It is up to a jury now

[RichH]

Re: District Attorney an accessory to the crime???

One can only hope that Dinius is totally exonerated ... and that eventually he sues the DA and the local county for prosecutorial, etc. misconduct to reclaim the expenses that he had to bear in proving is innocence. Its always a great shame to our republic that nakedly uncontrolled an unethical shysters can force the indictment of just about anyone... and even if later found innocent they usually and ultimately are destroyed because of the immense 'legal costs'. The recent "Duke Univ. LaCross" case is a good example.

Of course if Dinius is found innocent the DA and sheriff's office should then be vigorously prosecuted - for the cover up, etc. - that would be 'frosting on the cake' for 'real justice'.

Just like almost ALL actions nowadays of 'government' fed/state/local, etc. ... why do they never pass the 'smell test'?

 

[John]

lawsuit

If the defendant is found not guilty. You can be sure that some serious law suits will follow for damages and wrongful death. I am sure that the defence legal team already has an eye on this. Give the lawyers their due, they can smell a slam dunk case when they are anywhere close.

There SHOULD be serious law suits. If you believed you were charged with a serious crime in order to cover up for a law enforcement officer, and you had major legal expenses, a major disruption of your life, plus all the anguish and worry, wouldn't you feel you were entitled to some compensation? And consider the fact that Deputy Purdy's OWN insurance company assigned him something like 80% of the fault. In that case, don't you think that the family of the woman he killed is entitled to compensation? Do you think he should get off scot free?

It's true that lawyers get a bad name often deservedly, but that doesn't mean that everything they're involved in is without merit.

 

[Bad Obsession]

In reading the story one thing comes to mind. No matter who is charged, found guilty or not guilty, it won't bring back the person who died. Furthermore, it won't prevent any further injuries or deaths in that area.

The first thing that needs to be done is that the laws need to be amended to provide a night time speed limit on the body of water in which this incident occurred.

Actually, maybe federal law should put speed limits for recreational boaters for inclement weather with poor visibility and nights because I have missed near crashes with speeding powerboats in the fog.

What should have been done, from the get go, is have an outside agency do the investigation (such as the Coast Guard) as the accusations of protecting a fellow officer would be less. It would have also been much more impartial that way.

 

[BobM]

BUI

Well, the cop behind the wheel should certainly be charged for driving to endanger, or the boating equivalent, if not BUI itself, based on circumstantial evidence. There was evidence, if I recall correctly, that he had a few drinks prior to the incident.

Certainly the State Police should be involved in any incident when a local policeman is involved.

 

[Cpt. Jon]

I'm no lawyer, but I'm not sure I see the DA is an accessory to the crime, but can see conspiracy charges or something. I definately think he has no ethics and should not be representing the public - or charging the public. There is no trust, get rid of him and if you can't get rid of those who put him in his position.

BO, true it won't bring her back, but the creation of more rules and laws that everyone has to abide by EXCEPT LAW ENFORCEMENT would help. It is clear that the law enforcement officer is clearly at fault. 50 Mph is fast on the water, even more so at night, even more so on a moonless night. It was irresponsible and the whole event has violated the publics trust in their public "servants". Everyone involved in the cover up should held accountable. Citizens pay these peoples salaries to "protect and serve", it would seem that these people have violated the 'contract' that they have with the public.

 

[Bad Obsession]

Just because one locality is accused of impartial handling of a case based on someone being in law enforcement doesn't mean that the whole law enforcement community is that way.

Sure, it is typical for one cop to give another off duty cop a break on a speeding ticket if he pulls him over (in a car). It is a different circumstance if the person is DUI because they WILL be charged, no matter who they are. The days of the Good Ol' Boy system of Justice are dead and burried in most jursidictions.

Typically, law enforcement has become very adept in policing their own. They usually don't cover things up and it is sometimes the reverse of that. Departments have swung the other way and have left officers out to dry to save their liabilities if possible. This is very true when it comes to law suits based on crashes resulting from high speed pursuits (if you check around into this you will see this).

Just because one department has acted in this way, it shouldn't give all law enforcement officers a black eye. Remember, for the most part you have good, honest people working and hanging their lives on the line every day to make sure that you are safe. Saying that all law enforcement agencies protect their own would be like saying that all boaters get drunk and then operate their boats. We all know that the reality of it is that it is far from true. Just because one does it, doesn't mean that all do.

I am not condoning the actions of the Police Department or the District Attorney's Office. Another agency should have been involved in the investigation, the agency where the deputy had worked should have stepped back and allowed the investigation to proceed without interfering, an outside District Attorney's Office should have been asked to be a special prosecutor in this event, and a few other things should have taken place so that imparitiality could have been maintained.

In the end, my thoughts are that everyone is always yelling for someone to be punished when incidents like this happen. The whole eye for an eye principle. This is well and good, but the truth is that punishment is not a deterant, as a whole, and it is far more effective to analyze what went wrong in the incident and what could be done to prevent further incidents. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure! If the powerboat had been traveling at a reasonable speed, the crash may not have happened. Until we tell people that they shouldn't drive over X mph in certain situations, they will use their own judgement (which in some cases is not the most prudent of judgements). This is why there are speed limits on the road. As the waterways become more crowded, there should probably be specific speeds in areas of congestion and high commercial traffic because of incidents like this.

 

[RichH]

In the end, my thoughts are that everyone is always yelling for someone to be punished when incidents like this happen. The whole eye for an eye principle. This is well and good, but the truth is that punishment is not a deterant, as a whole, and it is far more effective to analyze what went wrong in the incident and what could be done to prevent further incidents. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure! If the powerboat had been traveling at a reasonable speed, the crash may not have happened. Until we tell people that they shouldn't drive over X mph in certain situations, they will use their own judgement (which in some cases is not the most prudent of judgements). This is why there are speed limits on the road. As the waterways become more crowded, there should probably be specific speeds in areas of congestion and high commercial traffic because of incidents like this.

Then how do you explain the German autobahn where there are NO speed limits and it's very safe to drive there in comparison to the vulgar disregard for 'rules' and 'simple courtesy' (especially in most 'metro' areas) on the USA highways? "hey outta da way, Eye'm drivin' hea!!"
Answer: the German drivers are 'well educated' as to the rules, there are EXTREMELY harsh penalties for violating the rules, the 'culture' is different as one who breaks the rules there will suffer the extreme ire, etc. from the citizenry long before the 'cops' show up. In Germany if they changed (some crowded sections have changed) to ridiculously low speed limits on the Autobahn -- EVERY damn driver would drive exactly at the ridiculous speed limit -- and then vote out EVERY politico who voted for the change at the VERY next opportunity.

 

[Ross]

Bad O , I agree with you. I have often called or emailed police departments with complaints or observations and have kept my comments civil and low key and have always received polite replies of explanation and have obseved correction concerning the subject of my compliant. For example: The local sherrifs patrols and the state police had a tendency to follow too close in traffic. I commented on this to my neighbor, a state trooper at the time and he said well they may be in a hury for a call. But I told him that as often as not they are just patroling and would he please mention it the next time they had a meeting. I told him that I thought that if I followed the patrol car as closely I would be stopped. He agreed to say something and soon after the cops maintained a safer interval.

 

[kenn]

Until we tell people that they shouldn't drive over X mph in certain situations, they will use their own judgement (which in some cases is not the most prudent of judgements). This is why there are speed limits on the road. As the waterways become more crowded, there should probably be specific speeds in areas of congestion and high commercial traffic because of incidents like this.

In many ways, boating is the last refuge of freedom tempered by common sense, and maritime right-of-way rules are simple, logical and practical. This sort of case highlights that; but even someone unfamiliar with boating right-of-way rules would assume that a 40+ mph powerboat should not have hit a 6 mph sailboat. From behind, yet.

Would a speed limit on that lake have helped? Perhaps. It would be far more effective though to have charged and tried the true offender, which would have publicly demonstrated that violating the most basic of common-sense rules (you MUST know what's in front of you) has legal as well as practical consequences.

PS - I very much respect police officers and I know a few, but serious offenses by members cannot go unpunished, to protect the rule of law, and to preserve the integrity of the rest of the force.

 

[Bad Obsession]

Rich...You hit the nail on the head. It is a totally different culture. If we had no speed limits and little traffic laws, Someone would be driving a minivan down the highway with blad tires and bad breaks at 100 mph while texting on a cellphone and eating a Big Mac. Seriously, I have seen people reading newspapers while driving.

