Pedestrian convicted of vehicular homicide in own child's death

[The Straight Story]

Pedestrian convicted of vehicular homicide in own child's death

A Marietta mother may serve more time than the driver who hit and killed her 4-year-old son.

Raquel Nelson, 30, could be sentenced to up to 36 months at a hearing July 26, said David Savoy, her attorney. She was convicted Tuesday of homicide by vehicle in the second degree, crossing roadway elsewhere than at crosswalk and reckless conduct, said Savoy.

Jerry L. Guy, the driver who admitted hitting the child when pleading guilty to hit-and-run, served a 6-month sentence. He was released Oct. 29, 2010, and will serve the remainder of a 5-year sentence on probation, according to Cobb court records.

Nelson was attempting to cross at the intersection of Austell Road and Austell Circle with her three children when her son was struck by a car, said Savoy. The child later died from his injuries. Nelson and her younger daughter suffered minor injuries and her older daughter was not injured.

http://www.ajc.com/news/cobb/pedestrian-convicted-of-vehicular-1014879.html

and more info (with pic of road here:)
http://t4america.org/blog/2011/07/18/prosecuting-the-victim-absolving-the-perpetrators/

[Lionessa]

1. This actually sounds reasonable to me, with one exception,

I have no problem with the mother serving time for jaywalking that caused a death. Jaywalking is stupid and crosswalks are for a reason. However, the man who "ran" should have had more time just for the running aspect, not the hit aspect. Had he stayed, I would think he wouldn't serve any time, but running from any crime should be more serious than 3 months and 5 yrs probation.

[Abq_Sarah]

2. I would be interested to know

How far away the nearest crosswalk was to the accident. If the place you need to be is across the street from the bus stop and the nearest crosswalk is a half mile away, people aren't going to detour a mile to "legally" cross the street.

[The Straight Story]

3. see pic in second link (nt)

[Lionessa]

5. I tried many times but it gives me a server error, so I can't.

[The Straight Story]

6. Does it show up in my post:

[Occulus]

8. I don't see a signal anywhere, traffic or pedestrian

and there are houses there. This is residential; their driveways exit directly onto a divided four-lane.

Appalled that this woman faced any charges at all. Ashamed that some here find no problem with that.

[csziggy]

22. According to the blog, it is 3/10 of a mile to the nearest intersection

With a pedestrian crosswalk. Then 3/10 of a mile back. No bus stop closer to the intersection.

[Mojorabbit]

26. I agree

and I personally don't see any redeeming reason to make her remaining children motherless and cost society to keep her locked up. It isn't like she is a danger to society and I am sure she has punished herself over and over for the incident.

[Lionessa]

11. Yes thank you.

It looks like a dangerous place to cross. I'm guessing by the article, that a crosswalk is somewhere near by. I know it's a hassle to walk out of your way, but that's roadways and traffic. I often walked places with my kids and we ALWAYS used crosswalks even when inconvenient because of safety, because of being the example to my kids so when they were old enough to go alone they wouldn't jaywalk and get killed, and honestly, she shouldn't have bee jaywalking with kids, and particularly not if there was even one car in sight.

Just my opinion. But hey, I actually also drive the speed limit, so screw me, I see the point to traffic rules and regs, ped and bike and motor, so I obey them.

[johnd83]

14. Implied crosswalk?

I think at most intersections there are implied crosswalks. I guess she should have walked to where two roads intersect, but at least in NY it does not need to be explicitly marked.

[happyslug]

20. In Georgia all INTERSECTIONS have Crosswalks, even if UNMARKED.

n/y

[Occulus]

9. Works for me.

Maybe you weren't patient enough.

[happyslug]

17. Is what she did jaywalking under Georgia Law? Does NOT look like it.

§ 40-6-92. Crossing roadway elsewhere than at crosswalk:
(a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway unless he has already, and under safe conditions, entered the roadway.
(b) Any pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway if he uses the roadway instead of such tunnel or crossing.
(c) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation, pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.


http://peds.org/resources/pedestrian_right_of_way/

The intersection that the accident occurred is NOT an intersection with a traffic Signal on it, the intersection up and down the streets are, but NOT that intersection. Thus, in my opinion, what she was doing was LEGAL under Georgia law.

