Elderly Driver Who Killed 10 Gets Probation
By LINDA DEUTSCH, AP
LOS ANGELES (Nov. 20) - An 89-year-old man whose car hurtled through a farmers market, killing 10 people, was let off on probation Monday by a judge who said he believed the defendant deserved to go prison but was too ill.
George Russell Weller was convicted Oct. 20 of 10 counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence in a case that renewed debate over whether elderly people should lose their driver's licenses.
Weller, confined to a sickbed, was not in court for his sentencing.
Superior Court Judge Michael Johnson said he agreed completely with the jury and called Weller's actions callous and showing "an enormous indifference to human life."
Weller was 86 when his 1992 Buick Le Sabre plowed at freeway speed into the crowded farmers market on July 16, 2003. In addition to the 10 killed, more than 70 people were injured.
Your thoughts on the sentencing of George Weller. Was it fair?
2006-11-20 10:25:10 · 11 answers · asked by marnefirstinfantry 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
A wise and experienced judge weighs both justice and circumstances. The purposes of imprisonment in this case would be to ensure the crime is not committed again (done, by virtue of his being too ill to drive ever again) and to ensure that he is made to pay a price for what he did (done, by probation).
If an 89-year-old man went outside with a shotgun and purposely murdered people, that would be different and I believe handled differently by a judge. This was, for the most part, an accident. I agree that there is no reason to spend taxpayer money to imprison a very ill man when he will surely never drive again and is experiencing punishment that probably goes beyond what prison could inflict upon him anyway.
2006-11-20 10:38:14 · answer #1 · answered by LisaT 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The sentencing of George Weller was appropriate.Mr Weller was an elderly driver suffering from aging process.As a person ages, they sometimes have vision problems, medical problems, difficulty judgment of distance,slower reaction times and sometimes confusion. that impair their ability to safely operate a motor vehicle,Mr Weller's actions were not intentional but the result of the aging process.Placing an elderly man in poor health would not serve any productive purpose.He would have special needs that the state could not provide .He would need to be housed in a special unit from the general population for his safety from other inmates.
The legislators should be considering mandates on the testing and competency of elder drivers.Mr Weller's family should have recognized the signs that he should not be driving a motor vehicle and intervened before this tragedy occurred.
2006-11-20 19:37:16 · answer #2 · answered by prettycoolchick38 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What was his reaction to his crashing into the farmer's market? I don't really know what to think, as it is a little cryptic, and almost lacking in detail. But I am taking care of/helping out someone myself, and I could see why they would put off his prison sentence. It is kind of hard to take care of a bed-ridden person in a prison. They do need a lot of attention, of course.
You can't extrapolate from this that we need to pull the driving license of every elderly people. If they meet the driving standards, then why should they be punished? If you are going to do that to older people, I think it makes more sense to pull the license of a lot of teenagers first. We could dig up story after story of under 21-year-olds getting into one sort of accident after another, and I should think that's more common than accidents caused by elderly people.
2006-11-20 12:35:36 · answer #3 · answered by Tet 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not at all!! If I did the same thing, they would throw me under the jail. Laws are Laws.... No exceptions. I don't care if he dies on the way to the prison, he should be sentenced to hard time. He killed 10 people and injured 70-something more. They ranged in age from 7 months to over 80. Sorry, but jail time is required...
2006-11-20 10:34:31 · answer #4 · answered by JS 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
As intention is the key element in any crime, and it doesn't appear that he had intent in this case, I would say that probation is fine. It was legal for him to drive. I don't know the specific details, but if he became unconscious or delusional, he did not intend to kill anyone. Maybe they need to tighten up the laws on the elderly driving.
2006-11-20 10:33:32 · answer #5 · answered by Lawgirl 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I say send him to jail. I also think it's time to have enforced driver license evaluations on the elderly - my grandfather was denied his license at the age of 80 as his eyesight was too poor, so I'm putting my money where my mouth is.
2006-11-23 11:13:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well i say if he is goingt o die soon anyway, then I really dont have a problem witht he sentencing, however, I do feel that we should mandatory physical driving tests every 5-10 years or so for EVERYONE
2006-11-20 10:27:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes probation was fair.
He is in bad health, and that would mean if he was put ito jail, all of hte medical expenses would have been passed on to the taxpayers.
why should we pay for his medical bills?
he is going to pay restitution, and that's what matters.
2006-11-20 10:33:43 · answer #8 · answered by arus.geo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, he refuses to admit responsibility, the old coot. He should have been sent to prison.
2006-11-20 10:33:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes the old man will be dead before to long and there is no need to waste tax dollars by incarcerating him
2006-11-20 10:28:36 · answer #10 · answered by TEXAS TREY 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