8 Die in Crash on Taconic State Parkway #2

[Melanie]

Aren't you comparing apples and oranges, Mel? The perpetrator in the Taconic crash is dead; she can't do anything more to "take responsibility."

As for her husband, many may think he needs to wake up and accept who his wife really was, but I've seen no evidence that he was responsible for the crash.

Oh absolutely - there's nothing more she can do as she's dead. It's just incredibly sad that the husband is trying to shift the weight onto the BIL and the roads. IMHO the husband should say "hey, she messed up, this is horrible, let's work together to get through this".

I guess that would happen in my perfect world -- but I know it doesn't work that way

MOO

Mel

 

[tiredblondy]

I went back and read the first thread last night. I'm not sure that the husbands story hasn't changed somewhat, especially if you go back to his first statements about pot and social drinking he made before he got an attorney.

Also LE stated that the families of the driver and children killed weren't cooperating with the investigation. Wonder if this lawsuit against the owner of the van will encourage them to cooperate now.

I wonder if the fishing trip was to harvest pot or transport pot? Just an idea I've had since the beginning.

 

[Nova]

Hi Nova! I swear I'm not nit picking...

This quote is a year old, and Mr. Shuler's former attorney, Dominic Barbara, who made this statement, was suspended from practicing law in February 2011, for 18 months after the appellate court found him guilty of professional misconduct (not related to this case).

http://www.longislandpress.com/2011/02/11/noted-attorney-dominic-barbara-suspended/

I don't think that's nit-picking. Just one more odd fact in a very odd case.

Mr. Barbara was suspended for erroneous billing practices. So while it's fair to doubt his credibility, we don't know whether he would lie about something like where the proceeds from the film go.

I don't know what sort of insurance Daniel Schuler has, but I assume his son's medical bills have been significant.

Barbara may be lying, but I can certainly understand Schuler and his sister-in-law agreeing to do the film for (a) $100,000 in trust for the boy; and (b) the cost of exhuming Diane and performing another autopsy.

Per the film, the second half of that equation didn't happen because of legal restrictions.

I see that Daniel infuriates a number of people, but he's a working-class guy. Even if he switched to day hours, it's not as if he's going to suddenly make more money. Maybe his kid really needs that trust.

 

[Nova]

Oh absolutely - there's nothing more she can do as she's dead. It's just incredibly sad that the husband is trying to shift the weight onto the BIL and the roads. IMHO the husband should say "hey, she messed up, this is horrible, let's work together to get through this".

I guess that would happen in my perfect world -- but I know it doesn't work that way

MOO

Mel

I really think there's something else going on with these suits, which is why I wonder whether they are an attempt to get a court to order an exhumation and second autopsy.

I don't know what the suit alleges re the car or signage, but I'll be surprised if Schuler's lawyer can convince a jury to assign much blame to the automaker when the driver was that drunk. (And that's assuming a judge doesn't dismiss the whole thing before trial.)

Of course, even as I type this I remember working for the defense of giant auto companies and how much they paid out just to make lawsuits go away.

Nonetheless, I think it's possible that the real aim of these suits is neither money nor the shifting of most of the blame.

As for suing his in-laws, I think that's just a legal maneuver. They probably can't sue the automaker without suing the owner of the vehicle. But, no, I don't like it either.

 

[Nova]

If it were me (and thank you, God, that it was not), I might have been drinking already during the 12:08 conversation, just not to where someone could detect it in my voice on the phone. Then I'm drinking more over the next hour, and I'm really soused by then--noticeably, as in "there's something wrong with...." Then, with alcohol still in the stomach, I guess I wouldn't be quite as soused as I was about to be, when I drove the wrong way and got myself and all those other people killed. Yep, I'm pretty sure I could've downed 10 shots in that time, that way. (Wow, it's depressing to imagine this in such detail though. She was pouring it down herself. But then... I've done that, too, and I have the chipped teeth to prove it.)

While it takes a serious drinker to do that, I'm pretty sure I could've done it.

A belated thanks for your candor, tapu. (And the same to others who have shared their substance-abuse problems in this thread.)

One graphic in the film was revealing. "10 shots" sounds like a lot (and it is in terms of alcohol and its effect on one's ability to drive)!

