| nightguy |
Murder trial focuses on whether dashboard DVD distracted motorist
Dan Joling, Associated Press
July 27, 2004 DVDCRASH0728
ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- When a pickup truck crossed the double yellow line along Seward Highway and killed two occupants of a Jeep Grand Cherokee, police initially thought the accident was another tragic mistake by a momentarily distracted driver.
Then they spotted the dashboard DVD player.
In what may be the first trial of its kind in the nation, prosecutors have accused the pickup truck's driver of second-degree murder for watching a movie instead of the road when he crashed head-on into the Jeep.
The pickup's driver, Erwin J. Petterson Jr., denies using the DVD player as he drove north on Oct. 12, 2002 and contends he was only listening to music from a compact disc, said his attorney, Chuck Robinson.
``It's an excessive charge for what happened here,'' he said. ``This was not a murder. Even the state medical examiner said during cross-examination that the manner of death for the people in the other car was accidental.''
Petterson, 29, is accused of killing Robert Weiser, 60, and his wife Donna Weiser, 56, of Anchorage, while on a three-hour drive between Kenai and Anchorage. In his truck was the equivalent of a home entertainment system - a DVD player, speakers and a Sony PlayStation 2.
While no Alaska law prohibits operating a DVD player in view of a driver, prosecutor June Stein said the facts warranted charging Petterson under one of two theories: that he knew his conduct was substantially certain to cause death, or that he knowingly engaged in conduct showing extreme indifference to human life.
Initial Alaska State Trooper reports said Petterson was at fault when he took his eyes off the road to reach for a soda. Stein, though, will try to prove that the DVD player was on, apparently playing the movie ``Road Trip.''
``We know it was,'' she said. ``It was wired so that the screen was in the open position when the ignition key was turned out.''
The murder trial, which got under way last week in Kenai Superior Court, may be the first of its kind in the nation, said Matthew Swantson, director of communications for the Consumer Electronics Association, a trade association.
Installed as recommended, DVD players and TV screens are either visible only from the back seats or will not work unless the vehicle is in park. But owners can defeat the safety measures by installing the devices themselves, as Petterson did, according to prosecutors.
Robinson said he expects prosecutors to have trouble winning a second-degree murder conviction. ``I think the prosecution is going to have a tough time proving the mental state of Mr. Petterson,'' he said. ``It's a tragic accident that happens all the time on our highways.''
Liz Neblett, spokeswoman for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, said more than 25 percent of police-reported crashes are distraction related, which covers everything from cell phone use to changing channels on a radio, screaming at kids, eating, applying makeup or reading a newspaper.
Vehicles can be equipped with fax machines, cell phones and two-way radios. But none should be used if they interrupt the concentration of drivers, she said. ``It's a no-brainer. If it's distracting, don't do it,'' Neblett said.
After the crash, Petterson and his passenger, roommate Jonathan Douglas, were transported to an Anchorage hospital. Within hours, Douglas called his ex-wife and told her he was not sure how the collision occurred because he was ``spacing out on a movie they were watching,'' according to prosecutors. The woman is scheduled to testify.
David Weiser, 34, the son of the slain couple, said only two people know what happened in the cab of the truck. But equipping a truck with entertainment options that can be used while driving goes beyond a momentary distraction of putting on makeup or using a cell phone, he said.
``This takes forethought, this takes methodical steps,'' David Weiser said. ``You have to go to the store, plop over money, install it, and install it so it can be used without a brake employed.
``I view it as no different than walking into a bar, having five beers within an hour and getting behind the wheel,'' said Weiser, who quit an eight-year career as a loan originator in Boston to attend the trial.
Driving laws have not kept up with technological changes, Weiser said. He plans to work toward changing that after Petterson's trial is over.
``I would like for the jury to sit and hear the evidence, and if the evidence shows what I believe to be true, that his conviction reflect that,'' he said. |
|
|
| kamalsyal |
Folks,
Came across this news item on CNN. Wiring your NAV screen to play DVDs could really have bad consequences ! The vehicle mentioned in this article is not an MDX, but this could easily happen in one !
