8 Die in Crash on Taconic State Parkway #2

[redheadedgal]

i've been reading this thread since it's inception... what i don't understand is how can someone be so drunk to drive the wrong way on a highway but still be able to drive at all? these two things just seem incongruous to me... i realize it is possible seeing all the times it happens but ...


there was a similar incident on the highway here last night... thankfully police were called and were able to intercept/stop the driver before an accident occurred:

http://www.windsorstar.com/news/Driver+drove+drunk+against+traffic/5233474/story.html


i wish there was a fool-proof way to stop this from ever being able to happen... but if you add an ignition lock to all vehicles, can't you easily have someone who has not been drinking blow into it? would drivers even accept this? would people stop driving? stop buying vehicles? what else can be done? education and policing does not seem to be working sufficiently...

 

[southcitymom]

BBM

I agree and I agree. But is it not possible that she drank the amount of alcohol she drank that day because she didn't know the effect it would have on her?

Still, IDK why her drinking habits are relevant. Whether she was an alcoholic or a moderate drinker, her choices that day were fatal. IMO, Daniel is NOT responsible either way.

UBM - imho, the only way this would be possible is if she had some sort of medical/psychological event that led to crazed/black-out type of behavior. And my mind is very open to the possibility that something like this (med/psych event) played a part in the accident.

However, I don't think an unknown med/psych event is something we will ever be able to prove in this situation.

Her drinking habits are relevant, I think, because of all the mystery surrounding what happened - because, by all accounts, this was a woman that acted responsibly so regularly that her friends and family seem genuinely shocked. Also - because of the amount of alcohol (& pot) in her system. No one can get to that level of booze in their belly on a Sunday morning unless they have had some conditioning. You have to be conditioned to drink like that or even consider it an option.

Also - the suicide/murder theory notwithstanding (mainly because it doesn't hold together for me), I've never thought of Diane as a murderer. I don't for one second think she did this on purpose or wanted to harm anyone. Now my beliefs about that don't negate the fact that a grown woman should know that drinking, smoking pot and carpooling children is dangerous unsafe behavior.

 

[southcitymom]

i've been reading this thread since it's inception... what i don't understand is how can someone be so drunk to drive the wrong way on a highway but still be able to drive at all? these two things just seem incongruous to me... i realize it is possible seeing all the times it happens but ...


there was a similar incident on the highway here last night... thankfully police were called and were able to intercept/stop the driver before an accident occurred:

http://www.windsorstar.com/news/Driver+drove+drunk+against+traffic/5233474/story.html


i wish there was a fool-proof way to stop this from ever being able to happen... but if you add an ignition lock to all vehicles, can't you easily have someone who has not been drinking blow into it? would drivers even accept this? would people stop driving? stop buying vehicles? what else can be done? education and policing does not seem to be working sufficiently...

BBM - people in blackouts often do all sorts of things (to include drive) competently on automatic pilot even though they don't recall having done it. That is the nature of a blackout.

Like you, I daydream about ways we can stop something like this from happening in the future, but the reality is that legislating things like forcing people to blow into a device in order to start their car is too intrusive into personal human liberties. We have enough of a nanny state already.

 

[southcitymom]

Her drinking habits are relevant because we want to know why this happened. That's why we're here...to discuss this case.

My opinion only....not a lawyer....But if he knew she was smoking pot at the campground all night before she took the kids, I think he could be facing some civil liability.

Why do you think Daniel should be exposed to civil liability if his wife smoked pot the night before - the effects of a joint at 8 or 9 p.m. are completely gone the following morning.

 

[southcitymom]

She could have stopped several times into a gas station bathroom or other place on the side of the road. She also could have ingested it in another form. Some people make a tincture or "concentrate" of it or put it in baked goods or other foods. Smoking is not the only way to get high from marijuana.

We have talked about the eating thing. I will say that the effects of ingested marijuana takes a lot longer to kick in than the effect of smoked marijuana. But the truth remains is that it would have been very easy for her to smoke or eat some pot at some time during that fateful journey - and obviously, she did if the box report is to be believed.

