Update on the kid who rammed another car & flipped it off the road

"sm70- why not Duesenberg?" (sm70-whynotduesenberg)
09/07/2016 at 09:36 • Filed to: None

!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , for those who don’t remember. The driver was originally going to be tried as an adult, but they had it moved back down to juvenile court. Also, apparently the parents of the teens in the RAV4 came forward and admitted that their kids were antagonizing/bullying the driver of the Ram just before he hit them, including throwing eggs at his car.

This is the truck that was allegedly egged before it rammed another car off the road.

DISCUSSION (55)

Rico > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 09:47

So..people just ride around with a carton of eggs in their car?

smobgirl > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 09:55

It shouldn't make a difference. Maybe file charges against the other kids as well, if that was the case, but the reaction of the Ram driver was inexcusable.

DipodomysDeserti > Rico
09/07/2016 at 09:56

How are you supposed to get the eggs from the market to your house?

Milky > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 09:57

In other words - Bullied bro, bros out and rams car off road with ram.

Also what parents buy their 16 year old that? I cant even.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Rico
09/07/2016 at 09:58

If you’re looking to egg someone, eggs are typically a helpful tool.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Milky
09/07/2016 at 09:59

1. Something like that, yes.

2. The family owned and sold a large regional supermarket chain, so I guess the answer is “very wealthy people”.

DipodomysDeserti > smobgirl
09/07/2016 at 10:00

It makes a difference if you’re deciding to charge him as an adult when he isn’t an adult. You’re right that there’s no excuse for his actions. You’ve got to be much more subtle when dealing with assholes. Otherwise you go to jail.

McMike > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 10:00

Truck gets a 2/5 from me.

Kinja'd!!!

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > McMike
09/07/2016 at 10:01

The headlights change colors, does that affect anything?

spanfucker retire bitch > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 10:04

2/5 is about right. For comparison, this is what a 5/5 looks like.

http://oppositelock.kinja.com/5-5-bros-perfe…

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > spanfucker retire bitch
09/07/2016 at 10:05

Ah yes, I’ve seen a few of those show trucks running around.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 10:13

This kind of thing is the reason that when I was 16 my main form of transportation was a bicycle. 99% of 16 year olds are mature enough to be trusted with a go cart, mich less a 4000lb 350hp truck. And I’m not just speaking of the maturity of the kid is the truck either. Seems like the kids in the RAV4 were trying to push this kid to a breaking point. I mean egging a car, that’s stupid, egging a car while some one is it? That’s a whole new level of dumbass.

Did the Ram kid over react? Sure, were the “vitims” just. “Vitims” nope.

Milky > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 10:14

Well if they wanted their kid to be a D-bag, mission success?

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles
09/07/2016 at 10:15

I tend to agree on all points.

With that being said, I spent both my JR and SR years of high school driving a car that nobody in their right mind would give to a 16 year old, so I’m a hypocrite.

Rico > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 10:18

That’s pretty corny of them, like they don’t have better shit to do wow

Rico > DipodomysDeserti
09/07/2016 at 10:20

Not by throwing them at someone’s car that’s for sure!

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Rico
09/07/2016 at 10:20

Youths, man.

TysMagic > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 10:22

samesies! 87 5.0 no airbags, no abs, hydroplaned like no body’s business. Who gives that to a kid?!

fintail > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 10:32

“they had it moved” = “bribe was paid”?

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > fintail
09/07/2016 at 10:33

No I just didn’t know if that would’ve been done though a plea bargain or what. I’m not savvy with court terms.

fintail > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 10:36

Wouldn’t surprise me if something was up. The kind of people who buy a truck like that for their kid usually aren’t on the up and up. I smell affluenza.

CB > fintail
09/07/2016 at 11:07

I doubt it. Originally, it appeared to be an unprovoked assault by the Ram driver, and being sixteen, it’s close enough to being an adult. So, the seriousness of the offence would push it up to having him tried as an adult. However, with the mitigating factor that the Ram was being egged by the RAV4 and antagonising him would probably push it back down to juvenile court, since it’s no longer unprovoked.

NostalgicCarLife > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 11:08

It would probably be better for all of us if they put the parents on trial.

We can dream right?

CB > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 11:08

Plea bargain usually means pleading guilty for a lesser sentence or lesser charge, which could theoretically have happened in this case.