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/07/27/d...h.ap/index.html
Comments anyone ? |
|
|
| timbrwolf9 |
| In my opinion, there is no reason whatsoever that a driver should be able to watch a DVD movie while driving. |
|
|
| XStatic |
quote:
Originally posted by timbrwolf9
In my opinion, there is no reason whatsoever that a driver should be able to watch a DVD movie while driving.
But why restrict the front seat passenger?
The driver is responsible for driving the car, it should not be necessary to essentially create blinders so that nothing in the car diverts their attention. A human is completely capable of turning their attention to the task necessary.
Before you know it you will have to pull over to change radio stations or adjust the temp. |
|
|
| nightguy |
I have to agree with the "anti" folks on this one. On a road trip back in May my wife was watching a movie on her laptop in the passenger seat. Even though it was mostly turned away from me, I could still see a little bit of motion and it was very distracting. Sure, there's not much traffic on the road and I have plenty of time to look, but I'm sure that's what this dude thought too.
There's a reason there are safety lockouts on the installed versions and I pity the fool that thinks it's safe and without consequence to defeat them. |
|
|
| XStatic |
quote:
Originally posted by nightguy
Even though it was mostly turned away from me, I could still see a little bit of motion and it was very distracting.
Do you have NAV? Does the map motion distract you?
You also better start calling for a ban on those in dash receivers with full motion LCD displays.
 |
|
|
| andreseng |
quote:
Originally posted by XStatic
But why restrict the front seat passenger?
The driver is responsible for driving the car, it should not be necessary to essentially create blinders so that nothing in the car diverts their attention. A human is completely capable of turning their attention to the task necessary.
Before you know it you will have to pull over to change radio stations or adjust the temp.
Think I have to agree with XStatic on this one.
This is just like anything else in life. You must choose to do or not do something. If you are an adult driver you surely recognize the inherent dangers of watching a DVD while driving and you should choose not to watch. The passenger should have the same choice.
You can compare this to drinking and driving. A designated driver chooses not to participate in drinking. His/her passengers can do as they please. Yes, there are idiots out there that will watch a DVD. But there are also idiots out there that drink and drive.
It's called personal responsibility folks. Our society tends to place blame everywhere except where it belongs. Just look at the frivolous lawsuits that pop up all the time. I spill hot coffee in my lap. I don't know it's hot??? So I sue McDonalds. And the worst part is I win??? Give me a break. Step up and be a responsible adult. |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by XStatic
Do you have NAV? Does the map motion distract you?
You also better start calling for a ban on those in dash receivers with full motion LCD displays.
No I don't have Navi. To me the maps and motion lcd's are different from watching entertainment programming. Again, there's a reason for the safety feature and this dude purposely defeated it. That's like screwing with the governor on a golf cart and blaming somebody else when you roll it down a hill.
quote:
Originally posted by XStatic
A human is completely capable of turning their attention to the task necessary.
So why not allow passengers to consume alcohol ? And keep reaching for that phone under the seat.
quote:
Originally posted by andreseng
This is just like anything else in life. You must choose to do or not do something. If you are an adult driver you surely recognize the inherent dangers of watching a DVD while driving and you should choose not to watch. The passenger should have the same choice.
You can compare this to drinking and driving. A designated driver chooses not to participate in drinking. His/her passengers can do as they please. Yes, there are idiots out there that will watch a DVD. But there are also idiots out there that drink and drive.
So drivers have to just take their chances with other drivers' choices, huh ? It's just dumb luck if they're caught in the middle...sort of a highway Darwinism.
quote:
Originally posted by andreseng
Just look at the frivolous lawsuits that pop up all the time. I spill hot coffee in my lap. I don't know it's hot??? So I sue McDonalds. And the worst part is I win??? Give me a break. Step up and be a responsible adult.
Not sure how this relates to a second degree murder charge (this is a criminal suit, not civil), but I'm sure laborlitigator would love to chime in on this one. From what I can remember, McDonald's was keeping the coffee at temperatures far higher than necessary (well over 200 F) just to keep the coffee hotter further down the road. It is conceivable in this industry that somebody will spill a product on themselves. I seem to remember the judgement being rather high, but there were high punitive damages set by a judge or jury. Almost put McDonald's out of business. :4: |
|
|
| andreseng |
quote:
Originally posted by nightguy
So drivers have to just take their chances with other drivers' choices, huh ? It's just dumb luck if they're caught in the middle.