 

[southcitymom]

I finally watched the HBO doc last night. I thought it was well-done - not stupendous or anything, but it did a good job of laying out the mystery and the tragedy - also a good job of delving more into who Diane was through the interviews with family and friends.

Diane was obviously a powerful person who had a strong impact on those who knew her. Type A, good at a lot of things, filled with life, love & energy, controlling, the alpha, the "responsible" one.

My gut feeling is that this family, like many families, was no stranger to alcohol or pot. I know quite a few moms and dads who have a nightly drink and/or smoke pot after the kids are settled down. I feel that because of her and her husband's opposite work schedules, he had no idea that her regular pot/alcohol intake was as high as it probably was.

I think the confusion of her husband and her friends and other members of her family is very real. I'm not willing to call it denial because that always sounds so dismissive and arrogant when a stranger says it about a family dynamic they know very little about. Clearly, they are all still processing and grieving and doing the best they can. I doubt they will ever get all the answers they feel like they need.

 

[noZme]

Those who do not have access to HBO may see "Something Is Wrong..." at www.LetMeSeeThis.ch .

 

[Nova]

UBM - imho, the only way this would be possible is if she had some sort of medical/psychological event that led to crazed/black-out type of behavior. And my mind is very open to the possibility that something like this (med/psych event) played a part in the accident.

However, I don't think an unknown med/psych event is something we will ever be able to prove in this situation.

Her drinking habits are relevant, I think, because of all the mystery surrounding what happened - because, by all accounts, this was a woman that acted responsibly so regularly that her friends and family seem genuinely shocked. Also - because of the amount of alcohol (& pot) in her system. No one can get to that level of booze in their belly on a Sunday morning unless they have had some conditioning. You have to be conditioned to drink like that or even consider it an option.

Also - the suicide/murder theory notwithstanding (mainly because it doesn't hold together for me), I've never thought of Diane as a murderer. I don't for one second think she did this on purpose or wanted to harm anyone. Now my beliefs about that don't negate the fact that a grown woman should know that drinking, smoking pot and carpooling children is dangerous unsafe behavior.

I share your definition of the word "murder." But I understand why others would apply the word to such gross negligence as to consume so much alcohol/pot and then drive a car full of children.

This is one instance where I'm not inclined to argue semantics.

 

[Nova]

Her drinking habits are relevant because we want to know why this happened. That's why we're here...to discuss this case.

My opinion only....not a lawyer....But if he knew she was smoking pot at the campground all night before she took the kids, I think he could be facing some civil liability.

I'm not a lawyer either, but I'm sure you're right. A good plaintiff's attorney could certainly make a strong case for shared negligence if Daniel knew she was impaired.

But that's why I think he'd be quiet now if he had known that then. Of course, his "not knowing" may be due to his own cluelessness.

 

[Nova]

Why do you think Daniel should be exposed to civil liability if his wife smoked pot the night before - the effects of a joint at 8 or 9 p.m. are completely gone the following morning.

I'm not authorized to respond for twinkiesmom, but she used the phrase "smoked all night." (Emphasis added.) I took that to mean smoking much later than 9 p.m. of the previous evening.

 

[Nova]

I finally watched the HBO doc last night. I thought it was well-done - not stupendous or anything, but it did a good job of laying out the mystery and the tragedy - also a good job of delving more into who Diane was through the interviews with family and friends.

Diane was obviously a powerful person who had a strong impact on those who knew her. Type A, good at a lot of things, filled with life, love & energy, controlling, the alpha, the "responsible" one.

My gut feeling is that this family, like many families, was no stranger to alcohol or pot. I know quite a few moms and dads who have a nightly drink and/or smoke pot after the kids are settled down. I feel that because of her and her husband's opposite work schedules, he had no idea that her regular pot/alcohol intake was as high as it probably was.

I think the confusion of her husband and her friends and other members of her family is very real. I'm not willing to call it denial because that always sounds so dismissive and arrogant when a stranger says it about a family dynamic they know very little about. Clearly, they are all still processing and grieving and doing the best they can. I doubt they will ever get all the answers they feel like they need.

Well, said (and point taken about the use of "denial," a word I may have used first)! As so often happens, I entirely agree with SCM.