CB > NostalgicCarLife
09/07/2016 at 11:10

Why? What law did the parents break?

fintail > CB
09/07/2016 at 11:12

I have my doubts. That’s pretty shoddy way of avoiding accountability, being “provoked”.

I am sure a road raging dbag kid from a less affluent family in an old beater truck would be afforded the same leniency. Yup.

Again, there’s probably affluenza at play.

NostalgicCarLife > CB
09/07/2016 at 11:17

It’s a rhetorical comment suggesting that if the children are any reflection of their respective parents, their parents are probably shitty people.

Or maybe they broke laws pertaining to the release of nuisance animals into the wild...

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > NostalgicCarLife
09/07/2016 at 11:17

I get your point, but spoiling a kid is hardly criminal. The parents were pretty horrified by this.

CB > fintail
09/07/2016 at 11:17

Yes, it was an overreaction, but in the eyes of the courts, the fact that the RAV4 was not just an innocent vehicle being knocked off the road, but had acted aggressively towards the driver of the Ram is incredibly important. Imagine that you punched me in the face. That’s pretty severe, right? Now imagine that I had been insulting you, your mother, been shoving you, et cetera, and then you punched me in the face. That’s pretty different. Same kind of deal.

There could be money at play, sure. The justice system is definitely unequal. However, arguing that it’s just money at play seems like a poor argument.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > CB
09/07/2016 at 11:19

I concur.

450X_FTW > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 11:27

including throwing eggs at his car.

Personally I view this as an act of terrorism

NostalgicCarLife > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 11:31

Of course, the parents feel bad, and feeling bad fixes things. Just the example these kids need.

haveacarortwoorthree2 > Rico
09/07/2016 at 11:35

Just utes looking to cause trouble.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > NostalgicCarLife
09/07/2016 at 11:39

My point still stands. You can’t put parents on trial based on the knowledge that they gave their kid a nice truck which he then abused. It’s not like that original affluenza case where the parents helped facilitate further shenanigans.

Like I said, I understand your sentiment. I knew this would be an issue when I posted it. Yes, this kid was spoiled, and yes he did a horrible, unacceptable thing. However, as I mentioned in my previous article, my parents know this kid’s parents very well. They aren’t some rich monsters who just go around using their money to make problems and other people go away. In this case, I am reasonably confident in saying it was the kid’s screw-up.

NostalgicCarLife > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 11:48

Well, I did mention it was a dream.

fintail > CB
09/07/2016 at 12:17

Not sure if running someone off the road and insulting someone’s mother are comparable. Cool random hypothetical, though.

Seeing how the justice system works time after time, I find it hard to believe that the severity of potential penalties were reduced simply because someone was “provoked”. It’s a world of crooked untouchable judges and arrogant prosecutors out there.

CB > fintail
09/07/2016 at 12:21

My opinion which is based on my understand of case law after four years of studying criminology and working in the criminal justice system for a period of time. And yes, it is definitely a mitigating factor here, as it entirely changes intent for an offense. In finding guilt, you need two things: the actus reus (the action) and the mens rea (the guilty mind). Having been provoked and responding, albeit in an extreme manner, is different from committing an act unprovoked.

And I was drawing parallels between two things in order to illustrate my point.

McMike > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 12:38

OK, a hard 2 then. :)

Still needs a bigger lift, fancy wheels, graphics, and a light bar to get a higher score out of me.

McMike > spanfucker retire bitch
09/07/2016 at 12:38

LOL, I wasn’t expect that link to be one of my previous rankings. :)

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > McMike
09/07/2016 at 12:42

Suits me

Mercedes Streeter > CB
09/07/2016 at 13:10

I normally agree with you (I think lol) but I don’t think so here. Maybe we do, actually. lol

If true, the occupants of the RAV 4 were doing property damage against the RAM. Now I’m not sure how Nebraska operates, but here in Illinois, that doesn’t give the RAM driver a free pass to try to perform vehicular manslaughter. Provoked or not, the response from RAM kid shouldn’t have been ramming the RAV 4.

I mean, I think the RAV 4 kids should be punished too, but the RAM guy needs even more punishment. Personally, I’d be hard on everyone in this case. Property damage isn’t cool and neither is road rage.

