Elderly Man Convicted of Manslaughter in Farmer's Market Crash That Killed 10

 

Friday, October 20, 2006

 

LOS ANGELES ? An elderly man who killed 10 people and injured more than 70 when his car roared through an outdoor farmers market in Santa Monica three years ago was found guilty Friday of 10 counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence.

 

George Russell Weller, 89, was not in court to hear the verdict that resulted from the July 2003 crash. With the judge's permission, the frail, white-haired defendant, who uses a wheelchair, attended only the trial's opening statements.

 

Weller faces as many as 18 years in prison when sentenced.

 

Jurors deliberated eight days before reaching the harshest verdict possible. While Weller could have been convicted of misdemeanor negligence, the panel opted for felonies.

 

Defense attorneys argued that Weller was a victim of "pedal error," in which he panicked and mistook his car's accelerator for the brake when it raced into the open-air market on July 16, 2003. Prosecutors said he was careless to the point of criminal negligence and lacked remorse.

 

"He looked at what he had done, essentially shrugged his shoulders and said 'oops,"' prosecutor Ann Ambrose told the jury.

 

On Wednesday, jurors had indicated they were having trouble reaching a verdict and asked Superior Court Judge Michael Johnson to explain the legal definition of felony gross negligence. Johnson responded in writing that it meant "more than ordinary carelessness, inattention or mistake in judgment."

 

The jurors then took Thursday off and came back with their verdict on Friday.

 

During the trial, jurors were shown photographs of several of the victims, including one who was sprawled on the street amid scattered strawberries. Another appeared to be embedded in the crumpled hood of Weller's car. Those killed ranged in age from 7 months to 78 years.

 

Although Weller did not testify during the trial, jurors did hear his taped interview with police immediately after the crash in which he said he tried everything he could think of to stop his car.

 

"I tried to take the control knob and jam it into park. Everything. Anything that I thought would stop the action of the car," he told a California Highway patrol investigator and a Santa Monica police detective.

 

He said he had no idea how many people he hit.

 

"But I'm deeply sorry for any pain that everyone went through. It was my fault," he said.

 

The crash left behind a devastating scene of carnage on what, until moments before, had been an idyllic Southern California summer day. It also ignited a national debate over whether elderly people should be allowed to continue to drive.

 

Weller was 86 when he sent his 1992 Buick Le Sabre roaring into the crowded farmers market on July 16, 2003. The vehicle traveled some 300 yards, reaching speeds of 60 mph or more, as it crashed into food stalls and mowed down scores of people. It finally came to a stop, after hitting a ditch, with one victim's body tangled underneath and another's draped across the hood.

 

The main issue raised at trial was whether Weller had control of the car during the 20 seconds it careened through the market.

 

Prosecutors said that was more than enough time to realize and correct his mistake, suggesting he steered into people and away from parked cars to avoid hurting himself.They called one witness who claimed Weller said: "You saw me coming, why didn't you get out of my way?"

 

Defense attorneys called expert witnesses who testified that Weller had likely been in a trancelike state of shock and was unable to determine he was pumping the accelerator and not the brake.

 

The tragedy had begun uneventfully enough with Weller, a retired food broker, leaving his Santa Monica home to mail a letter to his great-niece.

 

"How do you figure that a simple thing like that would be a precursor to all of the agony that I brought people?" he asked during his interview with police.

 

Witnesses testified that after Weller left the post office his car rear-ended a Mercedes-Benz just outside the farmer's market, then roared through the market's entrance.

link

7 month old baby?

 

 

christ

When you're mowing down 80+ pedestrians in a crowded public place with your Buick, you're bound to hit a baby.

Good, I'm glad the prosecutors went for the max.

And thanks to the AARP elderly drivers will be able to drive until they keel over and die regardless of their ability.

 

I think having people over age 65 being tested every 3-5 years would be more than fair.

Ban cars.

And thanks to the AARP elderly drivers will be able to drive until they keel over and die regardless of their ability.

 

I think having people over age 65 being tested every 3-5 years would be more than fair.

 

I agree. Once you reach a certain age, you should have to continually prove that you have the reflexes to operate such a powerful machine.

 

Ban cars.

 

Stop trying to turn every bullpen topic into a gun topic. :thumbup

And thanks to the AARP elderly drivers will be able to drive until they keel over and die regardless of their ability.

 

I think having people over age 65 being tested every 3-5 years would be more than fair.

 

 

Personally I think every 6 months having a day of in-car would be at the very least we need. Old people need to be kept off the streets. They're a hazard to themselves, pedestrians, and other drivers. And when they're not being a hazard, they're just plain annoying.

And thanks to the AARP elderly drivers will be able to drive until they keel over and die regardless of their ability.