But they showed a cutaway of a regular-size soda can with the equivalent of 10 shots in it and it wasn't even full. So in terms of total volume of liquid consumed in an hour (even accounting for o.j. as a mixer), it isn't hard to believe she drank that much.

 

[Nova]

I have a question re the 9-hour phone call. Does anyone know off the top of her head when it began and ended? (I don't need a link. Your best recall is good enough.)

I am wondering whether we should add "lack of sleep" to "alcohol" and "pot" as contributing factors in the crash.

 

[tamfish]

A belated thanks for your candor, tapu. (And the same to others who have shared their substance-abuse problems in this thread.)

One graphic in the film was revealing. "10 shots" sounds like a lot (and it is in terms of alcohol and its effect on one's ability to drive)!

But they showed a cutaway of a regular-size soda can with the equivalent of 10 shots in it and it wasn't even full. So in terms of total volume of liquid consumed in an hour (even accounting for o.j. as a mixer), it isn't hard to believe she drank that much.

I remember that. 1 ounce of liquid is not a lot -- about 1 swallow, actually, IMO. If Diane was sloshing a "swallow" of vodka in her mouth to dull the alleged tooth pain.... maybe she lost count and sloshed 10x? Maybe she didn't realize how much it really was until it hit her all at once (I've done that before myself, but at probably 4... )

BUT! That does not excuse her in any way because (a) she still smoked the pot on top of it and (b) when she called and was seemingly incoherent, she COULD HAVE STAYED ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD and waited for her brother or husband to come. She chose -- inebriated or not -- to get back in the van and drive.

Ugh.

I came across the official police report today and I think I probably read this a long time ago, but in reading it again, 2 things stood out to me:

From the police interviews with Daniel on 7/31/09:
"He stated that Friday evening after dinner he drank a couple of beers and his wife had 2 strawberry daquiris" and he stated that "she smoked marijuana once in a while to relieve the stress of work and the kids."

So there was alcohol at the campsite and they were drinking at some point. So much for "Diane didn't drink" and as for the pot... he knew she smoked.

Also in a 7/31/09 interview with "Joan Schuler" (Is that Jay?):
"Joan Schuler stated that her sister-in-law Diane smoked marijuana on a regular basis. She stated that Diane didn't believe in medicine and smoked marijuana to relax."

And that info came out on 7/31/09 .... so why all the insistence that she could not have been drunk and high? Reeeeaaallly?

(the above quotes taken from http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/policereport/schuler, diane_police_report.pdf)

 

[Nova]

Thanks for the research, tamfish.

In answer to your question, I think there are people who drink, but never do so to the point of being visibly impaired.

To someone who has never seen a loved one visibly drunk, the distance between 2 daiquiris in the evening and twice-the-legal-limit drunk and driving in the morning is quite far.

 

[RhythmicSun]

Does the free HBO last that long, or is that just how long the doc will be available?

(I'm not trying to be difficult and thanks for bringing the info here. I just haven't seen that sort of free offer last that long on Time Warner or Comcast.)

When I brought it up on screen, the blurb said it was available until 9/12. When I used to have Comcast, I would see the same type of message but I never tested it.

 

[ljwf22]

"Jackie Hance has filed for unspecified damages from the estate of Diane Schuler, describing in heartbreaking detail the 'terror and extreme horror' her little girls felt as they barrelled in the wrong direction down the Taconic Parkway in New York at up to 70mph.
It comes just days after Mrs Schuler's widower shocked even his own investigative team by announcing he was suing Mrs Hance's husband, Warren - because he owned the van his wife was driving."

Link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-sister-law-Diane-Schuler.html#ixzz1TLq18MrH

Link:http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMo...c-crash-sues-daniel-schuler/story?id=14169392
​

 

[southcitymom]

I'm going to have to watch this HBO show tomorrow night.

This case has stuck with me for a long time and I, like most of you, have any number of unanswered questions. It really is a sad, sad mystery.

 

[Fairy1]

I'm going to have to watch this HBO show tomorrow night.

This case has stuck with me for a long time and I, like most of you, have any number of unanswered questions. It really is a sad, sad mystery.

This is a deeply disturbing case on sooooo many levels. And it's frustrating because the woman responsible is gone and will never be able to answer the questions everyone wants answered.

As for Daniel......I just don't believe he has a clue how to survive without Diane. I think she was so in control of everything in their lives, he just doesn't know what to do without her. It's unfortunate that he was so clueless about his wife's habits/addictions, and equally unfortunate that he obviously hasn't gotten the help he needs to deal with the aftermath enough to step up and care for his son.

 

[zippitydoda]

Daniel's lies where:

1. His wife did not drink
2. His wife did not do drugs

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-11-07/news/17940211_1_diane-schuler-joan-schuler-state-police

3. He did not know where the bottle of vodka came from
- here he denies knowing where the bottle came from.

[video=youtube;6fFemRjBvW4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fFemRjBvW4[/video]


I can't find the larry king live video where he changes his story to - they had one bottle of vodka that lasted them 1 year, and they used it that camping weekend and she had two drinks.

 

[Nova]

When I brought it up on screen, the blurb said it was available until 9/12. When I used to have Comcast, I would see the same type of message but I never tested it.

I get similar messages, but it means that the film is on demand until that date, not that it is free until then.

Above, other people with your cable company report trying to access the film and getting a screen that says they have to order HBO.

So I don't know. Obviously my Time Warner cable provider isn't going to tell me.

 

[Nova]

Daniel's lies where:

1. His wife did not drink
2. His wife did not do drugs

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-11-07/news/17940211_1_diane-schuler-joan-schuler-state-police

3. He did not know where the bottle of vodka came from

‪Crash Mom "Not an Alcoholic"‬‏ - YouTube - here he denies knowing where the bottle came from.

I can't find the larry king live video where he changes his story to - they had one bottle of vodka that lasted them 1 year, and they used it that camping weekend and she had two drinks.

I don't have a link either, zippity, but he says something similar to your last paragraph in the documentary. So either he forgot about the vodka originally or he was trying to protect Diane's reputation.

 

[jjenny]

"Jackie Hance has filed for unspecified damages from the estate of Diane Schuler, describing in heartbreaking detail the 'terror and extreme horror' her little girls felt as they barrelled in the wrong direction down the Taconic Parkway in New York at up to 70mph.
It comes just days after Mrs Schuler's widower shocked even his own investigative team by announcing he was suing Mrs Hance's husband, Warren - because he owned the van his wife was driving."

Link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-sister-law-Diane-Schuler.html#ixzz1TLq18MrH

Link:http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMo...c-crash-sues-daniel-schuler/story?id=14169392
​

I can only imagine the shock when they found out Mr. Schuler decided to sue his brother in law because he was the owner of the van.

 

[Lady Justice]

I am sorry if these things were mentioned before, but there are many odd things about this case. For one, it is known that Diane smoked marijuana "occasionally". The husband and sister-in-law stated they knew she smoked pot to help her sleep.

Where did she get it from? If Daniel knew she was purchasing it, wouldn't he be worried about his wife buying pot off of a dealer and how dangerous that might be if she had to go to a bad neighborhood to get it? Maybe he was the one who was getting it for her? Wasn't he concerned about it?

Another thing I noticed while watching the documentary. I didn't hear him mention how much he missed or loved his daughter who died. It was all about Diane and how she left him all alone to take care of his son. He acted like he was mad at his wife for dying and leaving him with household tasks and raising his son.

Daniel is in so much denial. I know about being an enabler. I lived with an alcoholic and he was high functioning. No matter how much he drank the night before or how bad of a hangover he had, he was always ready to work and nobody at work had any idea he was an addict. He is a great father who would would give them the world. He was very secretive to those who knew him.

I have a feeling that Diane was a perfectionist who had a husband who was lazy and a was a slouch. She made way more money than him, took care of the kids, kept the house clean, paid all the bills and pandered to him while he sat on his butt. She was the mother and father of that house.

Deep down she probably was insecure and was afraid that if she divorced him she would not have an easy time trying to find someone else to love her. Also, since she made considerably more money than him, she would have to give him alimony and possibly half of everything if she left him. She was stuck. Being the type of person who was full of pride, to deal with the stresses she probably drank and smoked up when the kids were asleep. This probably went in secret when he was working the graveyard shift to deal with the pain. Instead of getting therapy her pride wouldn't let her tell another human being her true feelings which she seemed to have kept bottled up (no pun intended).