 

[southcitymom]

I share your definition of the word "murder." But I understand why others would apply the word to such gross negligence as to consume so much alcohol/pot and then drive a car full of children.

This is one instance where I'm not inclined to argue semantics.

I hear you, but it's the mystery surrounding all of this that weighs me down in those semantics. I think she was in a full-blown blackout because I believe the tox report, but I still have so many questions about "how she got there." Still, gross negligence certainly applies.

 

[southcitymom]

I'm not authorized to respond for twinkiesmom, but she used the phrase "smoked all night." (Emphasis added.) I took that to mean smoking much later than 9 p.m. of the previous evening.

I just saw that, Nova - and you (and twinkie) are right, of course, that if she smoked all night and he knew she was impaired, he's got some real responsibility on his hands.

Still, the campground lady and the McDonald's employees said she seemed fine (not inebriated by substance) and they have nothing to lose by telling the truth. I don't think Diane was impaired when she left the campground, but she may have been hungover.

 

[Nova]

Good and valid point animlzrule. You are correct. Andrea Y is a completely different situation. I should know. I had a Mother very much like Andrea Y. Very mentally ill.

GI, I acknowledged your post yesterday, but today it occurs to me I should have said how sorry I am you had to deal with your mother's mental illness.

 

[Nova]

I just saw that, Nova - and you (and twinkie) are right, of course, that if she smoked all night and he knew she was impaired, he's got some real responsibility on his hands.

Still, the campground lady and the McDonald's employees said she seemed fine (not inebriated by substance) and they have nothing to lose by telling the truth. I don't think Diane was impaired when she left the campground, but she may have been hungover.

Are you sure they have no reason to lie? I'm not. (Again, I'm not a lawyer and I haven't researched New York torts.)

If the camp owner or McDonald's employees admitted they thought she was drunk, I think they and their companies would find themselves plaintiffs in everybody's lawsuits very quickly.

I also think if her drunkenness were obvious, somebody would have had the decency to call police and say they had a drunk woman in a car with five relatively small children. So I'm not saying those people ARE lying, just that in theory they could have cause.

But here's a thought: I wonder if service workers (such as the McDonald's employees) are slower to conclude somebody is drunk at 10 a.m. Is behavior that reads as drunkenness at 10 p.m. just chalked up to eccentricity in the morning, when fewer people are drinking?

 

[Nova]

I hear you, but it's the mystery surrounding all of this that weighs me down in those semantics. I think she was in a full-blown blackout because I believe the tox report, but I still have so many questions about "how she got there." Still, gross negligence certainly applies.

I do, too. At Diane's age, I did my share of drinking, often to excess (never driving, never when I was responsible for children). But 10 shots of vodka would have struck me as a lot, and I'm a much bigger person than she (though we might have been closer in weight at that age).

I think you're right that she had more than a little experience with alcohol. Still, I wonder how a person who obviously valued control above almost anything got to a point where she was willing to risk being so out of control.

For that reason, the abscessed tooth theory does make a certain sense to me. I've had a tooth that hurt so bad it was a good thing I don't own a gun.

***

ETA this is an unrelated topic, but I'm sure everyone is tired of seeing additional posts from me here.

SCM, when I lived in NYC, where the bars don't close until 4 a.m. I would on rare occasions drink until closing time and then get up and go to work by 9. Of course, I was still drunk, but because I had a couple of hours of sleep, I didn't think of myself as drunk. Same thing with pot. (I'm making it sound like I did a lot more alcohol and drugs than I did. As I used to say, "I only drank to excess.")

What time did Diane go to sleep the night before the crash? Did she have to wait until Daniel was asleep to self-medicate with pot and alcohol in order to sleep herself?

 

[twinkiesmom]

Those who do not have access to HBO may see "Something Is Wrong..." at www.LetMeSeeThis.ch .

This doesn't appear to be a functional website...just links to other sites? Did this work for you?

 

[twinkiesmom]

I'm not a lawyer either, but I'm sure you're right. A good plaintiff's attorney could certainly make a strong case for shared negligence if Daniel knew she was impaired.

But that's why I think he'd be quiet now if he had known that then. Of course, his "not knowing" may be due to his own cluelessness.

