Truck driver in yesterday's accident was drunk

Can you believe this crap? http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=8225940

 

Not defending him at all but the article doesn't say he was drunk. It says impared. There are lots of reasons to be impared.

 

That's true. It could have been drugs. Either way, he was impared and should not have been driving.

 

Actually,
"Ronald Eugene Graybeal, 50, of Newport, Tennessee is charged with one count of felony death by vehicle, two counts of misdemeanor death by vehicle, DWI, and possession of methadone, marijuana, and drug paraphernalia." REALLY???

 

I was just coming to post that. They updated it since my first post.

So sad for those families. May God be with them.

 

My mother was a recruiter for a large trucking company with strict hiring policies. She had difficulty at times finding clean drivers to fill open positions. You would be AMAZED at the number of felons driving trucks. A lot of them are certainly trustworthy, good folks. However, there are enough who aren't to scare you.

 

oh, this was the 40 crash. haven't caught up on the details of the 85 crash yet, but that was several big rigs, too. yesterday may have been the fieriest, deadliest on triangle roadways in a single day ever. at one point in the afternoon, 85, 40, and the beltline were all blocked due to crashes with burning vehicles.

honestly, the best part of working Traffic is being secured away from it during rush times...

 

It is interesting that a named witness in the N&O article this morning says that the Ford F-250 hit the back of the Chevrolet Equinox and then the Ford slid sideways into the path of the semi. If so, then how did the driver of the semi cause this? Is the witness wrong or has there been more info?

 

You don't happen to have a link to that article, do you? The article that's online now in the N&O doesn't say that at all.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/07/01/1314554/trucker-faces-dwi-charge-after.html

 

I don't have a link to it at the moment, but I read the same thing this morning and in fact posted a link to it on FB. I took it down when they charged him with DUI.

I think DH might be right, the "4-wheelers" probably contributed to the accident and the trucker probably couldn't have done a thing whether he was sober or not.

 

well, whether he caused it or not - at least now (hopefully) we have one less 'impaired' driver on the road. :evil:

 

Amen to that. Doesn't really matter if it was alcohol or drugs . . . point is he caused the death of 3 innocent people.

 

Apparently he wasn't the root cause, his death charges based on eye witness will be dropped in court, the others will stand. If he didn't cause the wreck he shouldn't be charged for it regardless what he had in his system.

If someone who was drunk was driving down say capital blvd and another car was going to fast and ran a red light and smashed into the drunk and died who would you blame for that death??
It seems to me this eye witness had a pretty solid view of who caused the accident, I certainly don't condone driving impaired and he should be charged accordingly, but I feel the Highway patrol went to far trying to pin these deaths on this man and its not right based on eye witnesses.

 

"but I feel the Highway patrol went to far trying to pin these deaths on this man and its not right based on eye witnesses."

Ahh, the Highway Patrol. We can't question their judgement, can we? Nuff said.

 

Sure can, that has been proven much lately.

 

Thank you, I was thinking the same thing, even looked at the pics and couldn't figure out how the semi caused it. The Ford was competely in front of it sideways.... Semi's can't stop on a dime like a car can, we need to give them room!!!!

 

I totally agree with that. I was basing my statement on what I read on WRAL that said he was the cause of the accident. If he didn't cause it then I agree he should not be charged with death by motor vehicle. I do think he should still be charged with a DWI if he did in fact have methadone and pot in his system.

 

I know there are a lot of what ifs, but I think the biggest problem is he was DWI. The fact is, if he was responsible and refrained from driving while impared those 3 drivers wouldn't be dead right now. Maybe the 3 would have still been involved in an accident but not being mowed down by a tractor trailer certainly would have increased their chances of survival. It's this reason I feel he SHOULD be charged for death by motor vehicle. He should not have been driving in his condition. If his system was clean then he would have something to argue with.

I also know if you hit the back of another persons car you're at automatically fault. No exceptions. The police will just say you had an unsafe driving distance. (I don't like this rule)

 

a person shouldn't be charged for something they didn't cause. No its not an automatic charge if you hit someone from behind, there are cases of people pulling out in front of others causing a accident, also trucker didn't hit pick up from behind, it was a t bone due to pu losing control. The trucker should be charged and not allowed to drive again, the dude is a disgrace to mankind based on his history but that doesn't make it right to pin death charges on him.

 

:iagree: I'm hearing reports that he did NOT cause the accident. Guess we'll know when the HP finishes analyzing the reconstruction of the accident.