I just don’t understand drinking and driving

it is as likely that there were dinosaurs in the ditch.

maybe he thought he hit a dinosaur with his bentley convertible...

Thay R very similar; u raise a good point.
Thay never really went extinct; just some of them.

I think that T-Rexes looked a lot like 2 legged alligators.





David

the best liars money can buy...

g'nite dave.

Goodnite, Rocky.

Don 't trip over any dinosaurs.

Goodman also claimed his cell phone wasn't working. He walked away from the crash scene. He first went to one location, a barn belonging to a friend, looking for a phone. No one was there, there was no phone, but there was a fully stocked bar in an office in the barn, so Goodman could have had access to alcohol there. He then went to the trailer of a young women who let him use her cell phone to call his girlfriend and she urged him to call 911, which he did, almost an hour after the accident.
He really wasn't looking for a cell phone to call for aid for the victim--he called his girlfriend first--he was frightened and knew he was in trouble and didn't know what to do. The defense may claim he had a head injury/concussion and was confused.

Even the rescue divers who showed up at the crash scene weren't immediately able to aid the victim--the car was upside down submerged in water which must have been very dark. They felt inside the vehicle but said they didn't feel any occupants. It wasn't until a tow began lifting the car out of the water that they saw an arm hanging out. So, the rescue divers were, I think, reprimanded for failing to adequately search inside the vehicle so the victim could have been removed sooner.

Had the victim been removed faster from the vehicle would it have been possible to rescusitate him? Possibly not, he had inhaled silt as well as water. But, that might be part of the trial--if the defense tries to use the delay caused by the rescue divers not realizing the victim was in the car. They are likely to challenge every element of this case. They will have a hard time showing that Goodman did not contribute to the death, although they seem to be planning to claim some type of "sudden acceleration" problem with the car.

The whole issue of leaving the scene/ failing to aid the victim should be interesting in this trial.

According to one witness who was in the bar with Goodman, she didn't want to leave with him because he had been drinking and he said he was on his way to get some cocaine. How they will try to estimate the amount of alcohol he consumed prior to the crash should be interesting--they would have to do the same in Swift's case as well.

Goodman is charged with both DUI manslaughter and Vehicular Homicide and failing to aid on both charges.

This case is more than a little reminiscent
of the misadventures of Ted Kennedy & Mary Jo Kopechne in 1969 (almost deja vu).


I was surprized, when that happened.

Not really. Both Ted and Mary Jo were in the same car, and that car landed in deeper water, and Ted waited until much later to turn himself in. But I think Kennedy claimed his injuries prevented him from doing anything until much later.

I just read more of the Goodman documents. The car that was flipped over and knocked into the canal wasn't in very deep water at all, the rear wheels were sticking up out of the water, but there was a lot of vegetation around the submerged car, and the car had no lights on. It was a fire rescue person who went into the water to try to feel around inside the vehicle with his arms and legs, but he just couldn't feel the victim inside the car, so they concluded they didn't need to do anything else because the vehicle appeared unoccupied and they called for a tow truck to just get it out of the water. As soon as the car was lifted up out of the water they saw the driver's body inside. The rescue effort wasn't terrific.

The investigator concluded that Goodman was speeding and went through a stop sign based on the damage to the cars and other elements at the scene. Goodman, like Swift, was unsure of what he hit. Because Goodman also left the scene, they have to prove he was driving. He admitted that, to several people, but, in addition, they matched his DNA to what was found on the deployed air bag in his car. Don't know how they might do it with Swift.
Goodman may have also told people, after the accident, that the other car didn't have its headlights on.

The basic elements of this case are very similar to Swift's.

Kennedy went for help a little further then a block and a half and if memory serve me correctly did not call at once either.

What difference does that make? You might just as well say that because Jack the Ripper was never caught we should let all murderers walk free.

