PDA

View Full Version : Weller Faces 18 Years In Farmers Market Tragedy



RitcheyRch
10-20-2006, 01:05 PM
http://cbs2.com/topstories/local_story_293142716.html
George Russell Weller, 89, who drove his car through a Santa Monica farmers market in 2003, killing 10 people and injuring 63 others, was convicted Friday of 10 counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence.
Weller was 86 years old at the time. He now faces up to 18 years in prison.
The six-man, six-woman jury reached the verdict Friday morning, on their ninth day of deliberations.
Weller was not in the courtroom as the verdicts were read. His attorneys said he was in poor health and could not attend. The judge agreed at the beginning of the trial that Weller would not have to attend most of the proceedings.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Johnson did not immediately set a sentencing date. He asked attorneys to come back next Friday for a hearing to schedule the sentencing.
His attorneys contended that he accidentally pressed the gas pedal when he meant to hit the brakes as he plowed through the market along Arizona Avenue near Santa Monica's Third Street Promenade.
But in her closing argument, Deputy District Attorney Ann Ambrose said failure to convict Weller of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence would be like saying the man was guilty of nothing more than making a mistake
when he drove through the market.
In his closing argument, defense attorney Mark Overland said the prosecution's case was built on questionable testimony from a select number of witnesses whose comments were tailored to fit to the prosecution's theory that
Weller was able to see, steer and stop the vehicle and could have prevented the carnage.
Of the hundreds who witnessed the event, only a few were chosen to testify, and their testimony, based on events of three years ago, was questionable, Overland said. He noted the discrepancy in the testimony of certain witnesses on the stand and in statements they made to police at the scene.
"So what do you do with all this, do you pick and choose what fits your theory or do you look at all the evidence?" he asked the jurors.
In her rebuttal, Ambrose described the defense's tactics as being designed to divert jurors' attention away from the criminal conduct of the man who stood accused of plowing through the market and pedestrians.
"He spent two hours ... talking about everyone other than the defendant," Ambrose told jurors. "He roared at you so you wouldn't look at the truth, the truth that Mr. Weller's conduct killed 10 innocent people."
And despite the defense's claim -- backed by some high-paid "so-called" defense experts -- that Weller made a pedal error sending him into a "hypervigilant brain freeze," that didn't legally absolve the man of guilt, Ambrose said.
"Just because it's an accident doesn't mean there's no crime," Ambrose said. "You can't then use your negligence as an excuse."

Kilrtoy
10-20-2006, 01:06 PM
SON of a bitch deserves DEATH

redi4fun
10-20-2006, 01:12 PM
http://cbs2.com/topstories/local_story_293142716.html
George Russell Weller, 89, who drove his car through a Santa Monica farmers market in 2003, killing 10 people and injuring 63 others, was convicted Friday of 10 counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence.
Weller was 86 years old at the time. He now faces up to 18 years in prison.
He kills 10 people and only faces a max of 18yrs in prison. WTF :mad:

RitcheyRch
10-20-2006, 01:20 PM
The news just said that they dont think he will do one (1) day in jail due to his age.

Trailer Park Casanova
10-20-2006, 01:21 PM
Doesn't Weller remind you of Mermaid Man in Spongebob?

redi4fun
10-20-2006, 01:41 PM
The news just said that they dont think he will do one (1) day in jail due to his age.
To me that sets a dangerous precident. Does that mean young people should get the same break because they are immature and have the rest of their lives to live. :rolleyes:

BoatPI
10-20-2006, 02:15 PM
My guess would be that he is sentanced but may do do the time in home confinment if the judge thinks that he is near death, if not, off to state prison.

RUSHIN ROULETTE
10-20-2006, 02:49 PM
Interesting...what about the CA DMV that still issues a license to the elderly with a 4 year experation date..you would think they would only issue a 1 year license once you reach a certain age...how many times have you been behind someone old that had no clue how to drive....I guess for that matter how many times have you been behind someone at any age that had no clue...I guess they will issue a license to anyone...Now I am not trying to say that the old man is not guilty or anything..just another way to look at it...maybe the DMV can make stricter rules for issuing a license....so that these accidents do not keep happening...

RitcheyRch
10-20-2006, 02:50 PM
Sentencing is next Friday.

THOR
10-20-2006, 02:54 PM
I worked on this case. The pedal error occurence is very common among old people. Still not excusable though.

Seadog
10-20-2006, 04:09 PM
This is a tragedy in many ways. Too many people make the same mistake, just more often for the elderly. And they do not have the presence of mind to react properly. We do not allow for the review of driver's licenses because it is discrimination against the elderly. Between AARP, ACLU and weak politicians, it may never happen. And then we have to deal with the lack of options for those who are too old to drive, but do not need or cannot afford a care facility.
The jails are too crowded with real criminals and it would cost a fortune for the state to take care of an 89 year old man in poor health. Even if they just handle it in the civil courts, it will mean that he will get indigent care for what is left of his life. I would love to hear how anyone will get justice in this case. With all the real criminals that heartlessly take lives all the time, I cannot get too much animosity over this old man.

3 daytona`s
10-20-2006, 05:26 PM
Now everyone of you here remember if or when this may happen to your friend or family member on the other side.This is a disaster but what? He`s an old man made a terrible mistake,what in the hell is the point to put an old sick man in prison,get a life.He`s paid a price you`ll never know. :crossx:

BoatPI
10-20-2006, 05:52 PM
Hre are a few facts that I learned from articles and tnoights interviews with the jurors who sat on this case.
This was NOT the typical old man with pedal confusion. He intentionally drove over 300 YARDS, moving down numerous people, block after block. He killed 10.
1. he was convicted of 10 counts gross vehicular manslaughter.
2. Testimony included drivers tha twere forced off of the road by him after he was involved in a minor cossision just prior to the marker incident.
3. After the killings he told police and witnesses that everyone should have got out of his way.
4. Every jurror interviewed that I saw on TV tonight formed the opinion early on that the was guilty, and that the pedal confusion was not a viabale consideration given all of the facts. The feds even checked his car, no mehcanical issues and NO indication that he never applied the brakes-over a 300 yard period, with two dozen bodies struck!
I can go on but all things point to a form of road rage occurring after the prior minor colision.
Basically F*** u all was his attitude.
Now if u think that he was a bit crazy, then why didn't the defense attorneys have a shrink provide testimony to that fact?
For your own opinions. The jurors did not seem to have a difficult time doing so.
article LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-102006weller,0,6047527.story?coll=la-home-headlines)

THOR
10-20-2006, 07:19 PM
Now if u think that he was a bit crazy, then why didn't the defense attorneys have a shrink provide testimony to that fact?
article LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-102006weller,0,6047527.story?coll=la-home-headlines)
Since I am in the biz, I'll tell you why. Basically shrinks provide very little to help either side. Why? Opinions are what expert witnesses (what I do) do. They offer opinions to their clients (lawyers) that will help the case. But, opinions are only as good as the basis for which they are made. That being said, shrinks dont really have a basis for opinions because they are involved in a 'soft' science meaning it cant be proved or disproved. That is the sole reason why psychologists arent used all that much and why their opinions really arent worth a dime.

Trailer Park Casanova
10-20-2006, 07:28 PM
Hre are a few facts that I learned from articles and tnoights interviews with the jurors who sat on this case.
This was NOT the typical old man with pedal confusion. He intentionally drove over 300 YARDS, moving down numerous people, block after block. He killed 10.
1. he was convicted of 10 counts gross vehicular manslaughter.
2. Testimony included drivers tha twere forced off of the road by him after he was involved in a minor cossision just prior to the marker incident.
3. After the killings he told police and witnesses that everyone should have got out of his way.
4. Every jurror interviewed that I saw on TV tonight formed the opinion early on that the was guilty, and that the pedal confusion was not a viabale consideration given all of the facts. The feds even checked his car, no mehcanical issues and NO indication that he never applied the brakes-over a 300 yard period, with two dozen bodies struck!
I can go on but all things point to a form of road rage occurring after the prior minor colision.
Basically F*** u all was his attitude.
Now if u think that he was a bit crazy, then why didn't the defense attorneys have a shrink provide testimony to that fact?
For your own opinions. The jurors did and did not seem to have a difficult time doing so.
article LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-102006weller,0,6047527.story?coll=la-home-headlines)
Very good take PI.

C-2
10-20-2006, 08:41 PM
I’ve always thought he would end up guilty as the result of negligence, and rightfully so.
I don’t think Weller knew WTF was going on during those 20 seconds. Short of conclusive scientific evidence or somebody riding shotgun, nobody knows what happened – not even Weller himself.
They should have put DMV on trial, it would have been more productive.

BajaMike
10-21-2006, 12:22 AM
Hre are a few facts that I learned from articles and tnoights interviews with the jurors who sat on this case.
This was NOT the typical old man with pedal confusion. He intentionally drove over 300 YARDS, moving down numerous people, block after block. He killed 10.
1. he was convicted of 10 counts gross vehicular manslaughter.
2. Testimony included drivers tha twere forced off of the road by him after he was involved in a minor cossision just prior to the marker incident.
3. After the killings he told police and witnesses that everyone should have got out of his way.
4. Every jurror interviewed that I saw on TV tonight formed the opinion early on that the was guilty, and that the pedal confusion was not a viabale consideration given all of the facts. The feds even checked his car, no mehcanical issues and NO indication that he never applied the brakes-over a 300 yard period, with two dozen bodies struck!
I can go on but all things point to a form of road rage occurring after the prior minor colision.
Basically F*** u all was his attitude.
Now if u think that he was a bit crazy, then why didn't the defense attorneys have a shrink provide testimony to that fact?
For your own opinions. The jurors did and did not seem to have a difficult time doing so.
article LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-102006weller,0,6047527.story?coll=la-home-headlines)
Good take on this case, there was a lot of evidence introduced that the guy was pissed off because of a minor traffic accident that happened right before these murders, and just mowed people down.....300 yards and you can't move your foot from the gas to the brake??? It does not make sense.
The guy should go to jail.....It's a case of "old person rage"!!!
:idea:

BoatPI
10-21-2006, 05:29 AM
Thanks.. But we exchange alot of intresting topics on this board. Common sense comes into play with this case. Having prepeared for many trials, I always did so through the eyes of a juror that would hear my presentation. Using that perspective I lost one case in 32 years. So it seemed to work.
This incident took three years to come to trial. I suspect that the DA did not see a continuing threat from Weller, and spent many months putting together a near perfect prosecution.
I think the results showed that they did an excellent job of just that.

Kilrtoy
10-21-2006, 06:14 AM
Now everyone of you here remember if or when this may happen to your friend or family member on the other side.This is a disaster but what? He`s an old man made a terrible mistake,what in the hell is the point to put an old sick man in prison,get a life.He`s paid a price you`ll never know. :crossx:
BULLSHIT.
Follow the story a little closer
FRY HIS F***** ASS