[untrained skeptic]

Age is very much the issue. Younger drivers simply do not have the skills sets that an older driver generally has. That comes with experience.

What you are saying is generally true, but it's not relevant in determining who bears what responsibility for what happened.

Everyone driving a car has the same level of responsibility to operate it safely.

I may actually be an exception to the case where older drivers are generally more skilled drivers.

I started a job delivering pizzas at the age of 16.

By the time I turned 18 I was reasonably skilled in driving my car, and likely more skilled than I am now at least regarding driving on ice and snow.

I likely have better judgment now than I had then, but I was better skilled at driving my car then than I am now, because I was much more practiced at doing it.

I was also delivering pizza in a rural area and had lots of occasions where deer and dogs ran out on the road.

I managed to never hit either or run off the road trying to avoid either. I did get hit by a deer once.

I slowed to about 20 MPH when I saw it running along the side of the road. The deer turned and ran into the side of my car, bounced off and fell down.

It got back up slowly, looked around, and walked into the woods a bit unsteadily, but I think it was just stunned.

There as a small dent in the passenger door of the car, and a bit of a smear on the window.

You'll run into lots of surprises waiting for you on rural roads at night if you driver enough. I never ran saw any decoy deer on the road, but I encountered many things which I needed to respond in the same way I would have had to respond to decoy deer on the road by the time I turned 18.

[P-40]

What you are saying is generally true, but it's not relevant in determining who bears what responsibility for what happened.

Fortunately, the law does not generally work that way. It tends to incorporate reality and the reality is these kids caused an accident that almost killed someone and they are getting favorable treatment.

[RGSpincich]

http://www.limanews.com/story.php?IDnum=27320

My, my. Look what we have here.

"Prosecutors also have filed motions trying to keep records showing the level of marijuana in Roby’s system and his vehicle speed, along with Zachariah’s blood-alcohol level, from being admitted into evidence. But Rogers’ attorney, Maria Santo, of Lima, has filed a written argument saying the level of marijuana and speed of the car should be allowed into evidence. Other motorists driving within the speed limit and not under the influence of drugs or alcohol did not crash, she argued in court records. Traveling at a high rate of speed, 72 to 79 mph, while under the influence of drugs and alcohol must be considered when the case goes to trial, Santo argued."