Drunk driver will be sentenced next month

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
35,817
3,031
113
Drunk driver will be sentenced next month
By Tracy McLaughlin ,Special to QMI Agency
First posted: Thursday, April 17, 2014 06:36 PM EDT
BARRIE - A Cobourg man who got out of drug rehab and went straight to the liquor store to buy a bottle of whiskey before killing a woman with his SUV doesn’t believe he needs any counseling, a court heard Thursday.
Christopher Dubreuil, 29, has pleaded guilty to impaired driving causing the death of Ashley Fogal, 24, a woman known for “working wonders” with mentally handicapped children.
Dubreuil also pleaded guilty to impaired driving causing bodily harm of her best friend, Alyssa Blight, who sustained devastating injuries.
The two women were passionate country music fans and were dressed in cowboy boots on their way to a Miranda Lambert concert at Casino Rama when Dubreuil’s vehicle suddenly crossed the centre line and careened head-on into their vehicle at 143 km/h on Aug. 11, 2011.
Blight told the court she remembers seeing headlights in the darkness suddenly veering straight into her lane.
“There was nowhere to go,” said Blight, who still gets flashbacks and panic attacks. “We had no chance to avoid the situation — because of a bad choice someone else made.”
Dubreuil was impaired by alcohol and the sedative Lorazepam — but what made it even worse was that he was probably also texting at the time, the prosecutor said.
“He’s already got alcohol and Lorazepam in his system. He’s driving at a high rate of speed — and he’s got his head down to look at the phone,” said Crown attorney Kristine Staats.
Witnesses saw him with his head down and phone records show he was receiving text messages shortly before the collision, she said.
Earlier that day Dubreuil had just completed a stint at a Brooklin rehab facility for his addiction to Oxycontin. He and a female outpatient left and headed straight to the liquor store. They got a room at a hotel nearby and staggered over to the casino but Dubreuil was turned away at the door because of his drinking. So he jumped in his friend’s SUV to head back to Cobourg. Seconds later he crossed the centre line and hit Fogal’s vehicle.
Dubreuil suffered a fractured skull and broken knees, hips and sternum, but remarkably he climbed out of the sunroof of his crumpled vehicle and stood there as if in no pain.
His lawyer asked the judge to consider a lighter sentence because of the extent of his injuries and because he hasn’t touched a drink since the incident, but the Crown showed no sympathy.
“They are injuries he caused to himself,” said Staats, who suggested the only reason he hasn’t had a drink is because his bail conditions stipulate no alcohol.
The report also stated Dubreuil does not think he needs help for substance or alcohol abuse.
“He needs to recognize that he needs help or he will continue to be a risk to the community,” said Staats. “The consequences of his actions were catastrophic.”
Fogal’s heartbroken family members filled the court room, including her 80-year-old grandmother and her mother, Susan Fogal.
Justice Michael Brown will sentence Dubreuil on May 7.
Christopher Dubreuil, 27 of Cobourg, pleaded guilty to impaired driving causing the death of Ashley Fogal. (Tracy McLaughlin/Special to the Toronto Sun)

Drunk driver will be sentenced next month | Home | Toronto Sun
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
50
After seeing how a douchebag killed four women in Chatham while driving intoxicated and only being sentenced FOUR YEARS for it, I am not holding my breath that this piece of garbage will get anything more than a piddly little sentence.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,570
7,076
113
Washington DC
Hmm. . . if I were the prosecutor, I'd try an argument that the felony-murder rule applies (Criminal Code of Canada Section 229(c)). The standard is "an accused for an unlawful object did anything knowing that it was likely [on an objective standard] to cause someone's death." Driving drunk and drugged is an unlawful object, and pushing three tons of steel down the road at 100 kph out of control is sure as hell likely to cause someone's death. With a little good lawyering, that makes it murder.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,570
7,076
113
Washington DC
229 requires intent to kill.

I'd accept your word, not being a Canadian lawyer, except you ain't neither. Here's the text, relevant portions boldfaced. . .

229. Culpable homicide is murder

(a) where the person who causes the death of a human being

(i) means to cause his death, or

(ii) means to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and is reckless whether death ensues or not;

(b) where a person, meaning to cause death to a human being or meaning to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and being reckless whether death ensues or not, by accident or mistake causes death to another human being, notwithstanding that he does not mean to cause death or bodily harm to that human being; or

(c) where a person, for an unlawful object, does anything that he knows or ought to know is likely to cause death, and thereby causes death to a human being, notwithstanding that he desires to effect his object without causing death or bodily harm to any human being.
Murder is NOT an accident.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 212.

So, that pretty much shoots your "requires intent" argument.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,570
7,076
113
Washington DC
I read it and it requires intent. Are you sure you are a lawyer?
I'm not a Canadian lawyer, but then, you aren't either. So, "notwithstanding that he desires to effect his object without causing death or bodily harm" doesn't negate the intent requirement in petrosworld?

What'd you have for breakfast? Paint chips?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,303
11,389
113
Low Earth Orbit
I doubt you are an American one either.

Think "firing a weapon into a crowd" and you have a case with CCoC 229
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,570
7,076
113
Washington DC
Sorry pumpkin but you're definetly not a lawyer. A death in an arson is still only manslaughter.
In most common-law countries, it's felony murder. In Canada, Section 229(c) may cover it.

Just wondering, do you have a cite to support your proposition that 229(c) only applies to firing into crowds? No? Didn't think so.

Don't worry about it, petros, you can live a happy, productive life on the bottom half of the bell curve.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,570
7,076
113
Washington DC
You still aren't a lawyer.
And you still don't have a cite.

Just checked my bank balance. Guess how much your thinking I'm not a lawyer cost me?

Seriously, do you have any idea how stupid you look, loudly proclaiming on the internet what you can't possibly know?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,303
11,389
113
Low Earth Orbit
Fill your f-cking boots. You made the retarded claim. You back your retarded claim.
And your still not a lawyer.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
This case is just heart breaking. Such life and potential taken away by another who can't even make it through the day without a substance in his body.

If this guy never does another day in prison, he will still be a tortured, confused soul to the end of his days. He is a danger to society.

at the least, mentally ill and incapable of making a correct and safe decision...
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,570
7,076
113
Washington DC
Fill your f-cking boots. You made the retarded claim. You back your retarded claim.
I have, thanks. You just didn't understand it, unsurprisingly.

And your still not a lawyer.
And your repetition causes no more harm to me than your original statement did, unsurprisingly.

You're certainly sliding down the back slope of the bell curve, though.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,303
11,389
113
Low Earth Orbit
Why bother in continuing to bullsh-t about being a lawyer when it's obvious you aren't. BTW, I'm far from alone in this knowledge that you're full of sh-t.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,570
7,076
113
Washington DC
Why bother in continuing to bullsh-t about being a lawyer when it's obvious you aren't. BTW, I'm far from alone in this knowledge that you're full of sh-t.
Ah, the appeal to popularity. In this case, fictional popularity. I imagine that's the kind of logical thinking that makes you a soi-disant scientist.