Texting while driving

Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum

Help Support Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

bobg3723

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Messages
134
Reaction score
3
Location
Minneapolis, MN
Felony charge in texting case

A driver accused of text-messaging before a head-on crash has authorities and citizens alike sounding the alarm.

by Abby Simons, the Star Tribune

In one of the most serious cases of it's kind in Hennepin County, an Eden Prairie woman faces a litany of charges from a head-on collision with a motorcyclist that occurred as she allegedly texted while driving.

Amanda Elizabeth Manzanares, 20, was charged this week with a felony criminal vehicular operation and two counts of child endangerment in the Oct. 7 crash that critically injured Barry Lawrence, 65, of Minnetonka. Manzanares and her two daughters, ages 1 and 3, were unhurt.

 

Lawrence, who has had three surgeries and continues to receive medical treatment, later told police that Manzanares "never looked up" as her vehicle came at him on Excelsior Boulevard, despite his efforts to get out of the way and yell to get her attention. Manzanares told police she was not texting or talking on her phone while driving.

 

At a news conference Tuesday, Minnesotans for Safe Driving founder Jon Cummings held up his cell phone and said: "They're like any other tool; it can save your life or it can kill you."

 

Although citations for texting while driving are not uncommon, this is the most serious set of charges filed in Hennepin County since state law banned the practice in 2008, said Santo Cruz, a spokesman with the Hennepin County attorney's office.

 

It's not the first case of its kind. Serious injuries and deaths statewide are linked to distracted driving each year -- although authorities say those involving texting are seriously under-reported.

 

According to the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Department of Public Safety, driver inattention and distraction killed 58 people and injured 8,354 in 2009, accounting for 9 percent of fatalities and nearly a fifth of injury crashes. Data on crashes involving cellphone use is unavailable, however, partly because it's difficult to prove, Cummings said.

 

"We've had a few in the past, but what we're concerned about is the increased numbers we're seeing." said Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman, who was at Tuesday's news conference in Minneapolis.

 

On Wednesday morning, the Department of Public Safety will hold a news conference at East Ridge High School in Woodbury to announce a statewide enforcement and education campaign against distracted driving.

 

In March of last year, Jessica Howe of Minneapolis allegedly was reaching for a ringing cellphone when her car rear-ended a vehicle in Columbia Heights, causing a chain reaction crash that killed a 14-month-old boy. She was charged with criminal vehicular homicide.

 

Manzanares also faces charges of driving without a license, driving without insurance and texting while driving, all misdemeanors. She was not jailed and no court date has been set. Efforts to reach her Tuesday were unsuccessful.

Record of texts before crash

In the October crash, police were called to the scene at 8:03 a.m. They seized Manzanares' phone, and a forensic examiner found that she had received and sent several texts in a 19 minute period ending at 7:58 a.m., according to charges. The examination also indicated that she made calls from the phone at 8:02 and 8:04 a.m., the charges said.

 

Lawrence told investigators that he was headed east on Excelsior and saw a westbound vehicle cross into his lane. That driver's head was down, he said. and he could only see the top of it. Lawrence's injuries included a collapsed lung, broken ribs and severe tendon damage to his foot, and he has incurred more than $300,000 in medical bills. Manzanares told police she was not texting or using her cellphone. She said that she heard the phone vibrate, indicating that she had received a text, but that the phone was on the floor and she did not try to reach for it.

 

According to the charges, Manzanares told police she didn't remember what happened and acknowledged that she lacked a valid driver's license but was driving her mother's car with a learner's permit. She acknowledged that she knew the car was not insured and that she was driving illegally, but later claimed that she "blacked out" and didn't remember the accident. There were no alcohol or drugs in her system, according to a police report.

 

An examination of Manzanares' phone reflected a seemingly mundane exchange with two friends that morning.

 

"Hey im running a little behind" she wrote one, adding that she would swing by after dropping her daughters off at day care. When he offered to postpone their plans, she took him up on it.

