SD - Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg, involved in fatal hit and run, Sioux Falls, 12 Sept 2020

Discussion in 'Crimes in the News' started by dixiegirl1035, Sep 17, 2020.

  1. Sparko

    Sparko Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    327
    Trophy Points:
    53
    This is likely the case. He got as far away from the victim as he felt he could. Ironically this brought him nearer to Boever's disabled truck which he mentioned in his deposition.
     


  2. nells

    nells Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    93
  3. Sparko

    Sparko Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    327
    Trophy Points:
    53
    worm, misgrn, al66pine and 3 others like this.
  4. al66pine

    al66pine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,417
    Likes Received:
    16,471
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mr Boever's Clothing?
    Sorry if I've missed it, but has anyone seen reports of what Mr B. was wearing?

    Dark colored clothes? Light colored clothes?
    With or without reflective stripes, markings, the kind advertised for night joggers & bicyclists?
    Some reflective markings are very hard to miss in the dark.
    Just wondering.
     
    alexwood and worm like this.
  5. nells

    nells Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    93
    This is the weird thing. When law enforcement found the body, he was not wearing a shirt -- his white skin contrasted with the green/brown of the grass. But in the interview with the police the AG describes his shirt as a "dark shirt... we didn't look at him real close either" (around 1:29:00). I mean... wouldn't that be enough to arrest him? :(:


    (Side note: It really annoys me how the police block the AG's face)
     
    Laughing, momsof3, alexwood and 6 others like this.
  6. al66pine

    al66pine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,417
    Likes Received:
    16,471
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Authorities, Not Charge Felony? (edited title)
    @JerseyGirl. sbm Thx for your post w link saying investigation did not find evd for felony charges - vehicular homicide or manslaughter.* I see the difficulty/impossibility(?) proving VehHomicide** w no LE field sobriety tests, no breathalyzer, no timely blood tests. SD's statute for VH requires drug or alcohol influenced driver.

    But why not Manslaughter in Second Degree (aka InvolHomicide)? where "the act was carried out recklessly and resulted in another person's death... a reckless act where the person knew or should have known that the action would likely cause harm." ** bbm
    Per link authorities
    1. found Ravnsborg drove outside his lane pre-crash (but not why or how long)
    2. could not determine if he knew he was outside it.

    Is driving outside lane, in and of itself, a reckless act? If driver did not know he was driving outside his lane, suggests imo he was driving recklessly. my2ct
    _____________________________________
    * "Beadle County State's Attorney Michael Moore, who assisted with the investigation, said
    investigators weren't able to determine why or how long Ravnsborg had been driving outside of his lane leading up to the crash or whether he had been aware he was outside of it...

    prosecutors didn't find evidence to warrant felony charges of vehicular homicide or manslaughter..." From Widow of man killed in South Dakota AG crash plans to sue
    ** VH. South Dakota Legislature
    *** Manslaughter in second degree = Class 4 felony, up to 10 yr prison, up to $ 20,000 fine, per South Dakota Involuntary Manslaughter Law - FindLaw.com or South Dakota Legislature
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2021
    Laughing, MoeInVA, alexwood and 7 others like this.
  7. nells

    nells Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    93
    After viewing both videos a few times, I have to point out how I think the interviewers are complicit in a way: these are investigators who have been in that room tens, if not hundreds, of time. They’ve probably looked at videos made in that room fairly often. The 1st video has one interviewer in the corner so that the AG’s face and body language are fully visible.

    In the 2nd video, however, the interviewer for some reason has moved his chair to the precise spot that would block a viewer from seeing the AG’s face and body. Usually the furniture in interrogation rooms do not change or move, precisely so that the body language of the person being interviewed can be viewed.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 25, 2021
    Laughing, momsof3, misgrn and 8 others like this.
  8. worm

    worm Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    747
    Likes Received:
    5,027
    Trophy Points:
    93
    From what I’ve seen of the interview, and heard of the 911 call, is bad. Just awful. Repeating the 911 operators name, saying he was the AG. It all seems like a BS show to me.
     
  9. kaen

    kaen Trying to be a good human.

    Messages:
    5,455
    Likes Received:
    31,770
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Laughing, momsof3, misgrn and 8 others like this.
  10. Betty P

    Betty P Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,039
    Likes Received:
    52,231
    Trophy Points:
    113
    From the victim's cousin

    I have so many questions that will never be answered. I suspect Ravnsborg saw Boever in the moment prior to the crash and began applying his brakes before the impact. Based on the angle of the tire skid marks, I think Ravnsborg was traveling on the shoulder for well over 200 feet before the crash.

    On U.S. Highway 14 in that area, there are rumble strips on the edge of the traffic lane to warn drivers they are drifting onto the shoulder. Sovell stated today that there was no way Ravnsborg could have known he was drifting onto the shoulder of the road. I contend these rumble strips would have alerted him.

    BBM
    Rumble strips are pretty loud when you drive over them, at least they are in my state.
     
    Laughing, misgrn, MoeInVA and 5 others like this.
  11. worm

    worm Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    747
    Likes Received:
    5,027
    Trophy Points:
    93
    misgrn, alexwood, al66pine and 2 others like this.
  12. nells

    nells Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Why are 73 seconds redacted from the video at 1:52:11, this is near the end of the second video.
     
    Laughing, misgrn, alexwood and 3 others like this.
  13. JerseyGirl

    JerseyGirl Forum Coordinator Staff Member Forum Coordinators

    Messages:
    43,934
    Likes Received:
    122,325
    Trophy Points:
    113
  14. Betty P

    Betty P Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,039
    Likes Received:
    52,231
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They were questioning him about putting his phone down and not having distractions, then it skips to them having a search warrant for his car. After the redacted part, they mention if he was texting, their SW evidence will show it.

    Just a guess, but maybe he said something to incriminate himself in that redacted part. Something related to him texting?
     
    Laughing, momsof3, misgrn and 4 others like this.
  15. nells

    nells Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I think they have some evidence that he may have forwarded the news article he was looking at. If it incriminates him, why cut that out of the video? Or, perhaps I just answered my own question.

    I really hope someone at the federal level takes a look at this. There are so many issues with the people investigating it at the local, county, and state (multi-state since it includes N. Dakota!) levels.
     
    momsof3, misgrn, MoeInVA and 4 others like this.
  16. worm

    worm Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    747
    Likes Received:
    5,027
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I watched most of the interview video this time and wow. As I stated before, it’s bad. LE offers him a cushion with their suggestion that “if he doesn’t remember, just say so”. He keeps repeating “I didn’t see him” almost to reaffirm that point to himself. And did anybody notice how he emphasized how “surprised” the sheriff was to hear of a body? And offered the witness, Tim, to confirm his own surprise and shock. Those cops aren’t buying his not seeing that flashlight either. I think there will be more fallout from this and he is done as AG.
     
    momsof3, misgrn, JerseyGirl and 4 others like this.
  17. worm

    worm Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    747
    Likes Received:
    5,027
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Isn’t someone freely admitting that they “glance at the headlines” while driving the same as admitting to internet surfing while driving?
     
    tesni, Laughing, momsof3 and 6 others like this.
  18. Betty P

    Betty P Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,039
    Likes Received:
    52,231
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My #1 rule, I never look at my phone or text while driving. If I think someone important sent me a text while I'm driving, I pull over into a parking lot or something to read it. Only takes less than a minute to pull over and stop, then get back on the road.

    That said, I've driven past cars on the highway where I can see the driver is watching a movie or tv from a screen mounted on his dash. On a crowded multilane interstate highway in the middle of 70mph traffic in a major metro area. Crazy dumb. I'm always tempted to honk my horn really loud when I see a driver doing that, but figure it would make them lose control of the car.
     
    Laughing, momsof3, misgrn and 3 others like this.
  19. alexwood

    alexwood Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,293
    Likes Received:
    9,031
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He's charged with an illegal lane change, among other violations. When is the shoulder considered to be a "lane" that you would have the option to change to while driving? He had the whole damned highway to himself that night. (I'm sure it's in the statute language, somewhere, where he was within his rights to drive on the shoulder. The only "mistake" he made was failing to look first, where he would have seen that a man was already there and in his path.) He didn't even know what lane he was driving in (IMO).

    I know, I know, you can drive on the shoulder when necessary. But in his case, he was drifting across the lanes, not looking to "change lanes". When he ran out of highway lanes, he further drifted onto the shoulder. He was driving in a reckless manner -- not "carelessly". (IMO.)

    He says he was not drinking alcohol that night. Why should we believe him? He's lied about everything else.

    Get rid of him. [Rant over.]
     
  20. alexwood

    alexwood Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,293
    Likes Received:
    9,031
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He seems quite jovial and carefree while being questioned. You'd never know that this man had mowed down a pedestrian and killed him.
     

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice