It's a Better Deal to Flee the Scene of an Accident
- Leaving the scene of a fatal accident: 1-3.75 years
- Manslaughter (speeding, driving violation): 3-12.5 years
- 2nd degree murder (alcohol involved): Up to 22 years
There's going to be no way to ascertain the blood alcohol content of Mr. Torre at the time of the accident. And in the dark of night, estimates of speed will be disputed by Torre's legal representatives. So, it looks like that leaving the scene of an accident is the preferred choice of action for an dangerous, irresponsible driver.
Leibowitz took some heat from callers for instructing listeners that "fleeing the scene" would be beneficial - also, the "loophole" whereby someone may refuse to submit to a blood alcohol test and police do not follow proper procedure in those instances was highlighted as another way defendents avoid the more severe rap.
And on yesterday's KFYI Mohan in the Morning show, the story was also discussed from a different perspective - that is, in the zeal to crack down on drunk driving offenses, the increase in penalty severity has caused anyone who has even drank one beer trepidation at potential consequences. All of the measures to increase drunk driving sentences, lower the blood-alcohol level (lowered to .08), mandatory jail time, etc. have resulted in more of these types of cases.
Comments
Leaving the scene of an accident, being an attorney, is criminal. Torre should have all his legal priveleges removed and hopefully will be disbarred, and pay the maximum legal sentence.
May the guilt of his actions be the maximum punishment througout the remainder of his life.
It's easy to jump on the bandwagon and say that Mark Torre got what was coming to him when he was sentenced to a 9 1/2 year prison term for the hit-and-run death of Jessica Woodin that occurred in late 2001. I wonder though, how many people have really thought that through. It seems that once the media got a hold of it and once the prosecutors saw that Mark had a Harvard Law degree, he was going to be the one that they would make an example out of. To some, the fact that he was intelligent and successful seemed to imply that he was going to get away with something. It was assumed that he was a person of "privilege" and we all rallied behind the lynch-mob in the hopes of not letting a person like that get away with anything. After all, we've seen first hand what happens when people of privilege get into trouble. It seems the best defense is one that can be purchased. Those with money, more often than not, seem to be able to walk away from their crimes. Others assumed that because he was a practicing attorney, he must also be an expert on criminal law. Few people if any, bothered to find out that when he was a practicing attorney he specialized in commercial litigation and he probably knew little more of criminal law than any other lay-person and no one seemed to care what kind of person he was. Pretty soon, he wasn't even a person - just a monster and a cold-blooded criminal who deserved more than the maximum. After all, how many hit-and-run cases have resulted in such a harsh punishment? Take Bishop O'Brien for example, here is a man who is supposed to be a pillar of the community, someone to look up to. He hits a jaywalker and leaves him there to die and how much time did he get? He was sentenced to four years probation and 1,000 hours of community service. The judge is his case claimed to have reviewed 99 other similar cases when imposing the sentence. Where were those 99 other cases when Mark was sentenced? What about Sean Cooney? He drove his boat drunk, his friend fell off and died, he then lied to police about what happened and what was his sentence? 30 days in jail and a $442 fine.
I have read every article I can find on this case and not once have I seen anything printed that gives any insight into who Mark Torre really is. At first read, I'm ready to join the masses in the opinion that he should be sent away for as long as possible. There are some people who even think that he doesn't deserve a second thought, after all if he is a monster, who cares what kind of person he is.
Let me ask you this. How many of you have driven down a road at 2:00 in the morning, maybe with a few beers, maybe without. It's dark, it's late, you are probably exceeding the speed limit like many of us do at that hour - just trying to get home. What would you do if a person walked in front of your car, against a "don't walk" sign. Would you panic? Would your instincts kick in? What would your 3-second decision be? Would you do the moral and ethical thing or would you act in fear? I'd like to think I would have my wits about me and that I would have done the moral and ethical thing - BUT THE TRUTH IS... I don't know what I would have done and either do any of you. No one can say without a shadow of a doubt that they would have done this or that. You can’t say anything unless you were in that exact set of circumstances at that exact moment. That is the truth.
