[JackIsBack]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

and yet Marilyn Cross can find empathy and compassion

I remember when this first happened... seeing the carnage and destruction, I had empathy for everyone on the bus. I remember seeing the family members in the hospital... and then those morning their lost love ones - I felt empathy for them. Then I remembered seeing (or hearing about) the driver of the truck, and how distraught with guilt he was - and I remember thinking about what if I was in his position - how would I feel (the true measure of empathy IMO) and I felt empathy for him as well.



The bottom line: it's sad all around, it was an accident, more tragic then most... but that's what made this incident pull at our heart strings more than any other in recent memory - it was just an accident with victims of every kind.

[Ryan Coke]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Not stopping at a marked intersection?

I would think that is considered negligent....no?

I mean Im no lawyer for sure but if that doesnt qualify, how is anyone ever blamed or found at fault in any vehicle collision?

I can see that there is differing terminology in different industries, but negligence, willful negligence, criminal negligence, or gross negligence that I am talking about requires committing some avoidable act that is known to increase risk. Like drug or alcohol impairment, excessive speed, intentionally reckless driving.

Do you feel every mistake you make in a day is negligent? If so, I understand your position, but to me people make mistakes all the time, most of them minor, and of the major mistakes most don’t have tragic consequences. I don’t consider all of those negligent.

Based on what I know, he made a simple mistake that had tragic consequences, he was not willfully, grossly, criminally negligent in my mind.

[JackIsBack]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

Do you feel every mistake you make in a day is negligent? If so, I understand your position, but to me people make mistakes all the time, most of them minor, and of the major mistakes most don’t have tragic consequences. I don’t consider all of those negligent.

Based on what I know, he made a simple mistake that had tragic consequences, he was not willfully, grossly, criminally negligent in my mind.

If it causes someone else harm - a mistake by you is negligent on your part (in most cases at least). The driver was clearly negligent... it's to what degree should that be punished. Most accidents without intent are just dealt with financially - it's why we have insurance. Insurance may not cover all of it.... when you buy insurance, all you're really doing is buying (or transferring) your liability (a specific amount in most cases) for damages that your negligent for on to a third party provider (insurance company)... that's the one component of insurance that is required by law. (there are other component's to your policy - like covering yourself for loss - but that's not applicable here). You also don't need insurance - if you have the money, you can put up a bond with the government and self-insure, most just don't have the resources for that.


My point is this: The vast majority of losses from accidents are well under that limit (say 2 million)... so most policies only cover you for that... but if you were liable for someone else's losses that are more then your policy covers - they can then come after you for the difference. This truck obviously required more insurance then a regular car or truck does, but I'm almost certain that the amount of damages in this case would exceed all the insurance limits - so the driver and his company are liable for a great deal more - this accident will certainly bankrupt the company and certainly the driver... and depending on the structure of the business, the liability could flow through to the owners and their personal assets (owners house(s) and more) as well - all the lawyers will be working hard to get an in to those - this is why it so important to structure your business properly to limit your liability to those in the business only).



These people (driver, truck company owner) and their families will feel the financial pressure of this one accident in many ways for many years.

[JackIsBack]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Criminal charges are not initiated by serving a ticket (offence notice). Those are regulatory offences under the Highway Traffic Act. They are not criminal offences under the Criminal Code of Canada. They are an entirely different type of offence and the vast majority might be described as offences of "negligence" (in the sense that the accused may avoid conviction by proving due diligence [ie, non-negligence]).

I don't know where to go here.... you are both right and wrong. You could be issued a ticket that says "Court" in the penalty box - these could lead to larger fines and/or even prison time - and of course the police have up to 6 months to charge you with more. I guess we're arguing over an incident or offense under the Highway Traffic Act - so you're right in that case. Since the vast majority of these "offense notices" (read that for a second - that sounds serious) are minor, the Act likes to call them "incidents" to lessen the harshness of the offense, and it doesn't effect your "criminal record"... but all these things can under the Act... there is a degree built in to them.


Let me explain: try driving without insurance, you can be given a ticket ("offence notice") with the word "court" on it... many years ago, your first offense would have $600 written in - you could just pay that and be done with it - but now, I think a judge needs to hear the case, and I think the fine was raised to $1,500 some years ago and is now $2,500 (I could be wrong)... anyhow, the judge has so much power here if you're found guilty... he can fine you and let it walk as an "incident" so to speak - with no criminally consequence (i.e. no criminal record)... he can even send you to jail, it all depends (usually your first offense is treated better) on the circumstances and your attitude and ability to pay the fine.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Ace

Probably, but what gets me is that this particular intersection was already recommended to have rumble strips (that were not in place). Does that not make the province negligent at the same time. I have no familiarity with the area at all, but i would assume based on this, that this is a secondary highway with next to no stops, making the stopping location somewhat unexpected and out of the norm. If the driver is double checking the tarps, the rumble strips would have likely alerted him and avoided this.

I 100% agree with you.

However these kinds of highways in Saskatchewan are no where near engineering specifications to even enable rumble strips in several locations.

Rumble strips at a minimum would require resurfacing 2-4 km of roadway. Based on my recollection of this highway it didn’t appear to even have an adequate width and constructed road base that would align with current safety standards.

The secondary highway network in Saskatchewan is a joke that is legitimized by lipspeak, not strategically planned, designed, & engineered infrastructure capacity. Since the explosion of intermodal grain transport over 20 years ago an outdated network has been continually limped forward with band aids, hopes, & prayers.

[Lubicon]

ESPN has released a great video called 'The Logan Effect' focusing on Logan Boulet and being an organ donor but it also obviously touches on the crash itself as part of the story. Some pretty sobering stuff by some witnesses to the crash and by the Boulet family.

It's fantastic and worth viewing. Kudos for SI for putting this together.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRWnGxmqaEs

** edited to correct the video source - it was ESPN rather than SI **

[undercoverbrother]

Is there a sentence yet in this case?

[ken0042]

He pleaded guilty to 29 dangerous driving charges and is to be sentenced March 22.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by ken0042

He pleaded guilty to 29 dangerous driving charges and is to be sentenced March 22.

Thanks I was wondering when the sentence was coming down.

[stazzy33]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1109099664324857857

Sentencing will happen today. In a situation where nobody wins I wouldn't want to be in that Judge's shoes.

[sureLoss]

Frank Seravalli @frank_seravalli
Jaskirat Sidhu, the truck driver who pleaded guilty in causing the Humboldt Broncos bus crash, has been sentenced to 8 years in prison. Judge Inez Cardinal: "Nothing can turn back the clock. This collision was avoidable."

[loob job]

I believe that means he gets deported as well. Anything over 6 months.

[Manhattanboy]

Wow I believe that's an unprecedented sentence in Canada for dangerous driving.

I know he plead guilty to all counts but there may be grounds for an appeal of the sentence here.