Five people, including two children, killed in ‘horrific’ Surrey, B.C., crash

[Goober]

Surrey crash: Five people killed in B.C. accident | Canada | News | National Post

Five people, including two children, killed in ‘horrific’ Surrey, B.C., crash

RCMP in British Columbia say five people are dead after a serious crash near the U.S border.

The crash occurred in Surrey.

Sergeant Dale Carr says it appears that a westbound Dodge Caravan sped through a red light, and then crashed into a mid-sized car.

The mid-sized car was torn in half, and all five of its occupants — three adults and two children — are dead.

The driver of the Dodge Caravan has been transported to the hospital with serious injuries.

Carr calls the crash scene a horrific scene of debris, and the worst collision he has witnessed in more than 20 years.
Surrey: Two-vehicle crash kills 5

 

[damngrumpy]

If the description is true, and I use the term IF the driver should be held for first degree murder.
None of this vehicular manslaughter crap. This was willfully planned to avoid stopping at a
street light.
I say it is time to get rid of excuses for crimes. Things like "I was Drunk or stoned. I was in a
hurray and ran the light.
For being drunk and someone dies or is rendered a handicap person for life. Automatic fifteen
years and five tacked on for being drunk or stoned anther five for an infraction such as running
a light, speeding, passing on a solid line or talking on the phone.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

He will get off with a slap on the wrist. I am not even sure he/she will do jail time.

I agree with Grumpy. This has to stop.

 

[Cannuck]

This was willfully planned to avoid stopping at a street light.

Can you post a link to that?

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Can you post a link to that?

Obviously the red light planned a sneak attack. :roll:

 

[gerryh]

If the guy driving the mini van had a stroke, or a seizure, or a heart attack, etc..... would you still want him strung up his balls? How about we wait and find out ALL the facts before you all get your lynching kits out.

 

[Cannuck]

Obviously the red light planned a sneak attack. :roll:

Do you have the faintest idea what the word "willfully" means?

 

[karrie]

Yeah I gotta go with Cannuck on this. I don't think he 'willfully planned' to hit a car full of people, kill them all, and nearly kill himself.

 

[Kreskin]

Based on the report alone it looks like an accident. How is that pre-meditated murder?

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Based on the report alone it looks like an accident. How is that pre-meditated murder?

I guess it depends on your interpretation of what he intended to do at the intersection. For me this section is what gives me my opinion (barring a stroke or medical event not yet specified):

Sgt. Dale Carr said it appears a Dodge Caravan sped through a red light at the intersection and then crashed into a mid-sized car.

“The Dodge Caravan has such high velocity, it goes through the intersection, it comes to rest about 200 metres west of that intersection,” he said. “There’s again, so much velocity involved in the crash that the mid-sized import vehicle was torn in half at the firewall.”

The driver of the dodge sped through a red light. Not sure how one does that accidentally.

 

[Kreskin]

But his intent was probably to run a red light, not kill people.

 

[PoliticalNick]

It is hard for the average person to really understand just how much force is required to tear a vehicle in half. Add to that the van traveled another 200 feet or so after the impact and I would guess it was doing about 75-80 MPH (over 130 KPH for the new generation). Now if the van was travelling on 32nd ave the speed limit there is 60 KPH. If it was on 176th the limit in that area is 70 or 80 KPH. So it would seem that the driver was doing double the speed limit or at least close to that. Given the extremely excessive rate of speed I would not have an issue charging the driver with at least 2nd degree murder barring any legitimate medical excuses.

 

[talloola]

he better have a stroke or a heart attack 'now', before he has to remember and be told what he actually
did, and of course, once he is lawyered up, it will be amazing how he absolutely will not remember
anything.

if he was running the red light, it is very close to pre meditated murder, because he knew at that
very second the possibility of another vehicle going through that intersection, and he was gambling,
(with the lives of others).

if he was not paying attention, what was he doing, and just calling something like this an accident
seems to allready begin letting him off the hook somewhat.

if he had some kind of stroke or heart attack, the way he went through the red light would be much
different than if he was purposely doing it, and he 'probably' would have left the road before the
intersection, and also began to slow down a bit.
I wonder if he hit them right in the middle of the intersection, or?

the focal point here is all of the people 'he killed', not how guilty he is or isn't.

they are dead, a few hours ago they were all alive, and imagine the other people connected
with those five, who now have had their lives changed for the rest of their days.

it is very very sad, and very very unecessary, and preventable by the driver of the van.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

But his intent was probably to run a red light, not kill people.

I think it reasonable to assume that if you go speeding through a red light you may kill somebody. While I don't think he intended to kill, he intended to commit the action which can kill somebody. To me its like the law where if you go into a 7-11 with a gun intending only to rob the store but you wind up killing somebody with the gun, it is considered pre-meditated murder even though you had no intent to kill anybody.

But with today's court system, he will get a very light sentence -- probably a driving suspension and probation and won't likely see any serious jail time.

 

[Kreskin]

If he meant to kill someone then it's murder.

 

[talloola]

If he meant to kill someone then it's murder.

is it then called 'vehicular homocide', in this case, if there is no other 'sane' reason
he did this horrible crime.

 

[Kreskin]

I think it reasonable to assume that if you go speeding through a red light you may kill somebody. While I don't think he intended to kill, he intended to commit the action which can kill somebody. To me its like the law where if you go into a 7-11 with a gun intending only to rob the store but you wind up killing somebody with the gun, it is considered pre-meditated murder even though you had no intent to kill anybody.

But with today's court system, he will get a very light sentence -- probably a driving suspension and probation and won't likely see any serious jail time.

It's not the court system, it's the criminal code. The courts enforce the rule of law.

At this point there isn't enough information available to make judgements.

 

[#juan]

For a Dodge Caravan, not a particularly robust vehicle itself, to tear another "mid-sized" car in half, that van must have been
traveling at a pretty high speed. Charges of driving without due care and attention right up to criminal negligence causing death
come to mind. I would say the surviving driver has a lot to answer for. I wouldn't want to be in his shoes right now.

 

[Mowich]

For a Dodge Caravan, not a particularly robust vehicle itself, to tear another "mid-sized" car in half, that van must have been
traveling at a pretty high speed.

Good point, juan........hadn't thought of that until you posted the comment.

Just watched a Global news vid of the carnage.............unbelievable. A pair of sunglasses were actually found embedded in a nearby post.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

It's not the court system, it's the criminal code. The courts enforce the rule of law.

At this point there isn't enough information available to make judgements.

If this was a court of law, based upon the information available I agree. But this is a forum where it is perfectly ok to judge based upon information presented, and change your judgement if new information comes to light. So I choose to judge based upon what is presented and I have. If a report comes out that he was having a seisure, I will reform my judgement. Until then, it stands (for what it is worth -- my judgement and a nickel will get you a 5 cent candy).

As an aside. How come every time I post after Mowich my font gets funky?