You do that everyday that you wake up. Life is a chance. Let's eliminate DVD's and alcohol for a second. Do you think this would then keep you safe? Do you think the stupid people out there would no longer do stupid things?
I am not advocating drivers watching DVD's. To the contrary, I agree that this is 100% wrong. I'm merely saying that the idiot made a choice. He should pay. Not the people who drive responsibly. |
|
|
| nightguy |
I see what you're saying but I'm not sure you can just eliminate the topic of the discussion from the debate.
Look at how insurance premiums are calculated. Actuaries have been busy figuring out rates (and overcharging us) for years. A 19 year old burger flipper in a t-top Trans-Am with a couple of speeding tickets and a few delinquent credit cards is going to pay a lot more than a 48 year old 800 credit CEO who drives a Mercedes. I wonder if they calculate risk on something like this. |
|
|
| vlam |
Look at how insurance premiums are calculated. Actuaries have been busy figuring out rates (and overcharging us) for years. A 19 year old burger flipper in a t-top Trans-Am with a couple of speeding tickets and a few delinquent credit cards is going to pay a lot more than a 48 year old 800 credit CEO who drives a Mercedes. I wonder if they calculate risk on something like this.
My insurance agent told me that credit history is one of criteria that insurance company may be using. This very topic is up on debate and some States has made it illegal for such practice. |
|
|
| andreseng |
| This is really off the topic now. But credit is even being used by perspective employers in the pre-screening process. Talk about responsibility!! |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
| File a lawsuit against the manufacturer. There should be no way that the player could work while the car is moving. |
|
|
| one4gatr |
quote:
Originally posted by andreseng
This is really off the topic now. But credit is even being used by perspective employers in the pre-screening process. Talk about responsibility!!
I work in the banking and finance industry and this has been a long standing practice. The theory behind it is if you have financial issues then you are more likely to commit some crime or fraud on the job to help you gain/earn more money. It just boils down to risk management.
But to put this thread back on topic...
You cannot legislate intelligence. I feel badly that 2 people were killed because some idiot made a horrible decision (if he did). But the earlier statement about NAV is VERY much the same. An irresponsible drive will pay more attention to his NAV screen while looking for his street/exit then the road. There are many things that can distract you as a driver in fact I believe there is another thread somewhere else but if advocate outlawing anything that could potentially distract you while driving then I think you barking up the wrong tree. You will NEVER completely remove every potential distraction. In fact I could argue that the speedometer is potentially distracting enough that in some cases checking it could result in an accident. |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by one4gatr
I There are many things that can distract you as a driver in fact I believe there is another thread somewhere else but if advocate outlawing anything that could potentially distract you while driving then I think you barking up the wrong tree. You will NEVER completely remove every potential distraction. In fact I could argue that the speedometer is potentially distracting enough that in some cases checking it could result in an accident.
True enough. But do you think there are a few things that we can reasonably assume are strictly dangers to driving ? Even changing a CD can be and technically speaking, you're supposed to have both hands on the steering wheel unless doing something involving the operation of the vehicle. |
|
|
| trixie |
| Could litigation scare manufactures into not offering in-dash navigation systems? The DVD fad is stupid and out of control. The stupidity of a few could ruin it for the rest of us. I passed a two door 3 series BMW a few days ago with no less than five screens. The driver was solo. WTF? |
|
|
| 04mdx4sq |
As someone who works in the industry, we as a company sell mobile dvd players but refuse to wire around the manufacturer's safety provisions to allow the customer to watch any motion video while driving. I do turn away customers due to this, for several reasons.
1. It is not yet illegal in Missouri to view mobile video while driving, but this is the same case in Alaska where this trial is taking place. It is only a matter of time before whomever installed the system is named in a civil suit.
2. I have had a front monitor in my car for the passenger on long trips, and no matter how hard I tried not to, I would find myself watching it.
3. Simply put, I don't want to be on the other guy who is on the receiving end of someone crossing the road because they are watching a movie.
As far as comparing the distraction level to that of a nav system, I have yet to get too engrossed in a street map...... |
|
|
| XStatic |
quote:
Originally posted by 04mdx4sq
As someone who works in the industry, we as a company sell mobile dvd players but refuse to wire around the manufacturer's safety provisions to allow the customer to watch any motion video while driving. I do turn away customers due to this, for several reasons.
