Alberta man gets 2 years for school crash that killed girl, injured 2 others

[SLM]

Alberta man gets 2 years for school crash that killed girl, injured 2 others

ST. PAUL, Alta. - A man who killed a student when he crashed his minivan into a school while he was having a seizure has been handed a two-year sentence and banned from driving for life.
But the judge also gave Richard Benson just over a year's credit for time he has already spent in jail.
Justice Paul Belzil said Benson wasn't being punished for having a medical condition, but for driving when he shouldn't have been.
He noted that Benson, who had not been taking his medication for the seizures, has accepted full responsibility for the crash and is genuinely remorseful.
Benson, 47, pleaded guilty earlier this year to criminal negligence causing death and criminal negligence causing bodily harm.
He told court in St. Paul, Alta., on Thursday that he "never ever meant to go out and hurt any children. I'm truly sorry. Please forgive me."
The Crown had suggested that Benson be sentenced to three years and never be allowed to drive again.
Prosecutor Jeff Rudiak argued a message needed to be sent to other drivers who have seizures and aren't taking their medication.
Benson admitted in a court document that he wasn't supposed to be driving and rarely took prescribed medication to control his seizures.
Defence lawyer Jason Conlin had pointed out that Benson didn't remember the October 2012 crash and, when he learned what happened, wanted to trade places with the girl he killed.
Conlin said Benson felt OK at times and didn't think he needed to take his medication.
Benson had just dropped two of his children off at different schools in St. Paul and stopped at the post office. He had a seizure as he was driving home down a back alley.
His van bolted at about 80 km/h down more back lanes, crossed five streets and slammed into a window and wall at Racette Junior High School. It landed in a lower-level Grade 6 classroom and sent students and desks flying. Three children were pinned underneath the vehicle.
Megan Wolitski, 11, died in hospital the next day.
Classmate Angelina Luce suffered a brain injury, speech and eye problems. Maddie Guitard remains in a vegetative state and is not expected to recover, say court documents.
The court documents also lay out how Benson has suffered from seizures since a severe beating in 2002 put him in a coma and left him with a metal plate in his head.
When he applied for driver's licences, he didn't declare that he had health problems that might affect his ability to drive. The province requires people to disclose such information.
Doctors had also been writing prescriptions for medication, but the documents say Benson rarely filled them or took the pills he did get. His seizures had been increasing in recent years.
He suffered one at home four days before the crash and refused to go a doctor.
Benson "continued to drive while being aware of the danger or risk he posed to the lives or safety of others while operating a motor vehicle," said the document.


Yahoo News Canada - Latest News & Headlines


Interesting article, sad of course what has happened but it does bring up the very sticky point of where an individual's rights end and the well being of society begins. In this case it was anti-seizure medication and the fact that he shouldn't have been driving (which while not a right is certainly a freedom that most adults can enjoy) but could easily apply to medication for a lot of mentally ill individuals, particularly for ones that are known to be dangerous. Take Vince Li for example, we know what happened one time he stopped taking his medication. At some point, they're going to release him, it's inevitable....but what then? What kind of assurance can we have that he will continue with his medication and not subject some other poor individual to the same fate at Tim McLean? Can we truly have any assurance? Do we (society) have the right to it at all?


I'm not sure which side I'd actually come down on, which principles I'd apply to these situations. But it bears closer inspection and thought because situations like this do occur and they're not that irregular. They are always lose/lose, but is there any way to improve on that?

 

[Sal]

Driving is not a right, it's a privilege...he has paid an awful price...but not as high of a price as the dead and injured students or their families and friends.

I often wonder about eyesight too. If one never get's one's eyes tested, is a person really fit to drive? I think not. I know a few such individuals and I would be leery of driving with them.

 

[SLM]

Driving is not a right, it's a privilege...he has paid an awful price...but not as high of a price as the dead and injured students or their families and friends.

I often wonder about eyesight too. If one never get's one's eyes tested, is a person really fit to drive? I think not. I know a few such individuals and I would be leery of driving with them.

It's not just the driving aspect of it. If someone's medical condition is such that they could potentially pose a danger to others, is there any moral stand that society could take to make them attend to treatment? I say moral as opposed to legal because I ask it more as a question to contemplate the issue. People have the right to refuse treatment, to not take medication, etc.... but in some cases should they?