The average driver's perception reaction time is 1.5 seconds. A vehicle at that speed will be traveling at 80.63 feet per second. In the 1.5 seconds it would take a driver to percieve a hazard the vehicle would travel 120.95 feet. Additionally, once the driver applied the breaks the vehicle would cover 144.05 feet. This means from the time of perception reaction until the vehicle is at rest the vehicle covers about 265 feet. Of course this isn't going to take into account a driver who is distracted.

Driver distratction is the #1 cause of crashes on the highway. It is probably the same with boating.

Why must we have speed limits? The answer is because people will not use good judgement in a lot of cases so the government places a line in the sand to determine what is good judgement.

If there was a speed limint on the lake at night, it is possible that the power boat would have been violating that limit. If so, then it would be very obvious that there was a lot of liability on the power boat driver's part.

 

[Bad Obsession]

Police are the same as other people. They get up in the morning and put their pants legs on one leg at a time. It is also true that if they break the law they should be punished.

My point is that this incident shouldn't throw into question every law enforcement agency's decision in the whole country. This agency probably accounts for far less that 1% of the law enforcement population in the United States. Just because one agency didn't excercise good judgement doesn't mean the whole community does the same. I already outlined the way the situation should have been handled.

I digress. The incident is what it is. No matter who is punished, the person is still dead. Until someone steps in and says that we have a problem here and something needs to be done, people will continue to act in poor judgement and fly through that lake at crazy speeds at night and not even give this incident a second thought. When it becomes a law it sets a limit and makes things much more enforcable. When things are enforcable, it leaves less to the imagination.

If the speed limit for the lake at night was 10 knots and the power boat still hit the sailboat at 45 miles an hour, who looks worse in the eyes of the law?

 

[Ross]

I have to disagree with the observation responce times. If you hold you arms at your sides and have someone drop a ball from shoulder height it will hit the ground in a half second and by your numbers you would not catch it until the second bounce.

 

[txtowman]

interesting

If the power boat had hit a boat that was adrift and unattended and someone on his boat died what would be the charge? and whose fault would it be.

Or if he hit the rocks or other obstruction?

He(powerboater) clearly caused this Crash (not an accident) in my opinion. and also is at fault for improper overtaking another vessel.

 

[zeehag]

It's NOT in Texas, it's California.

The deputy should be keelhauled. Now.

And then drop the charges against Dinius. Now.

How this can happen in this country si beyond me.

amen--the sheriff was seen by witnesses to be drinking then going to his boat then killing the lady on board ---witnessed to be drinking. dinius tested at barely the legal drunk driver numbers----and was at helm only short time while owner went to pee in the bathroom instead of overboard---go figger..the lights had been on since leaving dock---witnessed...the sheriff needs to lose his job, lose his license and go to prison for manslaughter, AT LEAST......(latitude 38 kept us well informed).btw--the sailboat was barely moving, as there wasnt any wind--yes, the sheriff hit a boat unable to steer out of its own way....

 

[Bad Obsession]

Ross, the 1.5 second perception reaction time is the average for the average person. This is actually an accepted standard in the Crash Reconstruction Field. There are many states that have this as a law for Standard Perception Reaction time. This is the amount of time it takes for someone to perceive a hazard and react to it.

 

[Ross]

BadO, I guess that I don't know anyone who fits the average. A play ball rolling out from between parked cars will hit the far curb in that time.

 

[jackhartjr]

In trucking circles the Perception time is 3/4s of a second, then Reaction time is another 3/4s of a second.
Both are drastically reduced when driving in a defensive mode. Same for boating. Sail or stink-pot!
JAck

 

[TimCup]

I think we're missing the strategy of "protecting"

their own....

The charges weren't filed for almost a year! Let me guess how this plays out. The sailor is charged, so civil suits against the motorboat operator are severely affected. No jury (other than OJ's perhaps!) will find the sailor guilty, in the meantime the deputy get's to use the charges filed against another as proof that he has limited (or , according to his buddy the DA, NO) liability.

What a country...


cup

 

[Ross]

I always drive defensively. There are too many people that drive aggresively to not drive defencively. Maybe that is why I don't have accidents.

 

[jackhartjr]

My dad's favorite saying...and I think I have posted it here before was..."Who has the Right of Way in any given situation?"...Answer..."The one that wants it!"
Jack