7 killed , 3 hurt in motorcycle-truck accident in Randolph NH

Picton

NES Member
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
8,284
Likes
5,954
Location
MA
I think there’s only one person here who ever thought otherwise.
Be interesting to see whether he shows back up.

All things considered, I'm glad this seems to have been a straightforward case. It's not the kind of thing that needs to have internet conspiracy theories sprouting for years. Publish the findings, settle the civil suits, and give the victims their peace.

I won't say "...and fix the damn CDL system in New England," because I'm not that naive.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
1,175
Likes
1,800
Location
Southwest NH
Don't read too much into the report. He tested positive for drugs, but that doesn't mean he was under the influence of them (but it does mean he should be denied a CDL).

Also, nothing in the report says he was reaching for an alcoholic beverage... it could have been a bottle of water.

Still, he clearly caused the accident through negligence, as I've said all along.
But, but, but......bike spacing and helmets!!!
 

Jason Flare

NES Member
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
8,696
Likes
5,437
Location
Berkshires
The government loves taking responsibility for this.

So, a few bureaucrats heads roll; big deal.

It’s much better to have people agreeing that government could have prevented this and can prevent it from ever happening again than to assign sole responsibility to the actual perpetrator.

The government plays the same game when some bad guy with a gun injures or kills innocent people.
 

KBCraig

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
9,854
Likes
4,420
Location
Granite State of Mind
In NH you kill 7 in one day and you go home. WTF has happened to NH police on that day?
Because at that time they had no evidence of anything except an accident.

He had a valid CDL. He wasn't apparently impaired. It took time to figure out that his licensed should have been suspended, and that he would test positive for drugs.
 

10thSFFD

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 1, 2013
Messages
19,531
Likes
10,357
Location
Camp Deplorable in the Blue Swamp
Because at that time they had no evidence of anything except an accident.

He had a valid CDL. He wasn't apparently impaired. It took time to figure out that his licensed should have been suspended, and that he would test positive for drugs.
Sir, he has killed 7 people! [rolleyes]

I think we will find out shortly that both states, MA and NH, failed in this case.
 

zboys

NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Jan 30, 2017
Messages
1,110
Likes
1,270
I can't for the life of me fiqure why he was not held and tested immed. Like any other accident involving death, they never let them just walk away.
New Hampshire is no better than Mass
 

KBCraig

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
9,854
Likes
4,420
Location
Granite State of Mind
Sir, he has killed 7 people! [rolleyes]

I think we will find out shortly that both states, MA and NH, failed in this case.
He's sitting in my county jail charged with seven counts of manslaughter.

What was NH supposed to do to prevent the tragedy?

As I said: just because there was a fatal accident wasn't cause to arrest him until the drug screens came back.
 

10thSFFD

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 1, 2013
Messages
19,531
Likes
10,357
Location
Camp Deplorable in the Blue Swamp
He's sitting in my county jail charged with seven counts of manslaughter.

What was NH supposed to do to prevent the tragedy?

As I said: just because there was a fatal accident wasn't cause to arrest him until the drug screens came back.
I am absolutely ignorant. NH has to wait for drug screens to come back in case of drugs. In case of alcohol they can make an arrest on the spot. Am I correct?
 

bgoum

NES Member
Rating - 100%
43   0   0
Joined
Aug 6, 2015
Messages
1,031
Likes
490
Location
Salem, NH
I am absolutely ignorant. NH has to wait for drug screens to come back in case of drugs. In case of alcohol they can make an arrest on the spot. Am I correct?
I have not read anything about a field sobriety test being administered - not sure if anyone else has heard or read about one. Maybe they did one and maybe he passed it. I would hope at a minimum they tried to determine at the scene if he was in any way impaired at the time of the accident. If he passed a field sobriety test and he did not appear impaired, don't they have to let him walk pending actual proof from the tests? IANAL
 

10thSFFD

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 1, 2013
Messages
19,531
Likes
10,357
Location
Camp Deplorable in the Blue Swamp
I have not read anything about a field sobriety test being administered - not sure if anyone else has heard or read about one. Maybe they did one and maybe he passed it. I would hope at a minimum they tried to determine at the scene if he was in any way impaired at the time of the accident. If he passed a field sobriety test and he did not appear impaired, don't they have to let him walk pending actual proof from the tests? IANAL
Again, pardon my ignorance, could it be that NH does not have a test for this type of drugs in place? I am sure that if he would be under the influence of alcohol he would be sitting in the cell that evening and the next day instead of going on the beach!
 

bgoum

NES Member
Rating - 100%
43   0   0
Joined
Aug 6, 2015
Messages
1,031
Likes
490
Location
Salem, NH
Again, pardon my ignorance, could it be that NH does not have a test for this type of drugs in place? I am sure that if he would be under the influence of alcohol he would be sitting in the cell that evening and the next day instead of going on the beach!
I am unaware of any state having a roadside test that would detect a drug other than the alcohol "here blow in this tube" type test. Short of that, they would perform a test for impairment.
 

namedpipes

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
31,236
Likes
13,439
Location
PREM
Again, pardon my ignorance, could it be that NH does not have a test for this type of drugs in place? I am sure that if he would be under the influence of alcohol he would be sitting in the cell that evening and the next day instead of going on the beach!
To the best of my knowledge, drug testing can tell if a person "has used" a drug but not necessarily that they are currently intoxicated. And even that test takes a while to conduct.

With alcohol, the test can be performed on the spot (breathalyzer) or quickly (blood test) and tells if the person is CURRENTLY intoxicated and how badly. Not sure if there is any test to see if you had a drink, say, several days ago.

The only roadside test for current drug intoxication would be coordination tests, maybe looking at your pupils, making you say the alphabet backwards... stupid stuff that chronic, high functioning abusers laugh at.
 

10thSFFD

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 1, 2013
Messages
19,531
Likes
10,357
Location
Camp Deplorable in the Blue Swamp
To the best of my knowledge, drug testing can tell if a person "has used" a drug but not necessarily that they are currently intoxicated. And even that test takes a while to conduct.

With alcohol, the test can be performed on the spot (breathalyzer) or quickly (blood test) and tells if the person is CURRENTLY intoxicated and how badly. Not sure if there is any test to see if you had a drink, say, several days ago.

The only roadside test for current drug intoxication would be coordination tests, maybe looking at your pupils, making you say the alphabet backwards... stupid stuff that chronic, high functioning abusers laugh at.
Interesting. Yet, people fail drug tests required by their employers just because they have eaten poppy seeds on the bun or taken Imodium, just few examples......We have a huge problem and a technical challenge. We have neglected this area and we have no tools.
 

Picton

NES Member
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
8,284
Likes
5,954
Location
MA
Interesting. Yet, people fail drug tests required by their employers just because they have eaten poppy seeds on the bun or taken Imodium, just few examples......We have a huge problem and a technical challenge. We have neglected this area and we have no tools.
Those employment tests aren’t immediate, either. And employment law is different from 4A prohibitions on the state.

To my knowledge, there’s no immediate test for drugs OR alcohol, other than a breathalyzer that only works for booze you take by mouth. Blood testing always takes time, and I wouldn’t favor a law that allows cops to hold everybody they want to pending a drug test.

If a driver isn’t obviously impaired, they’re sent home until the test comes back. Then the coppers go grab them. That’s what happened in this case, and it worked. He’s in custody.
 

AHM

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
5,846
Likes
2,976
To my knowledge, there’s no immediate test for drugs OR alcohol, other than a breathalyzer that only works for booze you take by mouth.
The breathalyzer tests alcohol vapor that boiled out of the bloodstream into the lungs.
If it only worked on booze consumed by the organ emitting the vapors,
it would only work on people who poured vodka into a vaporizer.
 

Picton

NES Member
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
8,284
Likes
5,954
Location
MA
The breathalyzer tests alcohol vapor that boiled out of the bloodstream into the lungs.
If it only worked on booze consumed by the organ emitting the vapors,
it would only work on people who poured vodka into a vaporizer.
Huh. You learn something new every day.
 

AHM

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
5,846
Likes
2,976
Huh. You learn something new every day.
It's why the cops are in theory not supposed to test you unless you've had a 20-minute belch-free period (IIRC). Because if you're burping up gasses so rich they could start a fire if someone struck a match, then the test is going to be a false positive.
In theory.
 

atmay

NES Member
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
8,663
Likes
1,742
Location
Free 'murica
It's why the cops are in theory not supposed to test you unless you've had a 20-minute belch-free period (IIRC). Because if you're burping up gasses so rich they could start a fire if someone struck a match, then the test is going to be a false positive.
In theory.
Same goes for having ingested anything within 15-20 minutes or so, although that can skew the results in either direction, depending on what you ate or drank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AHM

KBCraig

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
9,854
Likes
4,420
Location
Granite State of Mind
The breathalyzer tests alcohol vapor that boiled out of the bloodstream into the lungs.
If it only worked on booze consumed by the organ emitting the vapors,
it would only work on people who poured vodka into a vaporizer.
While alcohol can be used by injection into the bloodstream via IV, or through absorption (like enemas), I don't think we'll see those methods gaining in popularity.

"I need you to fart into this tube and not stop until I tell you."
 
Top Bottom