 

Another friend messaged with an apology, blaming pneumonia for a lack of contact.

 

"Ouch that's always a bad thing to get" Manzanares responded.

 

At 7:58, Manzanares' friend texted again, the report said.

 

"Obviously, she was reaching down for the cellphone that was vibrating at the time of the accident and came right up onto the curb," County Attorney Freeman said Tuesday.

 

Although a conviction on the criminal vehicular operation charge calls for probation, Freeman said his office would seek time in the Hennepin County workhouse if she is convicted.

 

According to Cummings, what she would have to live with if convicted transcends a jail sentence.

 

"These people that kill people or cripple them, they've got to live with that for the rest of their lives."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hope this sticks. Somebody needs to set a percedent to wake these idiots up before we all get all get killed by negligent drivers. It's beginning to work with drunks but it took a while, sadly will probably take a while with "distracted drivers" too

 
The problem is trying to prove they where on the cell phone or messing with it when the accident took place. Don't get me wrong I want to take out about 50% of the drivers now a days, and the ones playing with the cell phone are the worst.

 
My blood pressure went up reading this :angry2: She knew she was driving illegally and the car wasn't insured. She's an adult that is responsible for her own actions! Throw the book at her.

 
"They seized Manzanares' phone, and a forensic examiner found that she had received and sent several texts in a 19 minute period ending at 7:58 a.m."

 

"At 7:58, Manzanares' friend texted again, the report said".

 

"Obviously, she was reaching down for the cellphone that was vibrating at the time of the accident and came right up onto the curb," County Attorney Freeman said Tuesday.
If the state's attorneys can't hang this careless negligent bitch then they are the problem. She was clearly texting while driving, even if not actually hitting the send button at the time of the incident. And with her two kids in the back seat no less.

With no insurance the victim has no recourse but to have his own insurance company pay his medical bills even though he was clearly not at fault. This woman should do jail time and then never be allowed to drive again.

Yesterday afternoon I got a call from my wife on her cell phone in a panic. She had been riding along on the local interstate with my eldest daughter on her way to a Dr. appointment, with our two grandsons strapped in the back car-seats when some 20 something woman swerved in the adjacent lane, first away from, and then in an over correction, violently back into the passenger side of my daughter's car. The front passenger door was caved in about a foot. The armrest whacked my wife's hip but luckily it only gave her a nasty bruise. The kids and my daughter came out fine, as did the girl.

When I got to the scene to help pick them up, they were all still sorting things out in the median of I93 (in Manchester), with the state police on hand, and waiting for the wreckers to arrive and haul off the carnage.

The story this sobbing girl gave to the police was that she was trying to avoid a green SUV, which nobody else had seen. I am suspicious that this incident (not accident) was precipitated by her inattention and distraction and when she eventually realized she had drifted out of her lane she made some extremely poor driving maneuvers due to inexperience. Of course we will never know, but if I was my daughter's insurance company I would be subpoenaing those cell phone records and going over them very closely.

In this case nobody was seriously hurt, just a lot of serious property damage and unnecessary insurance claims. If the girl had smashed into the rear passenger door instead of the front one my grandson might have been injured. He might not be here with us today. Why? So someone can communicate with their friends?

I'm mad as hell. This crap has really got to stop. I would like to see all of the cell phone towers along all of the interstates turned off and removed. I don't care if people can have cell phones or not. Get rid of them all. They are more of an intrusion on my life than any benefit.

 
"They seized Manzanares' phone, and a forensic examiner found that she had received and sent several texts in a 19 minute period ending at 7:58 a.m."

 

"At 7:58, Manzanares' friend texted again, the report said".