 

[karrie]

I've had to look long and hard at my ability to drive due to a plethora of health issues.


Fibromyalgia irritates my optic nerves and causes 'veiled' vision.


Fibromyalgia causes 'brain fog', impairing reaction times.


And last but not least, I have an overactive vasovagal response, which causes what we refer to as a 'slow faint' if something startles me and makes me tense up. Rarely do I ever get startled as a driver (because I'm always seeing what's happening), but as a passenger I've been startled and fainted on plenty of occasions. Only twice in my entire time driving have I had to pull over, both times due to wildlife jumping out. But thankfully, it is, as I say, a slow faint, and literally starts with a creeping numbness in my extremities, and allows plenty of time to stop and put my vehicle in park.


The combination though, makes me a picky driver. Picky about where, when, and how I will drive. My vision means night driving with oncoming headlights is out if I have to go any distance. Or driving on days where my optic nerves are especially irritated. Or driving into the sun on bright days.


My brain fog means I have days where I'm worse than a drunk, and so I will do everything I can to not drive, right down to calling a cab for my kids to get home from school.


And my vasovagal response is something that we are ever watchful of. If I ever start 'fast fainting'.... I'm done as a driver.


I have a hard time drumming up any sympathy for this driver, given the realities of his condition, and the fact that so many epileptics I know, deal with the strain of giving up their licenses. Given the way most people I know take driving as a serious responsibility.


That being said, I think the courts reached an appropriate sentence. He never fought any of this from what I've read. He stood up and owned his responsibility. It's a brutal lesson learned.

 

[Goober]

A BS sentence- 10 to 15 years would be appropriate - let the fuker rot.

 

[Sal]

It's not just the driving aspect of it. If someone's medical condition is such that they could potentially pose a danger to others, is there any moral stand that society could take to make them attend to treatment? I say moral as opposed to legal because I ask it more as a question to contemplate the issue.

I don't think it is a moral issue I believe it is a 100% legal issue. I view most issues as grey, because variables can change how I would conclude except when it involves the safety of other individuals. This guy was not fit to drive. He knew it. He chose to drive regardless.

People have the right to refuse treatment, to not take medication, etc.... but in some cases should they?

Absolutely they should have the right to refuse treatment and ingesting medication. By doing so they forfeit their privilege to drive.

This issue is black and white, open and shut. Seldom would I say that, but here I would.

He will have a hard time living with himself. It will haunt him daily.

 

[SLM]

I've had to look long and hard at my ability to drive due to a plethora of health issues.


Fibromyalgia irritates my optic nerves and causes 'veiled' vision.


Fibromyalgia causes 'brain fog', impairing reaction times.


And last but not least, I have an overactive vasovagal response, which causes what we refer to as a 'slow faint' if something startles me and makes me tense up. Rarely do I ever get startled as a driver (because I'm always seeing what's happening), but as a passenger I've been startled and fainted on plenty of occasions. Only twice in my entire time driving have I had to pull over, both times due to wildlife jumping out. But thankfully, it is, as I say, a slow faint, and literally starts with a creeping numbness in my extremities, and allows plenty of time to stop and put my vehicle in park.


The combination though, makes me a picky driver. Picky about where, when, and how I will drive. My vision means night driving with oncoming headlights is out if I have to go any distance. Or driving on days where my optic nerves are especially irritated. Or driving into the sun on bright days.


My brain fog means I have days where I'm worse than a drunk, and so I will do everything I can to not drive, right down to calling a cab for my kids to get home from school.


And my vasovagal response is something that we are ever watchful of. If I ever start 'fast fainting'.... I'm done as a driver.


I have a hard time drumming up any sympathy for this driver, given the realities of his condition, and the fact that so many epileptics I know, deal with the strain of giving up their licenses. Given the way most people I know take driving as a serious responsibility.


That being said, I think the courts reached an appropriate sentence. He never fought any of this from what I've read. He stood up and owned his responsibility. It's a brutal lesson learned.