He called the police the next day (while Mary Jo remained in her air pocket in his car),
after he spent the night on the fone with his political advisors
and with his attorneys.
When Ted checked into that hotel, he kept Mary Jo 's misfortune a secret,
while she suffocated in his car. Who thinks that water felt cold?


I was referring to the Goodman case,
because he abandoned his drowning victim
(not to imply that Mary Jo perished from drowning).
We don 't know how long Mary Jo lasted, in her air pocket,
while Ted was on the fone, for political advice.
Maybe if she had a cell fone in 1969, Ted 'd have called her
1ce in a while, to find out how well she was doing in her air pocket,
while he was on the fone with his advisors. U think ??
( "Hello, Mary Jo? This is Ted . . . Ted Kennedy, the Senator, yea.
How r u doing there, in your air pocket ? I 'll be sure to get some help
for u tomorrow, or the next day." ) Mary Jo was very pretty.

Anyway, Tom did not abandon any drowning victim,
nor suffocation victim, under any water.





David

Not at all...In one the allege pert alerted the state almost immediately the other waited a very long time...and one has the funds to enable him to defend himself against the state, the other does not.

If the states assertions are true then Swift is no where near as bad a guy. Becuase he does not have money he will almost certainly get a heavier penalty.

What on earth are you talking about?

For one thing, you don't know, for certain, that Swift ever called the police or whether they somehow tracked him down. The contention that he called the police was made by a poster in this thread--it may have been jcboy--the press reports said it was not made clear why the police arrived at Swift's home. But, even assuming he did call the police, you have no idea exactly when he called them--a half hour after the accident? An hour after the accident? Two hours after the accident? Three hours after the accident? You have no reason, at all, to believe that he called the police "immediately" after getting home.

Goodman did not wait "a very long time" to call the police--he called 911 about 54 minutes after his accident. He left the scene on foot and allegedly had been wandering around looking for a phone. When he found someone who let him use her cell phone, he first called his girlfriend, he told her to call his lawyer, and then he called 911 and told the police where to find him.

You don't know whether or not Swift can afford a trial--you know nothing about his assets or resources--nor do you know whether he'd even want to take his case to trial because that would also depend on how much reasonable doubt his defense attorney could raise regarding the charges against him in his particular case.

Goodman obviously has the funds to go to trial, but he's also taking an enormous risk in doing so. And we don't know whether the state even offered him the option of a plea.
While Goodman has a well known top-notch defense attorney, he's also up against an asst. D.A. with about 30 years of experience trying DUI cases, and she's familiar with all the strategies defense attorneys use to raise reasonable doubt, so it's likely to be an even match, and that's one reason it should be an interesting trial to watch. But, if Goodman's lawyer loses this case, Goodman's likely to get the maximum sentence of 30 years.

It's Goodman who is more likely to wind up with the heavier penalty, both because the outcome of a trial is always uncertain, but also because Goodman faces heavier charges--he's accused of Vehicular Homicide in addition to DUI Manslaughter, because they have charged him with reckless driving for speeding and going through a stop sign, in addition to DUI manslaughter.

The basic elements of the two cases are similar--in terms of what the state will have to prove.

Both Goodman and Swift were drinking in bars prior to their accidents. Both of them left the scene of the accident, so their BAC level was measured some time after the incident--and they could have consumed additional alcohol after the accident, which means the state has a greater burden of proof in trying to establish that they were DUI at the time of the accident.. And the way that the state will try to establish this will probably be similar in both cases.

Because neither of the two remained at the scene, the state must prove that they were both driving the cars that killed their victims--this is not taken for granted, the state must present some evidence of this. The state, in both cases, must prove their theory of how the accident occurred. Goodman's accident was apparently not witnessed, and we don't know whether Swift's was witnessed, both accidents took place at about the same time of day--after 1 am--when a lot of other cars and pedestrians aren't around. Neither Swift nor Goodman were really sure of what they had hit immediately after their accidents. The state has to hypothetically reconstruct the accidents and offer a theory of how they happened--and the defense can challenge that theory.