1. It is not yet illegal in Missouri to view mobile video while driving, but this is the same case in Alaska where this trial is taking place. It is only a matter of time before whomever installed the system is named in a civil suit.
2. I have had a front monitor in my car for the passenger on long trips, and no matter how hard I tried not to, I would find myself watching it.
3. Simply put, I don't want to be on the other guy who is on the receiving end of someone crossing the road because they are watching a movie.
As far as comparing the distraction level to that of a nav system, I have yet to get too engrossed in a street map......
When you say watching it, do you really mean staring at it?
If you stare at anything driving be it inside the car or outside, you are going to miss something and end up in an accident. Driving should be accompanied with a constant scan of all your surroundings, inside the car as well as outside, out the front window, the inside rear-view as well as the side view mirrors.
When the Nav is on does the movement catch my eye, absolutely, would a DVD, absolutely, do I operate a/c equipment, stereo, nav, cell phones, pagers, while driving, yes. All of this can and must be done in a safe manner by simply being completely aware of your surroundings and maintaining the scanning of the "event horizon" around you.
Perhaps removing a DVD player would remove that specific point of distraction but a driver that watches a movie instead of the road will just find something else to do and have an accident for some other reason. |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
| Issue is the companies know the units can be modified. . . that can easily lead to liability. |
|
|
| one4gatr |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
Issue is the companies know the units can be modified. . . that can easily lead to liability.
Sure but as I have learned from this board you can modify ANYTHING. I think 04mdx4sq hit the nail on the head. As long as the MANUFACTURER made an attempt to provide a safe product by installing a lock out feature I dont believe they can be held liable. But the installer who bypassed that function on the other hand could be. |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by one4gatr
Sure but as I have learned from this board you can modify ANYTHING. I think 04mdx4sq hit the nail on the head. As long as the MANUFACTURER made an attempt to provide a safe product by installing a lock out feature I dont believe they can be held liable. But the installer who bypassed that function on the other hand could be.
\
But what if the installer is the same as the end user ? LL is right, the companies know about it and I don't think it would take a lot of discovery to figure that out. They do it that way on purpose and probably even indirectly put out information advising how to defeat it. |
|
|
| chriswo |
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/08/...s.ap/index.html
KENAI, Alaska (AP) -- A man was acquitted Tuesday of charges he caused a fatal crash by taking his eyes off the road while watching a movie on a DVD player mounted on his truck dashboard.
Jurors acquitted Erwin Petterson Jr., 29, of two counts of second-degree murder and two counts of manslaughter. No law in Alaska prohibits operating a DVD player in view of a driver.
Petterson had been charged in the deaths of Robert Weiser, 60, and Donna Weiser, 56, when his truck collided with their vehicle on a highway in southern Alaska on October 12, 2002.
"I think this case was really important because it brought out the issue for public discussion," said the prosecutor, June Stein, after the acquittal. "It's probably an issue the Legislature should address."
Neither Petterson nor his lawyer could immediately be reached for comment after the acquittal. Lindsey Petterson said her brother was taking a long drive in his truck.
"He hasn't been able to drive in over two years," she said. "He just wanted to be alone for a while. He's very happy he can get on with his life again."
Stein argued that Petterson and his passenger Jonathan Douglas were watching a DVD movie when Petterson's pickup truck crossed the center line, hitting the Weisers' sport utility vehicle head-on.
Petterson testified he was not watching a movie and that his truck strayed into oncoming traffic when he reached for a soda.
The Weisers died at the scene.
Marty Zoda, Douglas' former wife, testified that her ex-husband told her the DVD was running when the accident happened, a claim Douglas denied.
If installed as recommended, DVD players will not work in an automobile unless the emergency brake is on or the vehicle is in park.
Prosecutors said Petterson overrode those safety measures when he installed an entertainment system including a DVD player, speakers and a Sony PlayStation 2 in his pickup truck.
David Weiser, a son of the dead couple, said the family was not surprised by the verdict because skid marks at the scene and Petterson's driving record were not allowed as evidence.
