Advocacy & Safety - Palo Alto hit-and-run guilty plea today

Here is the San Francisco Chronicle article about Megan Coughran's guilty plea today in Santa Clara County Superior Court in Palo Alto:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/gate/archive/2003/06/02/paloalto.DTL

The DA says he will seek 'substantial, which is real, county jail time behind bars' for Coughran. I'll believe that when it actually happens.

Sentencing is scheduled for July 24.

Get what Coughran's defense attorney is quoted as saying:

(Kurt) Seibert would not discuss what sentence he would seek from (Judge Diane) Northway for his client, but he did say that there is more to the case than has been reported by the media.

"It is a complicated set of facts despite what has been represented in the papers," Seibert said.

Oh, is it complicated? How? In what ways? Was she on drugs? Is he going to plead that she was suffering from ADD or depression or hurt feelings or a hangnail or some other such thing that would have nothing to do with... oh, I dunno.... paying attention while you're driving so you don't run over cyclists and pedestrians around you? Because killing someone with your car is about as serious a 'fact' while driving as you can get?

I don't see what details of this incident are not in the press already that would mitigate his client's irresponsibility in mowing those kids down or her lack of maturity in committing felony hit-and-run afterwards. I simply cannot imagine what those untold 'facts' might be except obfuscating BS.

Thats sickening that she'll be getting off rather easily for killing a person. I agree with you about the 'more to this case', doesnt sound like there is any more. I get the feeling that she did this guilty plea just as that, a plea bargain, she probably doesnt think anything is wrong. If she didnt she would have probably fought the case the whole way. Im not real keen on legal terms but how serious is a misdemeanor? Isnt underage drinking probably a misdemeanor? And thats comparable to killing a person?

Originally posted by TriDevil
Thats sickening that she'll be getting off rather easily for killing a person. I agree with you about the 'more to this case', doesnt sound like there is any more. I get the feeling that she did this guilty plea just as that, a plea bargain, she probably doesnt think anything is wrong. If she didnt she would have probably fought the case the whole way. Im not real keen on legal terms but how serious is a misdemeanor? Isnt underage drinking probably a misdemeanor? And thats comparable to killing a person?

A misdemeanor is punishable by up to one year in county jail and a fine of I think no more than $1000. Yes, the charge of underage drinking is a misdemeanor.

She's getting off easy, IMHO. 'Real... time behind bars'? Yeah, right. She'll be out in eight months with good behavior and will do her time at Elmwood Women's facility.

BTW, the family of the girl killed is very unhappy about it, it appears. The father wanted her to go to state prison and says Coughran hasn't contacted them at all. The state prison part I totally agree with. Convicted felons go to state prison, that's where she should be.

The part about not contacting the family, there is nothing legally to be gained out by her by having any sort of contact with them. They clearly aren't going to advocate for a lower sentence for her and there is the possibility that what she says to them will just anger them more or be misinterpreted. On a human level, I think her not contacting them is wrong. But legally, that's good advice her attorney has given her.

It's just sickening all around. I think a sentence of two years would be appropriate since then she'd do about a year behind bars. She'd have to do time in state prison, but that's what the law says. At this point, it seems the DA is content try to have it both ways: not send a pretty, upper-middle class girl to state prison while proclaiming that he'll go for 'real.... jail time' to the press.

All this scares me, but probably in a productive way. I realize that in spite of what people (especially many cyclists) have said, any one of us who drives could be her some day. Just one moment of inattention, just one distraction at precisely the wrong moment and we could be looking at state prison, too. That's how fast our lives and the lives of others could change. It's scary, but it also makes me take my driving a little more seriously, too.

Coughran's driving PRIVILEGE should be revoked for at least 10 years, if not for life. Her sentence should include public appearances at high schools, to talk about the dangers of operating a motor vehicle.

Inattentive motorists are by far the greatest single threat to all road users.

SInce the article doesn't go into to much detail of the accident I don't know how teenage drinking came into this discussion It looks like it wasn't a factor. One thing is she has not made any excuses as of yet for what she has done, in fact she has stood up and taken responsibility for her actions by pleading guilty and she did want to say something but was told to wait until sentencing. I think that she does need to pay for what she has done but I also think we need to show some good old fashion charity and look at what is really going on here, not speculate and bring in drinking etc to the issue when there is no foundation to it. I will almost bet you that this girl is going to live with what she has done for the rest of her life so our prayers need to be with her as well as the family of the dead girl. Forgiveness is a huge step in the journey to recover with out it there will be no healing. If she had been in court making excuses or denying or blaming I would have a different attitude. But I honestly do not see that in what I read in the article.

Originally posted by John E
Coughran's driving PRIVILEGE should be revoked for at least 10 years, if not for life. Her sentence should include public appearances at high schools, to talk about the dangers of operating a motor vehicle.

What amazes me is that after conviction of such a serious and driver-specific charge as vehicular manslaughter, a lifetime ban from driving doesn't result automatically. There is no more serious driver-specific charge than that, what more does a society/state need to say, 'No, I'm sorry but you have already proven that you are unable to handle that responsibility.'

Originally posted by jatkins679
What amazes me is that after conviction of such a serious and driver-specific charge as vehicular manslaughter, a lifetime ban from driving doesn't result automatically.

I agree. The average American would probably consider that cruel and unusally punishment, but it certainly is what they deserve.