Prison Sentence for death of 46-year-old Niagara region man - Greg Caissie | GTAMotorcycle.com

Prison Sentence for death of 46-year-old Niagara region man - Greg Caissie

OSIRIS_001

OSIRIS_001

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Canadian Forces Veteran Served four tours of duty during his 16-year military career - Greg Caissie was killed in October 2018 by a drunk driver.

His wife, a passenger on the motorcycle, sustained "life altering" injuries.

The defendant was approaching the intersection of Buchner Road and Highway 140 in Welland around 9 p.m. when she slammed into the rear of one vehicle before swerving into the oncoming lane, striking the motorcycle. Caissie died at the scene. His wife was rushed to a local hospital, then airlifted to Hamilton General Hospital.

An expert at the Centre of Forensic Sciences concluded her blood/alcohol level at the time of the crash was between 70 and 135 milligrams. The legal limit is 80 milligrams

Source

R.I.P. Greg - Obituary
 
Last edited:
Sad news, however justice should be equal for all, defendant had a point on that. Lots of these cases sadly get tossed out as "accidents" because all of us are just civilians, the fact this was a veteran is the only reason this stuck.
 
They simply have never come down hard enough on drunk drivers. Too many are repeat offenders. First offence over .80 should merit a year in jail. Second 5 and a lifetime driving ban. I'm fed up with these people without a moments thought for those they may kill.
 
Roadghost said:
They simply have never come down hard enough on drunk drivers. Too many are repeat offenders. First offence over .80 should merit a year in jail. Second 5 and a lifetime driving ban. I'm fed up with these people without a moments thought for those they may kill.
Click to expand...
Would you do same for distracted drivers?
 
Mad Mike said:
Would you do same for distracted drivers?
Click to expand...

The problem with "distracted" driving is that it's very subjective. If you're caught drinking a coffee, or glancing at a road map, or changing the channel on a radio, no. Cell phone? Absolutely.
 
Mad Mike said:
Would you do same for distracted drivers?
Click to expand...
In my mind, the scale should be different for distracted. Drunk driving requires a lot of time and stupid (you need to drink a lot, then decide that driving is a good idea). Distracted driving can be a momentary lapse. Obviously the outcome can be similar. Using roadghost's example of one year of prison, then five for drunk, I think distracted should be one month of no license, then one year, then follow the drunk driving model as obviously you aren't getting the message.
 
Police no longer need a reasonable suspicion of impairment or alcohol consumption before demanding a breath sample and there is now a two-hour window for police to demand someone blow into a breathalyzer. The obvious concern raised by many ? That someone who arrives at a destination and consumes alcohol in those ensuing two hours could register a fail on the breathalyzer, even though they had not actually driven drunk.
 
Roadghost said:
The problem with "distracted" driving is that it's very subjective. If you're caught drinking a coffee, or glancing at a road map, or changing the channel on a radio, no. Cell phone? Absolutely.
Click to expand...

what about fumbling with a pack of cigarettes and a lighter? You know how many cigarettes ive been hit with riding? Not that many only once lol but definitely a distraction. What if you drop your cigarette and then are panicking about it burning your seat? and then cause an accident. Personally I say 0.00 BAC if youre driving zero tolerance. This person got a slap on the wrist and the defense she used shows zero remorse and how deserving she is of a punitive sentence. Make an example out of her. If you planned to drink and knew you were driving and disregard the laws, and then kill someone that should be a murder charge.
 
Distracted driving can be trained out of a person not unlike training a dog to not pee on every bush. DUI has two different scenarios. One is an alcoholic and the other an irresponsible boozer.

The irresponsible boozer could theoretically grow up or be forced to grow up with the appropriate encouragement, stick or carrot.

The alcoholic has a brain deficiency that science has yet to fully understand. Therefore there is no cure. I had a friend that was a classic alcoholic and there's no easy fix. He drank himself out of a good marriage, multi million dollar house and successful business. What kind of fine would have changed him? BTW he smoked himself to death because he couldn't quit smoking either.

Locking an alcoholic driver up for a year makes him safe for a year and it has little effect on other alcoholic drivers. AA and other intervention programs help but there is alway the risk of a relapse. What do you do?
 
mistersouthpaw said:
what about fumbling with a pack of cigarettes and a lighter? You know how many cigarettes ive been hit with riding? Not that many only once lol but definitely a distraction. What if you drop your cigarette and then are panicking about it burning your seat? and then cause an accident. Personally I say 0.00 BAC if youre driving zero tolerance. This person got a slap on the wrist and the defense she used shows zero remorse and how deserving she is of a punitive sentence. Make an example out of her. If you planned to drink and knew you were driving and disregard the laws, and then kill someone that should be a murder charge.
Click to expand...

Eden, who hired and fired several lawyers since her arrest and later represented herself, had referred to the case against her as a "travesty of justice."

She filed a number of applications with the courts and tried to get the plea struck, saying she only pleaded guilty to the charges under duress and accused the Crown of "aggressive arrogance and judicial misconduct."

Since there was no premeditation it would be a manslaughter charge but yeah throw the book at them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom