Oakville woman charged in 2014 motorcycle death | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Oakville woman charged in 2014 motorcycle death

I hope the family sues for wrongful death.

RIP Rider.
 
So, only riders should be allowed to drive poorly, or make mistakes, since they get hurt the most?
 
So, only riders should be allowed to drive poorly, or make mistakes, since they get hurt the most?

Is this for or against? I'm not sure.
 
It's only manslaughter if you unintentionally cause death as a result of committing a criminal wrong. Unless your driving pattern over a sustained period of time immediately before a crash is overtly out of the norm to such a degree that it can be described as being dangerous or criminally negligent or impaired, it is very difficult to prove a crash was the result of criminal driving behaviour. End Quote

My interpretation of this logic is that Marco Muzzo was driving under the influence, a criminal charge, when he killed four people. Therefore he is facing stiff charges and penalties because he, in essence, killed people while committing a crime.

If Muzzo was sober and ran the stop sign because he was daydreaming, had the sun in his eyes, or was distracted by someone in the car what charges would he have been facing? a failure to yield?

I have a hate on for texting due to a personal encounter. If Muzzo ran the stop sign sober but texting what would be the charge?
 
My interpretation of this logic is that Marco Muzzo was driving under the influence, a criminal charge, when he killed four people. Therefore he is facing stiff charges and penalties because he, in essence, killed people while committing a crime.

If Muzzo was sober and ran the stop sign because he was daydreaming, had the sun in his eyes, or was distracted by someone in the car what charges would he have been facing? a failure to yield?

I have a hate on for texting due to a personal encounter. If Muzzo ran the stop sign sober but texting what would be the charge?

Muzzo's speed was also a factor. Collision investigation put his speed at double the 60 kmph speed limit immediately before the crash, and as a result he was also charged with dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death. Even had he been stone cold sober, charges of dangerous operation causing death (because of his speed) can bring up to 14 years imprisonment on conviction.

Had he been sober and doing closer to the speed limit, that crash would likely have seen him facing charges only of failure to stop and perhaps careless driving depending on how collision investigators assessed his driving and what he may have been doing in the vehicle just before the crash.

Throw in a cell phone and texting, and it still would not likely rise to the level of dangerous driving, so careless driving would probably be the worst charge he would have received. Then again a conviction on careless driving can bring a fine of up to $2,000, a two-year license suspension, and up to six months in jail, depending on the circumstances of the crash and the previous criminal and driving record of the accused.
 
Last edited:
Drivers make mistakes .... If these guys had been driving SUVs it'd be just another fender bender. The law isn't going to excessively punish them because we choose the riskiest form of transportation. There's no reckless criminality on their part ... speeding, alcohol, texting


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It's only manslaughter if you unintentionally cause death as a result of committing a criminal wrong. Unless your driving pattern over a sustained period of time immediately before a crash is overtly out of the norm to such a degree that it can be described as being dangerous or criminally negligent or impaired, it is very difficult to prove a crash was the result of criminal driving behaviour.

In this case, there were several witnesses who remained to give statements to the police. On review of those statements, she was charged not with dangerous driving or criminal negligence causing death, and not even with careless driving. That suggests that from the police and witness points of view, she was driving normally and acceptably aside from making a left turn in front of an approaching vehicle. According to some witnesses at the time, the motorcycle may have contributed to the crash by running a stale amber light.

She was charged with making an unsafe turn. Ordinarily that would result in a simple POA ticket with a set fine which she could pay out of court. Because of the death, she did not get that option but instead got a summons compelling her to appear in court at which point she pled guilty. Instead of paying the set fine of $85 plus victim surcharge, she was fined the maximum of $500 plus victim surcharge. That's over 5 times the usual penalty, because of the death, so the death did in fact play a part in the punishment.

This may still seem like a paltry amount considering someone was killed, but you punish for criminal intent, criminal act, or criminal degrees of negligence. This crash had none of that. Not seeing or misjudging the speed of an approaching vehicle and then making a left turn in front of it, in absence of overtly criminal driving behaviour at and immediately before the time, is an unfortunate but simple mistake that usually just results in angry blowing of horns and the occasional fender bender. EVERYONE makes those kinds of driving mistakes from time to time.

A given act or mistake is either criminal or it is not, irregardless of outcome. If a given mistake in absence of death or injury is not worthy of criminal charges or penalties, then neither should that same act incur criminal charges or penalties when someone is hurt or killed for that mistake.

Thank you for the common sense.

RIP to the rider.
 
Drivers make mistakes .... If these guys had been driving SUVs it'd be just another fender bender. The law isn't going to excessively punish them because we choose the riskiest form of transportation.

Have to agree. RIP rider, but in the end, that pretty much sums it up absolutely perfectly.
 
It's only manslaughter if you unintentionally cause death as a result of committing a criminal wrong. Unless your driving pattern over a sustained period of time immediately before a crash is overtly out of the norm to such a degree that it can be described as being dangerous or criminally negligent or impaired, it is very difficult to prove a crash was the result of criminal driving behaviour.

In this case, there were several witnesses who remained to give statements to the police. On review of those statements, she was charged not with dangerous driving or criminal negligence causing death, and not even with careless driving. That suggests that from the police and witness points of view, she was driving normally and acceptably aside from making a left turn in front of an approaching vehicle. According to some witnesses at the time, the motorcycle may have contributed to the crash by running a stale amber light.

She was charged with making an unsafe turn. Ordinarily that would result in a simple POA ticket with a set fine which she could pay out of court. Because of the death, she did not get that option but instead got a summons compelling her to appear in court at which point she pled guilty. Instead of paying the set fine of $85 plus victim surcharge, she was fined the maximum of $500 plus victim surcharge. That's over 5 times the usual penalty, because of the death, so the death did in fact play a part in the punishment.

This may still seem like a paltry amount considering someone was killed, but you punish for criminal intent, criminal act, or criminal degrees of negligence. This crash had none of that. Not seeing or misjudging the speed of an approaching vehicle and then making a left turn in front of it, in absence of overtly criminal driving behaviour at and immediately before the time, is an unfortunate but simple mistake that usually just results in angry blowing of horns and the occasional fender bender. EVERYONE makes those kinds of driving mistakes from time to time.

A given act or mistake is either criminal or it is not, irregardless of outcome. If a given mistake in absence of death or injury is not worthy of criminal charges or penalties, then neither should that same act incur criminal charges or penalties when someone is hurt or killed for that mistake.

While I hate to admit it, I believe this is a sobering and true post above... if she didn't mean for it to happen she can't really be charged for anything criminal. someone also mentioned if this was an SUV vs SUV probably would have just been a fender bender and 2 insurance companies paying for some bent bumpers. In this case unfortunately it was a bike and not an SUV.
 
This is a sobering news to me and, I assume, many others .... so if a driver/rider cause an accident with a death as a result, all they can get as a conviction is a fine and demerit points, once no criminal intent or technical malfunction of vehicles involved was proven, but rather just "I have not seen him ..."? I thought you get high fine and demerit points for the HTA172 where no life has been taken.

How about, license taken away and ordering mandatory re-examination of driver's riding skills. For sure, I'd think that a lot more could have been done after an innocent life has been wasted.

I keep forgetting that we live in Ontario where speed always kills, regardless whether anyone was actually killed or not ....
 
While I hate to admit it, I believe this is a sobering and true post above... if she didn't mean for it to happen she can't really be charged for anything criminal. someone also mentioned if this was an SUV vs SUV probably would have just been a fender bender and 2 insurance companies paying for some bent bumpers. In this case unfortunately it was a bike and not an SUV.

So you would agree if a law was to be lenient on a truck driver who took out a Ford Focus driver and took his life, because if was a truck vs. compact car??? Makes no sense to me ...
 
Drivers make mistakes .... If these guys had been driving SUVs it'd be just another fender bender. The law isn't going to excessively punish them because we choose the riskiest form of transportation. There's no reckless criminality on their part ... speeding, alcohol, texting

So... what you're saying is, whoever has the bigger stick wins. Literally, and legally.

What happens if the driver accidentally runs over a pedestrian crossing the street? Or a cyclist? Is that just "a mistake"?

I understand the entire premise rests on "reckless criminality", however the rationale is absurd.
 