 

"Obviously, she was reaching down for the cellphone that was vibrating at the time of the accident and came right up onto the curb," County Attorney Freeman said Tuesday.
If the state's attorneys can't hang this careless negligent bitch then they are the problem. She was clearly texting while driving, even if not actually hitting the send button at the time of the incident. And with her two kids in the back seat no less.
Fred,

I'm glad your family's safety is intact and understand your personal frustration. That being said, I have to disagree with this. The problem isn't with the state's attorneys, it's with burden of proof. In the court of common sense it's pretty clear that she was texting, but in a court of law there's no conclusive proof that she was based on the information. Even if she'd sent a text minutes before the incident, the state would need to prove that she was actually driving when she did which is near impossible for them to do without an eyewitness. Even if the judge wanted to make an example and convict her, the decision would easily be overturned by a higher court. My prediction is that she pleads no contest to the laundry list of other charges and the state drops the texting charge...provided she stops making statements.

 
It's the bane of this lawyerly and electronic age...

I just hope that my family, my son who is a motorcyclist, my friends here on the Forums, or myself don't get whacked by a crackberry texting creature. There are enough dangerous circumstances in life without this new type of "nonprovable drunk-type driving".

They are gambling with MY life. The state penalties for this type of life shattering behaviour are meager with regard to the consequences involved.

 
I understand your point regarding the burden of proof. However, that shouldn't be all that hard. They know where she was at the exact time of the incident. If they just work backwards from that time to the last text message she sent, then compare that to how far it was from where she originated her trip, from her own prior statement, it should be pretty simple to prove that she was texting while operating the car.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fred,

You're absolutely correct. A good lawyer tactic would be to ask if it's possible she wasn't speeding to create an alternate theory. Such is the way with lawyers. It's much easier and cheaper for the state to take a no contest plea which will carry jail time and drop the contested charge which won't add all that much.

IMO, convictions for texting should carry the current penalties for DUI and that current DUI should be changed to a minimum one one year suspention for the first offense and permanant revocation for the second. It's time people were forced to learn that driving is a priveledge and not a right. If people prove themselves incapable of handling the resposibility associated with driving they shouldn't be allowed to do it.

 
...IMO, convictions for texting should carry the current penalties for DUI and that current DUI should be changed to a minimum one one year suspention for the first offense and permanant revocation for the second. It's time people were forced to learn that driving is a priveledge and not a right. If people prove themselves incapable of handling the resposibility associated with driving they shouldn't be allowed to do it.
+1!!!!

 
Manzanares "never looked up" as her vehicle came at him on Excelsior Boulevard, despite his efforts to get out of the way and yell to get her attention.
He couldn't get her attention. Scary. Anyone replace their motorcycle horns with these? clicky

Are they substantially louder than the stock horns?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
He couldn't get her attention. Scary. Anyone replace their motorcycle horns with these? clicky

Are they substantially louder than the stock horns?
110 decibels ain't nothing...you want Magnum Blasters or Stebel air horns at 135 decibels. Decibels aren't measured linearly, so these horns are A LOT louder!

FJR Tech and FJRandy harnesses...search search search...

BTW, I can't imagine yelling working ever...use the damn horn.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
He couldn't get her attention. Scary. Anyone replace their motorcycle horns with these? clicky

Are they substantially louder than the stock horns?
110 decibels ain't nothing...you want Magnum Blasters or Stebel air horns at 135 decibels. Decibels aren't measured linearly, so these horns are A LOT louder!

FJR Tech and FJRandy harnesses...search search search...

BTW, I can't imagine yelling working ever...use the damn horn.
+1 I replaced my horns with 2 Magnun Blasters and a Stebel, I'm sorry to hear this story and hope they set an example with her, I was thinking of carrying all my old phones and when I came up on someone talking on there phone I would throw my old phone at them, that whould get there attention.

 
I think the poor guy didn't simply yell out of impulse. It was a literal primal scream.

I gotta get me 'em ear-splitting horns.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My rant!

Ban the freakin' things in cars!!! :angry:

I have zero tolerance for this BS.

I could live with out a bloody cell phone anyway. I don't need to talk to anyone that bad.

Rant over, have a nice day. ;)

 
Seems like all they would have to do is build into the cell phone software to turn it off when moving more that 5 mph.

 
Top