I'm not justifying Mr. Torre's actions and I'm not simplifying this horrific tragedy. Losing a loved one is one of the worst things a person can go through. I know this personally. At first the loss is so overwhelming that we look for someone to blame. I understand that part of it. I just think that we owe it ourselves and to any other fellow human being to consider all of the facts before we jump to conclusions about who is and who is not a monster and what that person does or does not deserve. This case was tried in the media well before it was tried in a court of law and if it were me or one of my friends I would have a hard time accepting that a prison sentence in excess of the maximum, given by a judge that was up for re-election was the best possible justice.
Now that Mr. Torre's sentence was vacated on Count 2 (leaving the scene of a fatal accident he did not cause), there will likely be a re-sentencing hearing held. In all probability the state will once again pursue the maximum presumptive term, which is 2 & 1/2 years. That is 2 & 1/2 years in addition to the six years he is already serving. What, if anything is that going to accomplish? Is 2 & 1/2 years going to change the death of an innocent victim? Is 2 & 1/2 more years going to make Mark Torre anymore remorseful than he already is?
The difference betwen Torre and Bishop O'Brien. Whether warranted or not, much lobbying has been done to make drunk driving, and tragic accidents caused from being DUI very harshly penalized.
Jessica was about 135, maybe 5'7"...there is absolutely no way he could have hit her and not realized what had happened. I hit a bird the other day in my SUV and felt the impact. Now, I understand, he probably panicked, but to LEAVE THE SCENE and hide for two days, to me at least, is unfathomable. To hit someone and cause her body to be split in half, I'm sure his car wasn't in perfect condition either. It was probably covered in blood and for him to ditch his vehicle and take off on a FOUR HOUR walk, there is no way he could have denied that he wasn't aware of what he had just done.
Jess was one of the most unique, amazing, lively young women I have ever met. She had a magnetic personality and could have been anything she wanted to be in life. Her idol was Brooke Shields and her favorite song was Freshman by the Vervepipe...I remember the last time I saw her and when I found out, I was in serving in the military overseas and got the phone call around midnight...I dropped the phone and literally could not speak for days because my mind could not wrap around the idea that someone like Jess was dead. I have never met anyone like her and probably never will. Do I feel bad for Mark Torre? No, for his family...of course. But the bottom line is that Jessica is dead and it could have been avoided. I know her mom personally and to feel the pain I feel over this, I can't even imagine the pain she feels on a daily basis...Jess was her only child. There is no amount of money that will wipe away the pain she feels--she will live with this for the rest of her life. Try defending Mark Torre and his actions to Justine on Mother's Day? And to put any blame on Jess for what happened is pathetic. Last time I checked, pedestrians have the right of way and speed limits are posted for a reason. Also, aren't you supposed to be watching where you are going when driving a car, in case, let's say...someone's walking across the street. The road she was crossing is a main street and well lit. There is no excuse.
I wouldn't say Torre should die, why put his family through that or let him off that easily? He needs to live out the rest of his life with a clear understanding of what he did to Jess, the people who witnessed what happened, what he's done to his own family, her family and friends who miss her, and the fact that a young woman's life was cut short because of his stupidity. He needs to be reminded on a daily basis, and people need to stop viewing him as some poor guy in who made a mistake...a mistake is when my three-year old colors on the couch, or you accidentally forget your keys and lock yourself out of your car...not killing someone, especially under these circumstances.
If you are in an accident where you are not necessarily at fault and the other driver does not have liability car insurance, you are protected by insurance known as uninsured motorist coverage.
If the pedestrian is in a crosswalk at an intersection, then they are required by law to observe the posted traffic signals (just as cars are required not to run red lights as well, which is provided in the same statutes). A.R.S. 28-791(A) says that pedestrians are subject to traffic control signals at intersections as provided in section 28-645 unless required by local ordinance to comply strictly with the signals. A.R.S. 28-645(A)(3)(d) states that pedestrians must not enter the roadway when facing a red signal, and 28-646(A)(2) provides that pedestrians do NOT have the right of way, and must obey the pedestrian signals, and must not enter the road on a solid "don't walk" signal.
Pedestrians are actually subject to the same laws as cars are when it comes to traffic signals. People are less concerned with pedestrians who jaywalk than with cars that run lights, however, because cars that run red lights kill other people, while jaywalkers usually don't kill other people through their own negligence. So, while the law requires the same duties of both, society looks more harshly on red light runners in cars, even though their conduct is exactly the same as that of a jaywalker.
Add Comment