What are your thoughts on the issue of whether society should have any say (or more or less say) when it comes to those who do not take their illnesses, and the potential danger that disregard may pose to others, given that you are facing your own in a responsible manner? Most often this comes up in discussion when addressing the mentally ill, many of which do seem to have a proclivity to stop taking their medication, but the notion that something like epileptic seizures and this individual's denial regarding them that cost a child her life (and two other children a horrific fate as well) made think about other situations where that line between private choice and public safety is or where it should be.

Again, I'm not coming down on either side of the issue, but just looking to explore the topic a little.

 

[Goober]

I've had to look long and hard at my ability to drive due to a plethora of health issues.


Fibromyalgia irritates my optic nerves and causes 'veiled' vision.


Fibromyalgia causes 'brain fog', impairing reaction times.


And last but not least, I have an overactive vasovagal response, which causes what we refer to as a 'slow faint' if something startles me and makes me tense up. Rarely do I ever get startled as a driver (because I'm always seeing what's happening), but as a passenger I've been startled and fainted on plenty of occasions. Only twice in my entire time driving have I had to pull over, both times due to wildlife jumping out. But thankfully, it is, as I say, a slow faint, and literally starts with a creeping numbness in my extremities, and allows plenty of time to stop and put my vehicle in park.


The combination though, makes me a picky driver. Picky about where, when, and how I will drive. My vision means night driving with oncoming headlights is out if I have to go any distance. Or driving on days where my optic nerves are especially irritated. Or driving into the sun on bright days.


My brain fog means I have days where I'm worse than a drunk, and so I will do everything I can to not drive, right down to calling a cab for my kids to get home from school.


And my vasovagal response is something that we are ever watchful of. If I ever start 'fast fainting'.... I'm done as a driver.


I have a hard time drumming up any sympathy for this driver, given the realities of his condition, and the fact that so many epileptics I know, deal with the strain of giving up their licenses. Given the way most people I know take driving as a serious responsibility.


That being said, I think the courts reached an appropriate sentence. He never fought any of this from what I've read. He stood up and owned his responsibility. It's a brutal lesson learned.

Over the years he put his children and many others at risk. The sentence is not appropriate.

 

[Sal]

I would also add, the issue I have wrestled with in the past was in knowing that someone in my building used to go golfing and hit the club house after. I ran into him a few times and he reeked of alcohol, other times not. I was uncertain of what I should do...I am still uncertain of the best course of action. He has since passed on but it caused a dilemma for me. With this man above, his wife may feel like hanging herself as well. For me, that is the moral issue here.

 

[SLM]

I don't think it is a moral issue I believe it is a 100% legal issue. I view most issues as grey, because variables can change how I would conclude except when it involves the safety of other individuals. This guy was not fit to drive. He knew it. He chose to drive regardless.


Absolutely they should have the right to refuse treatment and ingesting medication. By doing so they forfeit their privilege to drive.

This issue is black and white, open and shut. Seldom would I say that, but here I would.

He will have a hard time living with himself. It will haunt him daily.

In this particular case, the refusal to medicate coupled with his refusal to stop driving is the part that posed the danger to society, if he hadn't kept driving his refusal to take medication would not have threatened anyone. But take the example of a mentally ill individual, refusing treatment can (although certainly not always) lead to them becoming a danger to others. Sure right now we can gather them up for three days, but then they get released (I'm thinking specifically of a neighbour here)so it's a revolving door. If he doesn't choose to continue treatment, there's nothing that can be done until 'something happens'. I've heard the police say that. My question is, and it is a moral question, is should we be able to make someone continue treatment?

Digging the new avatar by the way.

 

[Sal]

In this particular case, the refusal to medicate coupled with his refusal to stop driving is the part that posed the danger to society, if he hadn't kept driving his refusal to take medication would not have threatened anyone. But take the example of a mentally ill individual, refusing treatment can (although certainly not always) lead to them becoming a danger to others. Sure right now we can gather them up for three days, but then they get released (I'm thinking specifically of a neighbour here)so it's a revolving door. If he doesn't choose to continue treatment, there's nothing that can be done until 'something happens'. I've heard the police say that. My question is, and it is a moral question, is should we be able to make someone continue treatment?

Digging the new avatar by the way.

Thanks I was going to put a pair of red lips up there too so we could confuse people...then I figured I should ask ya first...lol...

I don't know...that's a tough one which for me is grey. I think it would need to be on a case by case basis, but until one demonstrates that they are unsafe, there is no proof and proof is needed...by then, it's too late. It's kind of a parallel to what Hershel said in the Walking Dead, living is dangerous...

 

[karrie]

What are your thoughts on the issue of whether society should have any say (or more or less say) when it comes to those who do not take their illnesses, and the potential danger that disregard may pose to others.....
Again, I'm not coming down on either side of the issue, but just looking to explore the topic a little.

Health issues aren't easy to regulate. There are rules in place that epileptics must have their condition under control, which typically means meds, for a specific amount of time (4-6 months I believe, I don't recall exactly). And I do believe the law states that if they have a seizure behind the wheel and can be proven to have gone off their meds, they are at fault. But, beyond that, chasing people down to jam pills down their throats incase they break the law because some people like them have broken the law... well... that takes society to a pretty scary place.


I'd like to see more of this though, even in the case of certain mental illnesses (or especially?). Yes, we know you're sick, but while in your right mind, you decided to not do what you needed to be well, and you hurt someone, you will serve time for it .

 

[SLM]

Thanks I was going to put a pair of red lips up there too so we could confuse people...then I figured I should ask ya first...lol...

Go for it, I'm all for confusing people. It's pretty much what I live for. (But I do like the avatar)

I don't know...that's a tough one which for me is grey. I think it would need to be on a case by case basis, but until one demonstrates that they are unsafe, there is no proof and proof is needed...by then, it's too late.

It is a tough one and it's even a little bit uncomfortable to think about sometimes but sometimes the tough questions need to be asked.

It's kind of a parallel to what Hershel said in the Walking Dead, living is dangerous...

I hope it's not quite that dangerous though.

 

[karrie]

Over the years he put his children and many others at risk. The sentence is not appropriate.

You want him imprisoned longer for all the things that didn't happen? While I can understand disliking him, and holding him in a position of contempt for that fact, I can't see a lengthy prison term serving society well, or improving the situation for anyone Him, his family, the victims' families, or the tax payers. Vindictive prison terms serve only to breed contempt of the system, and undermine its position as a rehabilitative tool.

 

[Goober]

You want him imprisoned longer for all the things that didn't happen? While I can understand disliking him, and holding him in a position of contempt for that fact, I can't see a lengthy prison term serving society well, or improving the situation for anyone Him, his family, the victims' families, or the tax payers. Vindictive prison terms serve only to breed contempt of the system, and undermine its position as a rehabilitative tool.

No difference between him and a drunk driver- he was aware of his condition- he put his children at risk- if his wife was aware she also placed the children at risk, let alone others.
Was a school bus available- I did not see if that was.
If there was then why drive his kids.

 

[SLM]

Health issues aren't easy to regulate. There are rules in place that epileptics must have their condition under control, which typically means meds, for a specific amount of time (4-6 months I believe, I don't recall exactly). And I do believe the law states that if they have a seizure behind the wheel and can be proven to have gone off their meds, they are at fault. But, beyond that, chasing people down to jam pills down their throats incase they break the law because some people like them have broken the law... well... that takes society to a pretty scary place.

It is a scary place, not denying that. Sometimes it can be interesting to contemplate the scary places though, really weigh them out. Or it could just be my sick and twisted mind, lol.

I'd like to see more of this though, even in the case of certain mental illnesses (or especially?). Yes, we know you're sick, but while in your right mind, you decided to not do what you needed to be well, and you hurt someone, you will serve time for it .

Now that's an interesting take, particularly in the case of mental illness, because there is a direct correlation that can be made for choosing to stop treatment (meds) while in your "right mind" and knowing that horrific hallucinations will result and what could potentially happen. Thinking specifically of Li here.

But again, although I agree it's a scary place to contemplate going, we're waiting for someone to be beheaded on a greyhound bus before action is taken that could, at least hypothetically, be reasonably predicted. I'd have to ponder the moral validity of that stance.

 

[Goober]

It is a scary place, not denying that. Sometimes it can be interesting to contemplate the scary places though, really weigh them out. Or it could just be my sick and twisted mind, lol.


