Skip to comments.Woman, 25, faces life in prison for stopping on highway ti rescue ducklings and causing crash that..
Posted on 06/21/2014 7:23:03 AM PDT by BenLurkin
A woman who parked her car on a highway to rescue ducklings has been found guilty of causing the deaths of a motorcyclist and his daughter who slammed into her vehicle.
Emma Czornobaj was convicted by a jury on Friday on two counts of criminal negligence causing death, a charge that carries a maximum life sentence, and two counts of dangerous driving causing death, which comes with a maximum of 14 years in jail.
The 25-year-old was charged in the deaths of Andre Roy, 50, and his daughter Jessie, 16.
Czornobaj, a self-professed animal lover, told the court that she did not see the ducklings' mother anywhere and planned to capture them and take them home.
Her lawyer Marc Labelle said his client was stunned by the jury's decision. He said he may appeal.
'So now we are at the sentencing stage in this case. The question we have to ask is that considering the nature of the facts, it is rare that we have criminal negligence where there are no bad elements,' Labelle said.
'This was not a race. This was not a person who took a chance and drove drunk. This is not about someone who was speeding and took a risky maneuver.'
During the trial, witness Martine Tessier testified that she noticed parked car didn't have its hazards on and that the driver's door was open.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
They were ducks for Goodness sake. Are they worth two human lives? What an idiot to stop in the highway to “save” them.
She was driving a dark car and she did not have her hazards on. She was a menace on the roads.
I don’t know if she deserves life, because she didn’t do this deliberately, but it was certainly foreseeable that this was a disaster waiting to happen.
Nope, all white, all Quebecers
well I am an idiot
anyway, what about the duty of the guy on the motorcycle to look at what is ahead of him
I disagree. How was she to know two people on a motorcycle would be such careless drivers that they could not swerve to miss the car. What if the car had been disabled?
Life is a little stiff; 50 years is more reasonable. The current cult of animals is dangerous.
I will bet you that this”Animal Lover”is ALL for”Abortion-on-Demand”????????????????
You mean a car stopped on the highway with no lights or hazards?
If this were a civil suit in California — then the jury would weigh the comparative negligence of the actors in assessing percentages of liability.
But since this is a criminal case, the only question before the jury was whether her having come to a complete stop in the number one lane - for a ridiculous reason —was a criminally negligent act.
IMO, it definitely was.
Maybe I’m crazy, but I would not have convicted her.
I’m certainly no bleeding heart liberal... maybe I’m just a sucker for a girl with a heart bigger than her brain.
I see cars broken down on the highway with no lights and no hazards, cops pulled over with a vehicle whose owner they are ticketing with lights, all sorts of differing scenarios. You are supposed to be riding your motor sickle on the road not on the shoulder and you are supposed to look where you are going
This was about someone who caused the death of another motorist through stupidity. I'd likely have tried to help those ducklings myself, but stopping in the middle of the interstate with no emergency flashers, no nothing was very negligent.
Here’s a pic of the perp: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/06/21/article-2663995-1EF79A7900000578-162_306x357.jpg
Moron doesn’t stop on the highway without lights flashers or flares and 2 people don’t die.
End of story.
Maybe not life but certainly deserves a stiff penalty.
except she didn’t stop “in the middle” the photo shows whe was on the shoulder
She stopped IN THE TRAFFIC LANES. Not a breakdown. Just a stupid decision. She should be punished for it. Maybe not life but a stiff sentence.
Everyone’s at fault here. She had no business stopping on the road for a non-emergency - without her flashers, yet.
However, cars stop for all kinds of reasons on roads. They break down. There are accidents. Sometimes there’s a deer in the road, debris. I know someone who totaled a car by hitting a flat rock the size of a grapefruit. You can’t just blithely drive into oblivion.
why does the photos of her car show it on the shoulder then
The photo I see shows a vehicle next to the center barrier, 2/3 blocking the far left lane of the highway. The “shoulder” or emergency lane is on the far right.
There was a small shoulder... http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/06/21/article-2663995-1EFB8EF500000578-214_634x423.jpg ...not enough for her to pull off the road to chase ducks.
But you’re making an excellent point about something that will probably pertain to a civil case. BOTH sides might try suing the taxpayers who own the road, claiming that it had “inadequate shoulders”
Agree. I’ve always held the notion that if the front of your car (or motorcycle) hits something/anything, then that’s on you.
No, she faces life imprisonment for causing the deaths of two people. If she doesn’t have the intelligence not to stop her car on a highway, maybe prison is the safest place for her.
There is no “shoulder” on the far left lane. Never have I seen one in the US or Canada. Other countries often don’t have an emergency lane at all, on any side.