"I'm very disappointed in how the justice system has to prove a case against someone who took two lives," said David Weiser. |
|
|
| XStatic |
Sorry for the family but basically a good verdict, he should have been charged only with Involuntary vehicular manslaughter, not murder.
manslaughter
n. the unlawful killing of another person without premeditation or so-called "malice aforethought" (an evil intent prior to the killing). It is distinguished from murder (which brings greater penalties) by lack of any prior intention to kill anyone or create a deadly situation. There are two levels of manslaughter: voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter includes killing in heat of passion or while committing a felony. Involuntary manslaughter occurs when a death is caused by a violation of a non-felony, such as reckless driving (called "vehicular manslaughter").
Perhaps if the trial had focused on just the manslaughter claim there would have been a different outcome. |
|
|
| nicksan |
Yeah, I read about this in the morning.
It only mentioned about him being aquitted of second degree murder. I guess he'll be charged with something???
We have interesting laws here...the guy claims that he wasn't watching the DVD (apparently no laws in Alaska against it thought) but that he was reaching for a soda when his car crossed the center line and hit the other car.
Holy sh*t...that's not murder?
Sure it wasn't voluntary as in he wasn't saying "G*ddam I wanna kill someone today"...but might as well be if you are going to be stupid to reach for a soda (where was it anyways) and lose control of the car and killing 2 completely innocent people and causing so much devastation for the rest of the family members.
It's not "Voluntary" just like drunk driving isn't??? I meant when you are drunk you don't neccessaily get into a car saying "Sh*t...I'm drunk and I feel like killing someone"...but the punishment is harsh...because we all know it's a dumb thing to do...just like reaching for a soda and losing control!!!!!!!!
So...
Doing something Dumb->accident as a result->Go to jail for a long time.
Crystal clear decision to me.
But the law is the law I guess...
See how the guy reacts when his family gets mowed down by some punk watching a DVD in the car...
"It's OK...he was reaching for a soda...I forgive him". |
|
|
| nicksan |
I agree with XStatic completely.
There are too many easily distracted drivers out there.
NY is REAAAAAAALLY bad.
Makes me think they sell licenses at the corner deli or something.
Drivers don't even bother looking at anything.
You get these sh*tty drivers driving very dangerously...
So many times I watch these people (young/old/male/female) acting like they are Jeff Gordon on the highway, tailgating, going 90mph, changing lanes like there is no tomorrow, destroying their brakes...it's easy to spot the sh*tty drivers because when you watch them they aren't looking at much, just straight. They don't use their signals. They don't ANTICIPATE anything. It's too easy to get a license in this state!!!
I NEVER rely on turn signals anymore. I look at the tires and the situation instead. When I hit the break unusually hard I first look at the front/side to see if I'll make it or have a escape lane, then at the rear to see if I have a car on my as*...all senses go. I've always been a cautious driver and thankfully have NEVER been in a accident. (other than being hit while stopped at a traffic light...which doesn't count).
I would never reach for anything while going at high speeds or have traffic on the other side without any divider.
It's no joke...car is a potenial killer everytime it moves. Too many people take driving too lightly until something happens to them or their loved ones.
Even then, you have no control over other people's stupidity...and there is a whole lot to go around so... |
|
|
| nightguy |
Do what you have to do as long as you can accept and live with the consequences. Please, please, please be careful. Do the right thing. The wife of a co-worker lost her life due to somebody else's stupidity yesterday. So, instead of planning a fun, long weekend to wrap up the summer, the family has other things to do.
MAPLE GROVE - A check on a CD changer may have led to a deadly crash on Interstate 494 Thursday.
The crash happened just after 4 p.m. near Bass Lake Rd. in Maple Grove.
According to the State Patrol, Michelle Schwahn, 32, of Coon Rapids, was driving southbound on I-494 and looked down at her CD changer. When she looked up, troopers say she noticed traffic was coming to a stop.
Schwahn lost control of her 2005 Toyota Scion, crossed the median and slammed into a Honda CRV driven by Pamela Harvey, 58, of Minnetonka.
Harvey was airlifted to North Memorial Medical Center, where she later died.
Schwahn was also transported to North Memorial with minor injuries.
The accident shut down the southbound lanes of I-494 for at least two hours, causing traffic to back up for miles. |
|
|
|