Now that's an interesting take, particularly in the case of mental illness, because there is a direct correlation that can be made for choosing to stop treatment (meds) while in your "right mind" and knowing that horrific hallucinations will result and what could potentially happen. Thinking specifically of Li here.

But again, although I agree it's a scary place to contemplate going, we're waiting for someone to be beheaded on a greyhound bus before action is taken that could, at least hypothetically, be reasonably predicted. I'd have to ponder the moral validity of that stance.

Richard Benson, St. Paul School Crash Driver, Was Having A Seizure

But court records show he had been behind the wheel for about a decade.

The Alberta man had been told by doctors that he needed medication to prevent his recurring seizures.
"I need to take Dilantin on a regular basis or I will have seizures, fainting, blackout(s)."

When he applied for another driver's licence and auto insurance in 2011, he again failed to mention his health. In the spot where he was supposed to acknowledge any physical or medical conditions, he wrote "none."

The court document details several of his seizures, hospital stays and prescriptions from doctors. It says the seizures had been increasing in frequency over the years.

Benson "continued to drive while being aware of the danger or risk he posed to the lives or safety of others while operating a motor vehicle."

On Oct. 21, 2012, he had a seizure at home, but didn't go to a doctor. His worried family told him he shouldn't be driving.

 

[SLM]

Richard Benson, St. Paul School Crash Driver, Was Having A Seizure

But court records show he had been behind the wheel for about a decade.

The Alberta man had been told by doctors that he needed medication to prevent his recurring seizures.
"I need to take Dilantin on a regular basis or I will have seizures, fainting, blackout(s)."

When he applied for another driver's licence and auto insurance in 2011, he again failed to mention his health. In the spot where he was supposed to acknowledge any physical or medical conditions, he wrote "none."

The court document details several of his seizures, hospital stays and prescriptions from doctors. It says the seizures had been increasing in frequency over the years.

Benson "continued to drive while being aware of the danger or risk he posed to the lives or safety of others while operating a motor vehicle."

On Oct. 21, 2012, he had a seizure at home, but didn't go to a doctor. His worried family told him he shouldn't be driving.

I have a question, why weren't the doctor's (he had to have gone to some if he was getting prescription he wasn't filling) informing the ministry of his condition? I know here in Ontario they are legally required to do so in a situation where a condition would make driving dangerous, whether their patient even has a driver's license or not.

 

[Goober]

You want him imprisoned longer for all the things that didn't happen? While I can understand disliking him, and holding him in a position of contempt for that fact, I can't see a lengthy prison term serving society well, or improving the situation for anyone Him, his family, the victims' families, or the tax payers. Vindictive prison terms serve only to breed contempt of the system, and undermine its position as a rehabilitative tool.

Not vindictive- He knew he should not drive- no difference between him and a multiple Impaired driver.

Do we know if he had momentary seizures. Nope- and no way he would say if he did.


https://www.epilepsy.org.uk/info/seizures/about-seizures-brain

https://www.epilepsy.org.uk/info/seizures/focal-partial

Here are some common symptoms of focal seizures in the temporal lobes

Flushing, sweating, going very pale, having a churning feeling in your stomach
Seeing things as smaller or bigger than they really are
Seeing or hearing something that is not actually happening
Smelling non-existent smells
Tasting non-existent tastes
Feeling frightened, panicky, sad or happy
Feeling detached from what is going on around you
Feeling sick
Having vivid memory ‘flashbacks’
Having an intense feeling of ‘deja vu’, when you are convinced you have experienced something before – even when you haven’t
Being unable to recognise things that are very familiar to you - sometimes referred to as ‘jamais vu’
Chewing, smacking your lips, swallowing or scratching your head
Fumbling with your buttons or removing items of your clothing
Wandering off, without any awareness of what you are doing, or where you are going

I have a question, why weren't the doctor's (he had to have gone to some if he was getting prescription he wasn't filling) informing the ministry of his condition? I know here in Ontario they are legally required to do so in a situation where a condition would make driving dangerous, whether their patient even has a driver's license or not.

Not sure why- But probably they are not required to.

 

[petros]

A BS sentence- 10 to 15 years would be appropriate - let the fuker rot.

For what?