Topic: Quebec woman guilty in death of motorcyclist and passenger, trying to save ducks

[Scarecrow]

I thought it was reported that the motorcycles were behind a lady who swerved to miss the stopped duck woman car.  But the lady didn't hit the brakes when trying to avoid the parked car thus no brake light warning to the motorcyclists.  So motorcyclists got a nasty surprise.  They were probably using the riding someone's brake light technique.

No.  She parked her car in the left lane of a divided highway with no hazard lights flashing, and stepped out of it in a stupid and reckless attempt to walk back and rescue some baby ducks.  The motorcyclist would've had minimal time to recognize and react to her parked car.  And if my memory is correct, the exact spot where this happened was along a curve in the highway with no shoulder to speak of.

[rrocket]

No.  She parked her car in the left lane of a divided highway with no hazard lights flashing, and stepped out of it in a stupid and reckless attempt to walk back and rescue some baby ducks.  The motorcyclist would've had minimal time to recognize and react to her parked car.  And if my memory is correct, the exact spot where this happened was along a curve in the highway with no shoulder to speak of.

Uggg....definitely guilty.  And guilty of being an inconsiderate idiot too.

[Fobroader]

I thought it was reported that the motorcycles were behind a lady who swerved to miss the stopped duck woman car.  But the lady didn't hit the brakes when trying to avoid the parked car thus no brake light warning to the motorcyclists.  So motorcyclists got a nasty surprise.  They were probably using the riding someone's brake light technique.

No.  She parked her car in the left lane of a divided highway with no hazard lights flashing, and stepped out of it in a stupid and reckless attempt to walk back and rescue some baby ducks.  The motorcyclist would've had minimal time to recognize and react to her parked car.  And if my memory is correct, the exact spot where this happened was along a curve in the highway with no shoulder to speak of.

If her car would have been broken down and the motorcyclists had hit her....would she still be at fault??

[rrocket]

I thought it was reported that the motorcycles were behind a lady who swerved to miss the stopped duck woman car.  But the lady didn't hit the brakes when trying to avoid the parked car thus no brake light warning to the motorcyclists.  So motorcyclists got a nasty surprise.  They were probably using the riding someone's brake light technique.

No.  She parked her car in the left lane of a divided highway with no hazard lights flashing, and stepped out of it in a stupid and reckless attempt to walk back and rescue some baby ducks.  The motorcyclist would've had minimal time to recognize and react to her parked car.  And if my memory is correct, the exact spot where this happened was along a curve in the highway with no shoulder to speak of.

If her car would have been broken down and the motorcyclists had hit her....would she still be at fault??

Maybe not.  But stopping her car DELIBERATELY is what makes it different IMO.

[Snowman]

I thought it was reported that the motorcycles were behind a lady who swerved to miss the stopped duck woman car.  But the lady didn't hit the brakes when trying to avoid the parked car thus no brake light warning to the motorcyclists.  So motorcyclists got a nasty surprise.  They were probably using the riding someone's brake light technique.

No.  She parked her car in the left lane of a divided highway with no hazard lights flashing, and stepped out of it in a stupid and reckless attempt to walk back and rescue some baby ducks.  The motorcyclist would've had minimal time to recognize and react to her parked car.  And if my memory is correct, the exact spot where this happened was along a curve in the highway with no shoulder to speak of.

If her car would have been broken down and the motorcyclists had hit her....would she still be at fault??

If she put her emergency flashers on then no.

[Fobroader]

I thought it was reported that the motorcycles were behind a lady who swerved to miss the stopped duck woman car.  But the lady didn't hit the brakes when trying to avoid the parked car thus no brake light warning to the motorcyclists.  So motorcyclists got a nasty surprise.  They were probably using the riding someone's brake light technique.

No.  She parked her car in the left lane of a divided highway with no hazard lights flashing, and stepped out of it in a stupid and reckless attempt to walk back and rescue some baby ducks.  The motorcyclist would've had minimal time to recognize and react to her parked car.  And if my memory is correct, the exact spot where this happened was along a curve in the highway with no shoulder to speak of.

If her car would have been broken down and the motorcyclists had hit her....would she still be at fault??

Maybe not.  But stopping her car DELIBERATELY is what makes it different IMO.

No, it was a deliberate act of extreme stupidity, all I am saying is that either way, those bikers were dead. In my opinion, as a responsible rider/biker, you have to be in full control of your mount at all times. If the car was stopped because it broke down, had an accident or the floor licking moron was chasing baby ducks across a very busy highway, they would be dead.

[johngenx]

Stopping for the ducks was pure idiocy and she still can't understand why you can't stop your car randomly in the middle of the road - so she is incapable of operating a motor vehicle and for the safety of others should be losing her license for a long time - perhaps forever if she can't demonstrate competency.  But this wasn't a malicious criminal act and I don't believe jail time is warranted.  That should be reserved for those that need to be removed from society of society.

[HeliDriver]

I thought it was reported that the motorcycles were behind a lady who swerved to miss the stopped duck woman car.  But the lady didn't hit the brakes when trying to avoid the parked car thus no brake light warning to the motorcyclists.  So motorcyclists got a nasty surprise.  They were probably using the riding someone's brake light technique.

No.  She parked her car in the left lane of a divided highway with no hazard lights flashing, and stepped out of it in a stupid and reckless attempt to walk back and rescue some baby ducks.  The motorcyclist would've had minimal time to recognize and react to her parked car.  And if my memory is correct, the exact spot where this happened was along a curve in the highway with no shoulder to speak of.

If her car would have been broken down and the motorcyclists had hit her....would she still be at fault??

Even if your car breaks down, there's no excuse not to pull onto the shoulder and put on the hazard flashers.

Having said that, my personal opinion is that stupid duck lady is 60% responsible and the motorcyclist is 40% responsible. As someone else pointed out, a pickup towing a horse trailer was able to avoid a crash, so the motorcyclist was obviously lacking in skills and/or awareness.

[Scaerio]

Seems to me that two lives were lost all for not putting on the flashers and putying out flares or a warning triangle.

As for always trying to mae it to the left lane/shouider, I have seen some catastophic front suspension failures around Ottawa (for some reason almost always in mid- to late '90s Civics and Accords) that would have caused the car to stop dead in its tracks...

[Noto]

FYI, here's a pic of her car 'afterwards'...

Just like how people get off for drinking and driving.

But that's what you're missing here - it's not about "getting off".  She was charged and convicted of a criminal offence (4, to be exact).  She has a criminal record now for the rest of her life.

And not only that, but there are MANY types of sentences that can be had.  The question was, "is Jail the appropriate sentence, or is there some other type that would better remediate her?"

For example, she has a prohibition against driving (i.e. she is not allowed to drive) for a period of TEN YEARS.  She also is under probation (i.e. has to check in with a probation officer every so often).  She also has to do community service.

What, in my opinion, is wrong with her sentence, is they are putting her in jail for 90 days, to be served only on weekends.  The intention is for her to continue working during the week/see her family, but then she loses her free time on weekends.  It doesn't do anything other than punish her for under a year (i.e. no weekend fun for 11 months).  How is that beneficial?  She won't "learn" because she lost her weekends.  She'll learn by not being allowed to drive for 10 years.  She'll learn by having to take buses, etc.  She will learn because she is now listed as a criminal. 

But what will jail do?  It'll do more harm to her than good to society - she's not a danger if she cannot drive.

[Northernridge]

I'm ok with 90 days in the pokey for her.

[johngenx]

But what will jail do?  It'll do more harm to her than good to society - she's not a danger if she cannot drive.

Completely agree.  As a teacher that worked extensively with youth involved in the criminal justice system, I cannot condone jail time unless someone needs to be removed from society for the protection of society.

This woman is incompetent at operating a motor vehicle.  We need to take steps to:

1. Protect society from this incompetence.  Removing her driving privileges is right.
2. Change her behaviour.  Given that she will not admit to making an error, at this point this seems unlikely.  This necessitates that her driver's license be removed either indefinitely or for a very long term.  If she is able (and I'm not sure how) to demonstrate that she's now skilled, she should not be driving.
3. Show other drivers that incompetence will be met with removal of driving privileges in the hope that future incidents are avoided.

Honestly, I'm surprised that anything more than a simple traffic ticket was issued.  We have fatality causing behaviour in Alberta every day that is met with few consequences.

[Rupert]

Were there two motorcycles involved? There seems to be two down in the picture.

[rrocket]

^^Yea...sure seems like it.

[Rupert]

   If the ducks had been Moose, this would not have been a thread. Maybe we should be more concerned for the young driver who was consumed by her personal human reaction to the situation. Harsh sentences will not bring the dead back and there should be hard shoulders on both sides of main highways perhaps...do you think.
   

[Northernridge]

Do any cars sold in Canada still come with a warning triangle in the trunk? I recall a few German cars used to but don't remember seeing any for years. Wouldn't of helped in this case I suppose because dipsh!t didn't even bother with the hazard lights. Still would be a good idea, I think commercial trucks are required to carry/use them in multiples.

[Guy]

Yes 2 bikes, the wife (and mother) of the deceased was riding her own bike. She did not hit the car, maybe just dropped the bike after stopping. Look at the car in the top and bottom pictures and how much room to the right of it is still available to pass on a bike without even going into the next lane, not sure if there are any skid marks either. Accident took place at 19:20 on June 27th, still daytime at that period of the year. Her 4 way flashers were on. Other vehicles went around her car before the bike hit; how to explain cars were able to avoid her and not this bike? It's not a curve either, straight path of highway.

For me, sadly the bike rider who hit was  distracted; or in waving to his wife to move left he lost a few precious seconds to swerve and avoid hitting the car? I'm OK with the driving ban, but a community work sentence would have been more efficient in that case IMHO.

[Northernridge]

The second bike brings up the possibility that the dead guy wasn't able to avoid the collision because of the position of/thoughts for/errors of his wife. A number of posters have allocated responsibility to the dead guy for not seeing and avoiding the parked car but maybe that's not the whole story.

[Rupert]

So one bike hit the car...how did the other bike stop in almost the same spot without hitting the car. Did she simply brake and not move over or ride on by and turn back to the spot against the traffic flow. The second bike must have been further back on the highway to have stopped there surely.

[Guy]

So one bike hit the car...how did the other bike stop in almost the same spot without hitting the car. Did she simply brake and not move over or ride on by and turn back to the spot against the traffic flow. The second bike must have been further back on the highway to have stopped there surely.

Yes she was following. May have stopped besides the other bike and in the situation, forgot or neglected to use the side stand. Understandable in those circumstances.