This is a sobering news to me and, I assume, many others .... so if a driver/rider cause an accident with a death as a result, all they can get as a conviction is a fine and demerit points, once no criminal intent or technical malfunction of vehicles involved was proven, but rather just "I have not seen him ..."? I thought you get high fine and demerit points for the HTA172 where no life has been taken.

How about, license taken away and ordering mandatory re-examination of driver's riding skills. For sure, I'd think that a lot more could have been done after an innocent life has been wasted.

I keep forgetting that we live in Ontario where speed always kills, regardless whether anyone was actually killed or not ....

It seems unfair but the explanation stands. A problem with over penalizing the errant driver is that it probably won't do any good. Very few drivers kill more than once. The challenge is to get the next driver to avoid killing someone, but of course no one thinks they're going to kill someone.
 
How about, license taken away and ordering mandatory re-examination of driver's riding skills. For sure, I'd think that a lot more could have been done after an innocent life has been wasted.

I keep forgetting that we live in Ontario where speed always kills, regardless whether anyone was actually killed or not ....

Finally, some reason. Everyone makes mistakes, to err is human. But, for crying out loud, LEARN FROM THE MISTAKE. A petty fine does nothing to discourage this kind of behaviour from reoccuring.

Incompetence should not be the acceptable standard, not when the stakes are this high. It should be recognized and rectified.
 
So... what you're saying is, whoever has the bigger stick wins. Literally, and legally.

No, what people are saying is that when there was no criminal intent you can't whack someone upside the head with unjust charges. It was an accident afterall, not a planned event intent on harm. There is a big difference.

It's only the laws of physics that turn it into a "bigger stick" situation. Of COURSE the bigger vehicle is going to win, that holds true with any vehicle combination short of identical ones. Train vs car, the train wins. Truck vs train, the train wins. Car vs truck, the truck wins. Car vs motorcycle, the car wins. None of this changes the necessary lack of intent or the facts that accidents are accidents, not typically someone intentionally plowing into the the other vehicle (in this case, a motorcyclist) with malice, dead set on killing them. WAY different situation.
 
I say decimation. Execute every tenth murderous driver. Actually decimation is an interesting percentage for things like desertion. If you killed all deserters you'd lose your whole army. One in ten scares the crap out of them.
 
No, what people are saying is that when there was no criminal intent you can't whack someone upside the head with unjust charges. It was an accident afterall, not a planned event intent on harm. There is a big difference.

Okay, I can certainly understand that premise, yes. What I find inexcusable is the lack of any afterthought. It's chalked up to a mistake, a petty fine is handed out, and everyone goes about their business as if nothing happened.

What's the point in all the process that one has to follow in order to exemplify competency behind the wheel (written tests, road tests, licensing & registration, insurance), if such a glaring example of incompetency is not met with recourse? It was a mistake, yes, but the consequence was DIRE. That should be recognized and accounted for, properly. A maximum penalty of $500 is not what I would call accountability when an accident results in death.
 
If it's such an honest mistake, as everybody says, why have even a token fine? As a deterrent?
 
What I find inexcusable is the lack of any afterthought. It's chalked up to a mistake, a petty fine is handed out, and everyone goes about their business as if nothing happened.

The driver that killed the motorcyclist has to live with that for the rest of their life. Until you've met someone that has to live with that burden for the rest of their life you have no idea how much they suffer from it. I know someone in that situation and I wouldn't wish it on anyone..

Arguably, that's more than the "pound of flesh" that many are demanding in itself. A financial penalty would mean nothing in comparison despite apparently giving some members of the public some satisfaction?
 
The driver that killed the motorcyclist has to live with that for the rest of their life. Until you've met someone that has to live with that burden for the rest of their life you have no idea how much they suffer from it.

I want to believe that's true. If you've ever been in an accident, serious or fender bender, you'll note some people go directly to "how does this affect me?" not "are you ok?".
 
I want to believe that's true. If you've ever been in an accident, serious or fender bender, you'll note some people go directly to "how does this affect me?" not "are you ok?".

I think both are to be expected, probably the latter, then the former.

It really does effect people. My coworker in question still struggles with the memories and images in his head. There is no escaping it.
 

Back
Top Bottom