1nterceptor

“A polygraph examination established that Amber K. Fernandez didn’t realize that she had struck a bicyclist on a dark, rainy Columbus street nearly two years ago.

But her failure to stop and determine what had bounced off her SUV, cracking the windshield, was a criminal act that required “serious consequences,” a Franklin County judge said yesterday."

Read the full article:
https://www.dispatch.com/content/stor...sts-death.html

Kurt Erlenbach

Here is a superb column about the crash and sentencing by my friend and classmate, Steve Magas, who represented the victim's mother in the civil suit over the crash. Someone, I'd say, is pretty PO'd about this.

Keith99

Read the responces also. It seems she had been drinking (at least if the person refering to others sources is telling the truth).

smasha

here's my comment....

The only solution I can think of is to have different degrees of hit-n-run…

1st degree – Leaving the scene of an accident where someone died.

2nd degree – Leaving the scene of an accident where someone is injured (and by “injured” I mean they need a band-aid).

3rd degree – Simple hit-n-run; Leaving the scene of an accident.

Needless to say, #1 & #2 should all carry penalties in excess of “just an accident” that results in injury or death.

The statutes should also provide for sentencing that exceeds the penalties for DUI/DWI if there is ANY suspicion that the driver was under the influence of anything, but they succeeded in hiding for long enough to avoid proper testing. If someone hit-n-runs, the burden should be on THEM to provide breath/blood/urine/hair samples to the police in a timely manner, in order to get a reduced sentence. Otherwise the maximum sentence should apply. This would not be a “presumption of guilt” (as such) but rather just applying sentencing and sentencing guidelines that encourage drivers to do the right thing, as soon as practicable.

Shimagnolo

As if 30 days for a fatal hit & run wasn't bad enough, why do we have authorities in the US still using 20th century witchcraft (polygraph).

CB HI

The defense lawyer set it up to get the client off (no authority in that). If I were the judge, I would not have allowed it or I would have insisted the killer take abother polygraph with a tester of my choice and additional questions of my choice.

Chris516

As if 30 days in jail will make an emotional difference!!

dougmc

Except that it would be seen as a "presumption of guilt" and thrown out as unconstitutional.

We certainly could make the penalties for hit and run to be significantly more serious than even DWI, and give such crime similar penalties -- that might help, and wouldn't be found to be unconstitutional. But anything that requires people to prove that they're not guilty of something is going to be thrown out by the courts.

And hit and runs are difficult to prove -- if there's no witnesses and the person doesn't open their mouth and confess, it's nearly impossible to show "beyond a reasonable doubt" that they were driving their car (let's assume the car was found later with damage that shows it was the murder weapon -- that happens often) when it killed the victim. Unfortunately, this is difficult to fix without running into Constitutional issues -- anything that starts with the assumption that somebody is guilty (even if you call it something else) will be thrown out -- and correctly so, since right or wrong it's not compatible with the highest law in our land.

LemondFanForeve

Great read & totally.understandable, WTF IS WRONG W/PEOPLE?

You can be sure if it had happened to a cop, or the judge, that guy wouldve received the chair.