[RaleighNCDUer]

7. Read the t4america link, and see if you still have no problem with it.

She lost her kid - that is more than punishment enough.

[provis99]

4. Guy should have gotten at least 10 years.

He was drunk when he hit them. And, he was also convicted in a previous hit-and-run that seriously injured people. Hell, 15 years would have been better.

[saras]

10. Please read the articles before commenting

There is a crosswalk - described as either a third of a mile, or three-tenthts of a mile, up that highway with no sidewalks. Personally I wouldn't walk up that highway, as that looks a lot less safe than crossing it.

In our state, it would be required for the driver to stop, given that the crosswalks are so far away. So the mother wouldn't have actually broken any law at all.

And it's the driver's THIRD hit-and-run DUI, any ONE of which would have been a felony in my state. And we have a three-strikes law. I guess I'm glad I don't live there.

Poor black mother, middle-class white jury, case closed.

[Lance_Boyle]

12. Sure looks like there are sidewalks to me, on both sides.

It is required in all States that drivers yield to pedestrians. It is also required that pedestrians use crosswalks. Both people charged in this incident are at fault.

[happyslug]

16. What is a "Crosswalk" under Georgia law??

§ 40-1-1.(10) Definition of a Crosswalk:
“Crosswalk” means (A) That part of a roadway at an intersection included within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway measured from the curbs or in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the traversable roadway; or (B) Any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface.

Notice the crosswalk exist even if NONE IS PAINTED.

Please note the definition of a "Sidewalk" also does NOT require a actual Sidewalk:

§ 40-1-1. (57) Definition of a Sidewalk:
“Sidewalk” means that portion of a street between the curb lines, or the lateral lines of a railway, and the adjacent property lines, intended for use by pedestrians.


The General Rule is you must cross at an intersection. The next intersection, .3 miles away had a MARKED crosswalk, but the intersection she crossed also had a crosswalk, it just was NOT marked. Under the laws in most states that would still be a legal crosswalk UNLESS there is a sign forbidding pedestrian crossing.

The reason for this rule is clear, most rural roads (and many suburban roads) do NOT have any MARKED crosswalks, thus to require someone to cross at a MARKED crosswalk means requiring then to walk for MILES, even tens of miles till they get to a Cross Walk and then walk back. Furthermore I have been on roads that you can go in a circle and NEVER met a MARKED crosswalk, the local community never paint one in. Thus pedestrian must STAY in that area and NEVER leave? The answer is no.

Thus the question is NOT whether their is a crosswalk BUT is there a sign FORBIDDING pedestrian crossing. The story is unclear on that subject.

No crossing signs at intersections are notorious for being legally questionable. Most people drive cars and thus demand the lights change as quickly as possible, giving no times for pedestrians. In the 1990s a Suburb of Pittsburgh saw a strange phenomenal, Penndot was required to install handicap access at an intersection that had had no pedestrian crossing signs for decades. When someone brought this up, Penndot pointed out it was a public road and people were expected to cross at intersections, but the local Government, which in Pennsylvania controls traffic lights, PA is one of only four states that gives all such power to local government was the one that had put up the no Pedestrian crossing signs. Penndot correctly pointed out the signs were illegal but they had no authority to sue the local government to make them legal, but under the ADA act had to make sure the highway sidewalks meet ADA requirement, thus the ramps were installed while the No Crossing sign remained. After a few months of embarrassment, the local Government agreed to permit pedestrian crossing at that intersection.

I give the above story to point out that it is quite common for intersections to have illegal no crossing signs. The problem is how to correct those signs. The only way is for someone to file a lawsuit to get the sign change. Such a person must do it at his own expense with no hope of ever getting paid for the expense of getting it done. Furthermore all you will win is an order for a change, which the local government will do only to the extent it thinks it has to, and thus you have to sue them over and over again until you either run out of money OR what had been done meet the minimal standards.

In this intersection it looks like Georgia may have forbidden pedestrian crossing, without even thinking of the alternative. This is typical of most State and Local Highway Departments. In my opinion the problem here is a combination of refusal of the State of Georgia to address the issue of people needed to cross at that intersection AND the local Bus Company using it as a stop. If a crosswalk had been made, this problem would NOT have occurred, if the bus did NOT have its bus stop at that intersection this accident would not have occurred. Given the nature of this intersection and the bus stop this was an accident waiting to happen, and will happen again unless BOTH problems are addressed, and convicting this woman does NOT address either problem.

[Abq_Sarah]

13. So she has to walk over a half mile

With her kids at night to cross legally when the place she needs to be is damned near directly across the street from the bus stop.

Sorry, that's absolutely absurd.

[Gormy Cuss]

15. Roads are designed for cars, not pedestrians.

I agree with you, it's absurd that the location NEAR A BUS STOP doesn't have a crosswalk.

[spinbaby]

19. Many of our roads and byways are downright hostile to pedestrians

In the town I live there are a lot of people too poor to afford a car. There is a Walmart about a mile's walk out of town. Even though there is public transportation, it's infrequent and people choose to walk the mile to Walmart. The walk is on sidewalks right up until you get to big box land. There are no provisions for pedestrians walking in to big box land, so people walked those last hundred yards or so across the grass to get to the Walmart parking lot. Either Walmart or the managers of big box land didn't like poor people walking on the lawn and solved the problem by putting up a sign prohibiting pedestrians. The local cops cooperate by arresting pedestrians.

[abelenkpe]

24. +1 nt

[Liquorice]

18. Her conviction is a travesty, but I do know how bad the jaywalking

is on that road. People are often standing in the turn lane waiting for cars to go by so they can run the rest of the way across. Many times I've had to slam on my brakes as someone is running across. It's horrible and very dangerous. They need to have some sort of anti-jaywalking campaign in that area.

But yeah, the guy who hit them should be in prison for years, and the mom should get no time at all. She has suffered too much already.

[Kat45]

21. That is totally absurd!

The woman is probably blaming herself as it is. She's devastated by losing her child. And they want to put her in jail??!! And from the article, it did not look like any of her peers were on the jury. Sounds like they were people who had no idea of the reality of the woman's circumstances.

[kiva]

23. I have a problem with the idea that parents who are responsible

(either totally or partially) for a child's death to be given a pass because they are grieving. Had this been a babysitter who jaywalked with the child, I can guarantee that s/he would also be grieving - perhaps not as deeply, but they would be grieving.

Saying that the mother's circumstances somehow justify her actions seems condescending, as though she was too ignorant to understand the danger of what she did.

[Lionessa]

25. +1

[Kat45]

27. I don't think of "jaywalking" as a horrible thing to do.

Everyone else who got off the bus did it, and I wouldn't be surprised it that's always the way it is at that bus stop. I get the impression that road doesn't have any sidewalks--correct me if I'm wrong--and I think it would be just as dangerous, if not more so, to walk a half a mile along a busy street with no sidewalks, particularly when you're dragging along three exhausted kids (and you're exhausted yourself). I'm sorry, but I'm a person who finds it absurd to have to walk a half a mile to cross a street.

I find it absurd to charge a mother, or a babysitter, or whomever, with homicide, never mind vehicular homicide. Never mind the fact that the driver, who was a hit and run driver and had had some drinks, got a much lesser punishment. It's not so much "giving the person a pass" as thinking that the loss of a child is already the most severe punishment. And putting her in jail would just take the mother away from her other children.

I have no intention of being condescending. To be honest with you, I would have probably done the same thing myself. Whenever I get off the bus, I cross the street right there instead of walking a block to the crosswalk. (No, it's not a five-lane street.) And where I live, cars are not any more likely to stop for you when you're in a crosswalk than when you're not. I've had times when I stood in a crosswalk for quite some time and nobody stopped; I had better luck crossing when I was not in the crosswalk.