Were those calls recorded? Possible they told him he had to keep going?
Seeing smoking breaks going down hill and just yoloing doesn’t make sense
Did he explain why he didn’t use the emergency ramp?
I don’t know, I didn’t follow the trial, just read some articles about the case after the sentencing.
Wife is watching Hallmark’s first lesbian xmas romance and I’m like damn that’s a bold move to name one of the gals “Charlie” as Klandma is going to have her world rocked when she randomly turns it on. Alternatively, she’ll get more and more confused as to where the man is as it goes on.
Driving past the runaway truck ramp doesn’t make him particularly culpable in my opinion. That’s just a fuck up. Generally the levels of culpability start with the lowest as: “not perceiving a risk, but that failure to perceive the risk is a deviation from the normal standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same or similar circumstances.” That’s what failing to drive up the runaway ramp is and it’s of marginal culpability. Closer to civil negligence then anything criminal.
The more damning evidence (if true) is that he saw that his breaks were smoking and/or knew they were inoperable but chose to drive his truck anyway. That probably bumps him up to the next general level iwhich is usually something along the lines of “perceived the risk, but consciously disregarded that risk, and that conscious disregard was a gross deviation from the normal standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same or similar circumstances.”
Still though, none of that evidence should bump him up to anything near the crimes he was convicted of or the sentence he got. With no alcohol or drugs involved, I wouldn’t normally expect someone to get more then a handful of years for something like this, and only because so many people were hurt and killed. 110 years is just unbelievable.
1 Like
Yeah, this is the damning part. Not missing the truck ramp. Missing the truck ramp with no other aggravating factors seems like only civil negligence to me.
I was just curious if he explained why he didn’t use it.
Defense argued he didn’t see it and/or it didn’t register. It is interesting that at the penultimate moment before the wreck he apparently had a real life trolley problem where his options were to do nothing and slam into a truck likely killing himself or swerve back onto the highway and slam into traffic likely killing others.
This is my new favorite political cartoon, even though it’s satire.
The elf burning the American flag is top notch.
7 Likes
You’re overthinking it. Cain was an idiot.
He’s mixing his talking points to sound pro life while adding in a teaspoon of freedom, that’s it.
Although at that point it’s irrelevant, legally, what he does. If he hadn’t exhibited criminal negligence before that point it’s just an accident no matter what he decides to do.
Wiki says he had degrees in math and CS and was head of a Federal Reserve Bank. I’m not saying that makes him a genius, but those aren’t prizes in a claw machine arcade game.
He’s mixing his talking points to sound pro life while adding in a teaspoon of freedom, that’s it.
Could be. Based on what little I saw of him, he was arrogant and his style was to talk in a way he thought us dummies would understand. In that clip he was probably frustrated what he said got turned around on him so he looked like the idiot. If the question were put in terms of category theory or whatever, I expect he could give a sensible if not a politically better answer.
2 Likes
I’m pretty sure wiki says that some fucking moron named Donald Trump was president.
These things happen.
President does seem like somewhat less of an accomplishment now. 
The difficulty of driving tests in Europe definitely shocks me. I had 15 question test, drove around a circle and parallel parked in the states. My students are studying for months and going to driver’s Ed for a chance to pass a 100 question test and a driving test on actual roads.
I honestly can’t tell what level this is working on. Is the author making fun of the conservative view of how the world should be?
1 Like
That’s what I thought.
What’s crazy is that plenty of conservatives wouldn’t see it as satire
1 Like
This is from the Onion‘s cartoonist.
2 Likes
No idea what this refers to and am not scrolling thru a bunch of noise to find out. My stances are pretty well known on things and while you find some of them wrong or distasteful, I’m sure they are much more mild and reasonable than many others you disagree with or who disagree with you
2 Likes
I’m glad you responded this way and didn’t take the bait.
As there has been in the past - and no doubt will be again - plenty of times Cactus has to defend his views but this forum would be a lot better if we didn’t go around poking things all the time. What was the purpose or @ ing Cactus other than the start an argument/pile-on out of nowhere? All a bit passive agressive for me.
6 Likes