@SeaGreenEyez I thought he was pissed because the gov stepped in prematurely. I was wondering how much the mandatorys had hindered the judge in the first place.

@SeaGreenEyez

He passed at least two runaway truck ramps, which he didn't take. His lawyer, Jim Golgan, said he was too overwhelmed to see the ramps. Aguilera-Mederos ran into a line of traffic and caused a flaming crash with 28 vehicles, closing the interstate for a day.

@SeaGreenEyez There is a minimal level of competence you expect from someone driving a truck that large on our freeways. I've watched videos of him driving recklessly on upward grades (so he was likely lying about his brakes). He missed two turnouts. He had two opportunities to avoid what happened. If he drove a truck that he knew had mechanical problems, as a certified truck driver, he is responsible for the consequences.

@SeaGreenEyez I will respond in-line:

Cutting to the chase your of the opinion 110, years is an appriate sentence. OK. Just own it.

BD: I believe somewhere between 10 years and 30 years is appropriate. Whatever you should receive for being convicted of 4 counts of negligent manslaughter. He should never ever be allowed to drive a truck again.

Have you EVER been in an accident?

BD: Yes, equipment failure. I was pulling a 1500 gallon wagon down a hill with a pickup truck when the tongue of the wagon broke.

Was it negligence or with intent?

BD: Neither. it was equipment failure.

Did you INTEND to have an accident? Legally speaking, that's impossible. You can't intend to have an accident.

BD: He was driving so recklessly prior to his "Accident" that other motorists were filming him.

He could have blown passed 74 turn outs. That's not a crime. I've lived in Colorado. It's not a crime to NOT use a turnout (or rather, a turn up.)

BD: He is trained and licensed to drive a large truck. He was driving the truck recklessly prior to the "accident", he did not take appropriate precautions to be sure his truck was operating properly. He did not use his engine to slow himself down in the event that his brakes failed. He did not take the opportunity to turn out if his breaks failed. The combination of his reckless driving and his failure to exercise the options he had to avoid a collision should result in a criminal conviction of negligent manslaughter.

He couldn't forsee, foretell or predict the future. A lapse in judgement isn't a crime. It might be negligence, that wasn't determined in this particular case.

BD: If you engage in reckless behavior of any kind that puts the lives of other people in danger, and that reckless behavior results in the death of other people, that is the crime of manslaughter.

He's not responsible for the deaths of those already in the midst of an accident. But let's say he is. So is the ORIGINAL card, trucks and people that caused the initial crash. Where are the charges for those 8 people? Legally, they are more culpable than this kid. They caused the subsequent pileup and pile on.

It matters not. He's now got ten years, minus time served and is eligible for good time. And good on the Government for righting a disgusting wrong.

(There are lifelong over the road truckers that would tell you you're beyond wrong. That speaks volumes.)

BD: I found the video of his reckless driving on a trucking web site.

If you happen to be in an accident, post the details here. I'll bet you have an entirely different view.

@TheMiddleWay but he has never spent a day in jail. And he has been a con man and a grifter his entire life.

No usually about it. There is zero equity in our justice system......

Thousands of non violent men of color sitting in jail because they can't make bail for cannabis possession. Democracy is ponderous & fragile. We are in the midst of a crisis. Too many epidemics to list.

@Buck When any system based on a zero-sum (winning and losing ) outcome equity is the first casualty