Look closely . She’s in the left traffic lane. The shoulder is about 2 feet wide in the photo.
Really, that simple ?
So if someone blows though a stop sign and the front of your car hits them it’s your fault for what, not being psychic?
8 foot and wider shoulders adjacent to the number one lane are very common on California freeways.
In fact I think current design standards require them.
Do we know if the car was moved following the collision but before this photo was taken?
There was not enough shoulder for her to safely have her vehicle out of the travel lanes, especially the passing lane. The situation she created was hazardous and you are required to have emergency flashers operating when stopped.
Since this was at night, she needed to consider that her dark vehicle could not be seen by vehicles operating at speed.
I am curious about a couple of things:
-How did she see ducklings at night traveling as fast as traffic was?
-Witnesses say that the drivers door was open. The photo show the drivers side entirely against the Jersey barrier, how could it have been open or did the impact move the car?
Completely different scenario. My version is w/ all traffic going the same direction. Stopping distance is the term that comes to mind.
It’s called The Law Of Unintended Consequences. This woman has been conditioned by her society to save baby ducks. I’m sure she thought she was performing a caring and thoughtful act by rescuing ducklings. The problem is that she obeyed her conditioning instead of thinking. No rational person parks in the left lane of a freeway at night while their car still works. It’s not something other motorists would expect or prepare for. She could have pulled her car off to the right hand shoulder of the road and put on her flashers. Then, she could have run out onto the freeway to rescue the ducklings and been hit and killed by a semi.
This whole story is just a small example of what happens with liberals every day.
“Gosh, I’m sorry my actions caused those people to needlessly die, but I felt like I was doing something really good and important.”
I think the blue paint on the pavement shows the rear of the car at impact.
It’s a potential crime scene. Nobody moves the vehicles till the investigation is done.
It’s getting to the point where every accident is a crime. On the other hand, it’s getting to the point where animals are valued over humans.
Both sides are evil.
what is the guy doing out riding with his kid on the back and not watching where he was going at night
There’s a picture of one at this link http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/geometric/pubs/mitigationstrategies/chapter3/3_shoulderwidth.htm
See also Table 302.1 Mandatory Standards for Paved Shoulder Widths on Highways in the Caltrans Design Manual http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/hdm/pdf/english/chp0300.pdf
I suspect that the shoulder width as this location met Quebec’s design standards at the time of construction, and may still today. But plaintiff lawyers are greedy and unconscionable. They will hire “experts” to convince the jury that somehow the road is defective — no matter what the truth is.
Have you ever run up on a vehicle at highway speed in the dark that had no lights on? You have to SEE IT to know to stop. This idiot didn’t even think to leave her lights on or turn her flashers on.
Now having read that article again to clarify some points lets see if I have this straight.
This woman stops in the left hand lane to help some ducks and doesn’t put her emergency lights on, now I take this was during the daylight hours.
Next, if I got this right, she was out of the car helping the ducks.
So that car was at a full stop and had been for several minutes which means that the people on the motorcycle had plenty of time to react to that and slow down.
The question is why didn’t the people on that motorcycle slow down and just how fast were they going?
I am not excusing her fault in this mess but if that guy had been more diligent that accident could have been avoided.
I have heard this happens more often than people care to think about.
Look. Her car has massive mechanical and electric failure, she can’t put on lights or get out of traffic. Not a crime. Accident.
She INTENTIONALLY stops in a high speed lane DOESNT PUT ON LIGHTS, NOT AN ACCIDENT. get it?
That has absolutely nothing to do with this and just because that woman wanted to help those ducks you are making a quantum leap in logic and thinking that does not apply.
Wonder what that makes me, I have stopped before to help a turtle across the road.
from the looks of the car, the bike hit it sideways as if the biker was trying to lay it down.
Well I now see from the pictures that this happened at night so that does change things some but even so she must have had her lights on. So surely if the people on that motorcycle had been paying attention you would think they would have slowed down and changed lanes.
How fast was that motorcycle going, looks like a good clip from the picture of that car.
I’m guessing the car was moved to the left for safety once investigators got there. The driver’s door could not have been open in the picture shown.
There are plenty of likely, valid reasons why the motorcyclist may not have seen the car until it was too late, so I don’t think one can automatically conclude that he wasn’t paying attention. The stopped car was dark, with no lights on, at night, so the only way that’s going to be noticed in time is if the driver is looking directly ahead 100% of the time, and no one drives that way.
So he may have been looking at a street sign, or checking a rearview mirror or a gas meter, or he may have been behind a ace that waited until the last minute to chance lanes. But the mere fact that he struck a dark car illegally stopped in the left lane does not mean he wasn’t paying attention.
Typo - meant to say behind a car (not behind a ace)