Not sure about that....his defense of Diane, perfect wife, seems self serving.

I don't think he CAN be quiet, though. He's lost his breadwinner and is in over his head with the media....and I don't think his mouthpiece gave him good legal advice in terms of maintaining public relations.

I think if this goes to court he will face a tough cross examination, just from the standpoint of playing clips from the film and making him look bad if not from his actions at the campground.

 

[southcitymom]

Are you sure they have no reason to lie? I'm not. (Again, I'm not a lawyer and I haven't researched New York torts.)

If the camp owner or McDonald's employees admitted they thought she was drunk, I think they and their companies would find themselves plaintiffs in everybody's lawsuits very quickly.

I also think if her drunkenness were obvious, somebody would have had the decency to call police and say they had a drunk woman in a car with five relatively small children. So I'm not saying those people ARE lying, just that in theory they could have cause.

But here's a thought: I wonder if service workers (such as the McDonald's employees) are slower to conclude somebody is drunk at 10 a.m. Is behavior that reads as drunkenness at 10 p.m. just chalked up to eccentricity in the morning, when fewer people are drinking?

Well, that's where I go with it, Nova - I don't believe that those people would have allowed a blasted woman to keep going with a van full of kids - that just doesn't pass my personal no-way test. But yes, I can assume their untruths or unsures for the sake of discussion.

I do believe that anyone would be less likely to assume inebriation at that hour with a mini-van of children. Still, if a person was off in the way that extreme drinking/smoking can make you off, I think someone would have noticed that enough to do something, say something.

 

[southcitymom]

I do, too. At Diane's age, I did my share of drinking, often to excess (never driving, never when I was responsible for children). But 10 shots of vodka would have struck me as a lot, and I'm a much bigger person than she (though we might have been closer in weight at that age).

I think you're right that she had more than a little experience with alcohol. Still, I wonder how a person who obviously valued control above almost anything got to a point where she was willing to risk being so out of control.

For that reason, the abscessed tooth theory does make a certain sense to me. I've had a tooth that hurt so bad it was a good thing I don't own a gun.

***

ETA this is an unrelated topic, but I'm sure everyone is tired of seeing additional posts from me here.

SCM, when I lived in NYC, where the bars don't close until 4 a.m. I would on rare occasions drink until closing time and then get up and go to work by 9. Of course, I was still drunk, but because I had a couple of hours of sleep, I didn't think of myself as drunk. Same thing with pot. (I'm making it sound like I did a lot more alcohol and drugs than I did. As I used to say, "I only drank to excess.")

What time did Diane go to sleep the night before the crash? Did she have to wait until Daniel was asleep to self-medicate with pot and alcohol in order to sleep herself?

BBM - this is the crux of the mystery to me, my friend.

As you know, I have real experience with drug and alcohol use and abuse - most when I was young and unencumbered, but also some as a wife and mother and "productive member of society."

I don't think it would have been hard for her to drink more vodka the night before - maybe they all had a drink and passed a joint while the kids were in bed. That's no sin, in my book. She could have certainly drank and/or smoked more than the others - I'm sure they wouldn't pay attention - out in the woods, relaxing, kids wound down.

She was probably a very controlled drinker - meaning it was easier for her to act fine than some.

Where it all breaks down for me is the next morning. I can see myself in her situation with a hangover and having to get packed, drive kids. If I am Diane, I know I have pot and some booze at my disposal and they would make me feel better, but I have kids to drive and I am "the responsible one." Maybe - if I really felt awful, I would smoke a little weed to take the edge off and my headache away. Not laudable, but I am just trying to think it out from that perspective.

Then, I'm stymied. I just can't make the leap from there to consuming 10 ounces of vodka and a bat hit or two of weed in the next 2 hours. That is clearly out of control behavior and she had no history of that.

There are times in my life that alcohol and weed have hit me too hard - harder than I expected or could handle. Rare times, but they have happened. So that could have happened to her too ....except for the fact that she had 10 ounces in her and alcohol in her stomach - I will posit a theory that she may have drank MUCH of that enormous amount of alcohol after she blacked out.

The whole thing really does confound me.