It sounds to me like this guy didn't give her a break or any support at all. This is probably why he is in denial right now. He must have lots of guilt and regrets for being so unsupportive. I also have a feeling he knows more than we do. Maybe he knew she was a drinker and an addict and let her do what she wanted. It was a fine life for him as long as she kept taking care of everything and he didn't have to lift a finger with the kids, paying the bills and caring for the house. He may have been an enabler.

Also, if he admitted he knew she was a drinker and an addict there would be more lawsuits against him and he would be culpable. He has to play the grieving widower who had a perfect wife to the public.

I feel so bad for his surviving son! In the documentary, it seemed he had barely any patience for the poor child. He even seemed like he didn't want to be bothered.

If she was a secret drinker, on the day of the accident she might have been craving booze and pot in the worst way. Think about it. She took care of 5 kids while her lazy husband probably didn't lift a finger. Her nerves were probably shot by then.

She had a long ride home plus she couldn't drink as much as she normally did when he was at work in front of him that weekend. When they got to McDonalds she probably purchased a big cup of Orange juice to mix the vodka in, and while the kids were in the Mc Donald's playground she probably smoked the pot behind the van while they weren't paying attention to her. Maybe she did it in the van with the windows rolled down and used air-freshener afterwards. The kids might have thought she was just smoking a cigarette. Maybe she had a big fight with him before she left the camp ground and flipped out and drank and smoked up to try to get her through the trip. Many alcoholics think they can handle their booze and she probably thought she would not get drunk.

Please don't think I condone what happened. I think what she did was horrendous!!! It is such a sad story for all involved.

All I can say is Daniel Schuler should leave the Hances alone. He is acting like a spoiled brat and is probably suing because he needs the money. In the documentary, it said that he only makes about $40,000 a year. I live on Long Island and even in the worst neighborhoods, average taxes on a house run around $10,000-$12,000 a year!! Just to live a half way decent existence on Long Island an average middle class working family needs to make at least $100,000 a year for a simple 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom house. I do not know how this man has not lost his house yet.

All I can say is I wish he would stop being defiant and finally admit his wife did the unthinkable. It is quite obvious she drank and did drugs that day.

 

[Fairy1]

I don't have a link either, zippity, but he says something similar to your last paragraph in the documentary. So either he forgot about the vodka originally or he was trying to protect Diane's reputation.

I assume he didn't know his wife was possibly/probably an alcoholic. That's not a stretch to believe and what happened that tragic day extends far beyond social/occasional drinking.

I know lots of folks who don't consider marijuana to be a "drug." But then again, he may have been attempting to protect her reputation.

As far as the "one bottle of vodka that lasted them a year" comment goes, perhaps she had been replenishing along the way and he truly didn't realize it wasn't the same bottle all that time?

I'm just not willing to hold this guy responsible for the decisions Diane made that day. And I can't vilify him for trying to protect her reputation; though I really don't think it ever crossed his mind that he would have to do so. It's also not a crime to be a dunce.

By ALL accounts, Diane was smart, responsible and capable. IMO, she never gave anyone close to her any reason to question that. She fooled them all and the result was devastating to so many.

 

[Nova]

I can only imagine the shock when they found out Mr. Schuler decided to sue his brother in law because he was the owner of the van.

Per the link, the court in which the Hance's are countersuing has a damage limit of $25K. That's only slightly more than small claims court. So perhaps this suit is largely symbolic, repayment for Dan Schuler's suit.

So the families are waging war in civil court. Nothing about this case gets any less heartbreaking.

 

[deelytful1]

Oh absolutely - there's nothing more she can do as she's dead. It's just incredibly sad that the husband is trying to shift the weight onto the BIL and the roads. IMHO the husband should say "hey, she messed up, this is horrible, let's work together to get through this".

I guess that would happen in my perfect world -- but I know it doesn't work that way

MOO

Mel

The only thing I can think of is that since he was married to her and had children with her, he feels like she was and extension of himself and her bad acts reflect poorly on who HE is and that's why he's been so defensive.
OR perhaps it's a simple as him feeling guilty. He might have known that for years she was driving his children around (and others) while she was high as the sky (MOO) and was never man enough to do or say anything.. hence in his own mind, denial is the only way he can rationalize the death of his child and 3 others. :twocents:
ETA: I should have said 6 others. I was only thinking of the children and didn't take into account the men in the other car.