Both men are charged with failing to aid their victims. Well, what exactly did the state of Florida expect them to do for their victims? Did they expect Goodman to jump into the canal to pull his victim out of his submerged car? Did they expect Swift to try to stop his victim's possible bleeding? Or did they simply require a 911 phone call to be made--something that both of them eventually did. Does the state have a time frame for making that call? By watching Goodman's trial we are likely to find out just how "failing to aid" is defined in Florida, and that should be illuminating regarding the discussion in this thread.

The state of Florida, in both cases, will have to prove that both of these men caused, or contributed, to the death of their victims while driving DUI, that both left the scene, and that both failed to give aid--and that's where both cases are similar, and, by following Goodman's case, we will get a pretty good idea of how the state goes about proving these things and what sort of evidence and expert testimony they rely on to do that. We can also see, from Goodman's trial, how a defense attorney tries to counter these charges and raise reasonable doubt. Even in trying to work out a plea deal, which might be going on in Swift's case, his defense attorney would still be doing those very same things--that's how you get the best plea deal for your client. And, if Swift is moving toward a trial, it's unlikely to happen for a couple of years, because that's apparently how long these things take in Florida, and Goodman's case will give us some idea of what's likely to go on at that trial.

So, I thought that you, in particular, would be interested in the Goodman case because you have complained about not having the results of investigations in Swift's case--and you seem to feel there was no real investigation done, when police procedures, in fact, dictate an investigation to back up every element of the charges. In Goodman's case, because of the public interest in the case, we can look at most of those documents because they've been posted online--that's the state's evidence to justify the charges, and the state has done the same in Swift's case. By looking at the documents, and witness statements, in Goodman's case, you'll get a pretty good idea of how they put together the evidence against Swift.

But, if you fail to see the similarities in both cases, or you're uninterested in how the state of Florida actually goes about prosecuting DUI manslaughter/leaving the scene cases, feel free to ignore whatever I post about the Goodman case and his trial.

Its hard to believe that he 'd rather see a man killed than be proven rong.

Surely Bill is a better man than that.





David

I'm afraid I've not seen any evidence of Bills benevolence whatsoever.

Thank u for that information.
I had not been aware of that revulsion.
Maybe it is possible that u coud be right.

I agree that it may be unwise,
and I have (unsuccessfully) argued
with at least 1 drunk not to drive, tho devoid of emotion.

She proved me rong by getting home uneventfully.





David

Most of the time they do, that doesn't mean they're not taking a terrible risk.

Yes.

OK. Maybe we can convince him to show more evidence LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, STOPPING
HIS PUTTING ALL THOSE GRAMMATICAL MISTAKES INTO HIS POSTS.

Bill, don 't u grow weary, after all these years,
of inserting all those mistakes into your posts????????
It seems like a lot of unnecessary work to do that.





David

I was the one who posted this was Thom's second DUI, the first one wasn't in Florida, not sure if that makes a difference.

He's expecting to do time, and for the record the DA has not dropped the leaving the scene charge.

I must admit, as many in the local community , have lurked here for awhile reading much of the posts related to this tragedy. While I will refrain from posting too much opinion I will continue to appreciate the thoughts of most here who can appreciate some intelligent discourse (pro/con). I did however feel it necessary to chime in on the particular user BeachBoy who seems to post gossip, hearsay, or untruths. BeachBoy....where is your documentation that this was not Mr. Swift's 1st DUI? You also mentioned you spoke with Mr. Swift in Tampa last week, where would that have been since my understanding is he has not discussed the issue with anyone and has not appeared in any social situations since the incident occurred? Lastly, and least importantly, I am sure this would take a toll on any person that would be involved in this type of calamity, but being a person in the Tpa/St.P social arena it has appeared Mr. Swift has always been approximately 150 lbs and on the thin side. BeachBoy- your posts really seem to lack credibility.