https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...83/detail.html

She shoulda been a cop.

I'm impressed--so far, the commenters on that story aren't mindlessly defending her.

No, I think the difference in sentencing is because, a) Its Colorado, and b) she was under the influence.

kill two people, go to jail for 3 years...

The article says:

I like Judge Martinez.

Sounds about right, a local drunk driver kills 4 and gets 6 years. (He's eligible for probation in 3 years)

She has her nerve asking the judge not to send her to prison. What about the two people that she killed, who spoke for them when she pointed her pick-up truck at them?

How can one "defending" someone who was under the influence of morphine and barbiturates at the time that she killed two people??? As well as running away from the scene of a crime that she had just committed???

I'm glad that the judge didn't let her go home to spend some time with her family. As I am sure that the families of the two people that she killed would LOVE to be able to spend time with their dead loved ones.

NOW that is criminal. He should have to do the full time, and again hopefully he will NEVER get his license back.

As well as both of them should have to do community service when they get out as well as having to take a tour of the morgue and trauma centers.

Not that being unlicensed would keep him from operating an automobile on the public street.

Not to justify anything, but many people are rightfully prescribed morphine and barbiturates for health problems. She should have been wearing her contact lenses. But the medicines may have been legal. The article kind of leaves this issue hanging, while implying that she may have been using the drugs illicitly.

I'm very sad to hear a story like this.

Regardless if the medicine was legal or illegal, she shouldn't have been driving if they were impairing her ability.

ej was a very close friend of mine. i was at the preliminary trial, as well as barbara thomas's sentencing yesterday. i got a chance to speak on his behalf, as well as several other friends and family.

i'm fairly certain she only used that wheelchair for the trial. she was really working it. her medication was indeed for her many health issues. she is human garbage though. during the preliminary hearing the DUI officers on the scene testified that when they first were talking to her, she said the only medication she was on at the time was "antibiotics". clearly she knew damn well she was too wasted to be driving. she was so intoxicated, she couldn't stand for the roadside sobriety tests.

her lawyer was a total scumbag as well. in court yesterday he was trying to say her doctor nor the pharmacy gave her any warning that she shouldn't be driving while on morphine. yeah right.

prior to the crash, she was allegedly shoplifting at a grocery store. the judge read off all of her minor offenses from her past; she had been charged with shoplifting several times. there was also a few minor traffic incidents, as well as she had a pending hit and run charge against her. apparently she backed into a someone's car and took off.

her family flipped when the judge told her her sentence was beginning immediately. i seriously think they all thought she was going to get off with only probation.

The bad part is that he was driving on a suspended license from a previous DUI. The motorist was charged with 4 counts of second degree murder, with both sides eventually agreeing upon a 10 year plea bargain, but the plea bargain was thrown out by the presiding judge as to lenient. The jury didn't agree, as he was acquitted of all murder charges, and was found guilty of four counts of vehicular manslaughter without gross negligence.(4 years for the first victim, 8 months each for the other 3)

This type of local justice is why I take extreme care when riding my bike, since it sends a signal to some motorists that one can drive as irresponsibly as they like, and literally get away with murder.

We have to look out for ourselves, because in the eyes of the public and the eyes of the law, killing a cyclist while driving is about as bad as killing a dog.

In this incident, the dog received a better conviction.

dogs

Correct me IF I'm mistaken, but I was always under the impression that if a person died during the commission of a crime that the person committing the crime was also guilty of murder.

Here we have a woman who has committed at the very least three crimes:

a) NOT wearing her prescription/corrective eye wear
b) shoplifting (with a history of said crime)
c) hit-and-run while fleeing the scene of a crime (again with a history for careless driving) as well as an outstanding summons for a hit-and-run from just two months before the "accident" in which she killed two innocent people.

Add to that being under the influence of prescription medication, as well as being on a total of some 18 meds for pulmonary disease and arthritis. Shouldn't she have been charged with murder in the death of the two people that she hit and killed, and NOT vehicular manslaughter?

I mean here we have a woman who is fleeing the scene of not just ONE but TWO crimes while still committing a third crime. Or would not wearing her prescription/corrective eye wear be the first crime?

And her daughters have the nerve to call her "kind and selfless?" What kind of "kind and selfless" person goes around operating a "weapon" under the influence of prescription medicines?

her daughters were also saying she's been living with one of them for awhile now, so that they can care for her and be with her at all times. where the f word were they on 8.6.08? such crap. two of my friends saw her driving after the fact as well, though her license was revoked.

she ended up getting a sweeeet plea agreement. she was only convicted of ONE count of vehicular homocide. also, the pending hit and run she was involved with was thrown out with her plea deal. she was initally charged with two counts vehicular homocide and a dui. the shoplifting incident of that day was deemed alleged and never prosecuted.

the most ironic part of the whole thing was the assistant d.a., emma adams, who was initially handling the case. she was pathetic. she was willing to go into mediation almost immediately, despite the severity of the crash, the circumstances leading up to it, and the huge public following and involvement. many people who contacted her for more information or to protest the mediation got a really pathetic canned response from her... she was basically telling everyone they didn't have all the facts and that her case load was overwhelming for her. what a baby! so, last month, she was at a downtown bar celebrating a case and drives home drunk and crashes her car!

https://www.gazette.com/news/deputy-5...ended-4th.html

no wonder she was so willing to cut barbara thomas a deal! she obviously has no qualms with drunk driving! the replacement assistant d.a. jim bentley did the best he could, in such a short time.

dog=6 years, person =4 years or less

2.68 years per dead dog (102 years / 38 dead dogs, not including the 17 that will probably have to be killed because they've been trained to be vicious), including clear intent to harm/kill said dogs. He'll also "most likely" serve only 1/3 of that sentence.

I'm not saying that the said jail sentence shouldn't be longer, just that your comparison doesn't make that case.

What I was basing my calculations on was on the 17 dogs he was charged for, and they were later euthanized.

FINALY! one less senior citizen to mow people down. yes i happen to be a bit biased, but that happens when you're continuously ran off the road by them.

Sadly, this is all too true. :-(