CB > Mercedes Streeter
09/07/2016 at 13:25

I think we’re on the same page here. I’m not saying the Ram driver should get off, just that they aren’t an unprovoked attacker as they were originally portrayed to be, and that the provocation should be considered when it comes to trial. On punishing the RAV4 kids, I agree, but I don’t think that’d fly due to sympathies for their injuries and the severity of the response from the driver.

fintail > CB
09/07/2016 at 14:28

Cool story bro, CJUS101 paid off, now you can try to teach. I can’t see how being “provoked” justifies moving to juvenile charges rather than simply doling out a lesser adult penalty, but if something else is behind the scenes, it makes more sense.

Now using Murkan spelling, must be a dual citizen. Feel free to think what “seems” as much as you like.

As you mentioned opinion, is your opinion 100% that nothing else was at play here than being “provoked”?

fintail > NostalgicCarLife
09/07/2016 at 14:33

Anyone who buys a teenager a truck of that type is suspect.

CB > fintail
09/07/2016 at 14:34

Because he’s 16? He’s a juvenile who was only going to be charged as an adult due to the severity of the offence. Once information came out that he was harassed, antagonised, and egged, as much as you seem to not care about those being factors and instead believe that the system must be corrupt, it would make sense to lessen the charges.

I’m Canadian, actually. We kind of don’t care what spelling you use for most things, as long as you add a “u” to requisite words.

fintail > CB
09/07/2016 at 14:41

Why move to juvenile instead of applying a lesser adult charge? The same mitigating circumstances can apply. Very convenient.

Oh now I see, a budding cop. I should have studied some history first. Definitely nothing wrong with the system, nothing to see here, move along. Don’t take offense or offence or whatever spelling we are using on this post :)

CB > fintail
09/07/2016 at 14:53

I know records for convictions are dealt with differently for youth versus adults in Canada, as well as the fact that sending a 16 year old to an adult facility is risky.

Nice attack of my character. Real cool of you. I never said that there’s nothing wrong with the system (hell, most of my degree was studying issues with it), I’m saying that the fact that it was moved down to a juvenile charge doesn’t necessarily mean that the system is corrupt.

Mercedes Streeter > CB
09/07/2016 at 15:36

Ah, we are on the same page then. :)

Yep! The provocation should be considered. Not sure how it should affect sentencing, but definitely information to be brought up in court, if only as evidence to show that the RAV 4 kids weren’t 100% innocent.

Personally, I’d still try him as an adult, but give him a lesser charge. Here in America, Juvie is still very much so a joke, and is pretty much a get out of jail free card. He needs something that will tell him to get his crap straight, but not entirely ruin his life (creative sentencing, not jail)...then give the RAV 4 kids a life lesson on not being excellent to people...maybe revoke their licenses for some time and a nice ticket to go home with.

fintail > CB
09/07/2016 at 15:56

The record is they key, I think.

What character was attacked? Was something incorrect? Correlation isn’t causation, but there’s often fire with the presence of smoke.

CB > fintail
09/07/2016 at 16:07

My apologies. Just don’t like having opinion lessened by the field I want to get into. Believe me, it’s not because I love the system, because there’s a ton of stuff wrong with it. But if you want something to change, you need to get involved.

So yes, there could be a possibility that there was money under the table, as you have been saying. I just believe that there are more likely explanations as to why this case is going in the direction it is. Neither of us knows for sure, and we’ll just have to see how this plays out in the long run.

We cool? Don’t want any animosity between us over an Internet discussion.

Under_Score > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 17:29

Come on in to Shrago’s! One dozen eggs only selling for 75 cents, this week only!

(Yes, I looked at the old post).

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Under_Score
09/07/2016 at 17:31

This is good. Normally when I link to an old post people ignore it. But two(!) people at least have read the background posts!

Under_Score > sm70- why not Duesenberg?
09/07/2016 at 17:36

Lol, I wanted to see his name so I could use it for some purpose, and the grocery store thing gave me the perfect opportunity. Thank you!

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Under_Score
09/07/2016 at 17:39

Shrago my eggo

fintail > CB
09/07/2016 at 18:59

I just find it very hard to believe that socio-economics aren’t at play. Maybe not the only factor, but a factor. We both know that many judges and prosecutors are into that game, and that the system is more of an industry in many areas.

I’d be happy if we never heard about the incident again :)