 

I think having people over age 65 being tested every 3-5 years would be more than fair.

 

 

Personally I think every 6 months having a day of in-car would be at the very least we need. Old people need to be kept off the streets. They're a hazard to themselves, pedestrians, and other drivers. And when they're not being a hazard, they're just plain annoying.

Every 6 months...DMVs are already a nightmare, if we had the elderly getting tested every six months, the lines for other DMV services would be Soviet Union breadline-esque.

And thanks to the AARP elderly drivers will be able to drive until they keel over and die regardless of their ability.

 

I think having people over age 65 being tested every 3-5 years would be more than fair.

 

 

Personally I think every 6 months having a day of in-car would be at the very least we need. Old people need to be kept off the streets. They're a hazard to themselves, pedestrians, and other drivers. And when they're not being a hazard, they're just plain annoying.

 

Seems a bit much.

 

I'm for testing MAYBE once a year, but any more than that is a hassle.

 

Plus, I think the tendency is to say "ALL" old people can't drive, when that's just not true. If that stereotype is true then maybe we should do the same with Somalians. Those peeps can't drive either... At any age.

And thanks to the AARP elderly drivers will be able to drive until they keel over and die regardless of their ability.

 

I think having people over age 65 being tested every 3-5 years would be more than fair.

 

 

Personally I think every 6 months having a day of in-car would be at the very least we need. Old people need to be kept off the streets. They're a hazard to themselves, pedestrians, and other drivers. And when they're not being a hazard, they're just plain annoying.

Every 6 months...DMVs are already a nightmare, if we had the elderly getting tested every six months, the lines for other DMV services would be Soviet Union breadline-esque.

 

Who cares, I guarantee you thousands of lives will be saved every year AND tardiness to work will decrease all over the nation. If we must, we can open up a Department of Geezer Affairs to keep them out of our DMV's as well.

 

 

 

 

And thanks to the AARP elderly drivers will be able to drive until they keel over and die regardless of their ability.

 

I think having people over age 65 being tested every 3-5 years would be more than fair.

 

 

Personally I think every 6 months having a day of in-car would be at the very least we need. Old people need to be kept off the streets. They're a hazard to themselves, pedestrians, and other drivers. And when they're not being a hazard, they're just plain annoying.

 

Seems a bit much.

 

I'm for testing MAYBE once a year, but any more than that is a hassle.

 

Plus, I think the tendency is to say "ALL" old people can't drive, when that's just not true. If that stereotype is true then maybe we should do the same with Somalians. Those peeps can't drive either... At any age.

 

Six months seems a bit much? It wouldn't matter if they had a driving lesson every day, they'd just forget what they learned in 2 hours.

Six months seems a bit much? It wouldn't matter if they had a driving lesson every day, they'd just forget what they learned in 2 hours.

 

 

Hilarious.

 

Old people can't remember sh*t! :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Thing is, having something that discriminates against people of a certain age after 18/21 (no matter how good an idea it is) probably won't stand up in court.

 

Old people for sure should never be allowed to drive during rush hour. They clog up the left lane going ten miles an hour in the parts of the streets that move, then don't go quick enough once traffic hits a stand still to prevent tens of cars from entering the lane and slowing down traffic further. Let's not even get into the expressway.....

Thing is, having something that discriminates against people of a certain age after 18/21 (no matter how good an idea it is) probably won't stand up in court.

 

Old people for sure should never be allowed to drive during rush hour. They clog up the left lane going ten miles an hour in the parts of the streets that move, then don't go quick enough once traffic hits a stand still to prevent tens of cars from entering the lane and slowing down traffic further. Let's not even get into the expressway.....

 

Well age is not a protected category like race or religion. We do discriminate-under 16 no license, under 18 no cigs, etc. Only rational basis applies. And judging by some recent horrible deaths people have suffered because of elderly drivers, I think it would be fine.

 

The thing that bothers me about the ruling is that he seems to have been convicted of driving while old. Driving while elderly and mentally weak was his negligent act. Yet he was given a licence to do so by the state. I think this could open the door for lawsuits against the state because if it is gross negligence to drive while old, isn't negligence to give a license to someone who is old? Kind of like giving a drunk driver the keys to your car.

 

It's obvious this was based on emotion and not sound principles. I think old people should be banned from driving. But this guy should not be going to prison. Of course Im not sure of the full details of the case, so Im just assuming it was because he was old.

Thing is, having something that discriminates against people of a certain age after 18/21 (no matter how good an idea it is) probably won't stand up in court.

 

Old people for sure should never be allowed to drive during rush hour. They clog up the left lane going ten miles an hour in the parts of the streets that move, then don't go quick enough once traffic hits a stand still to prevent tens of cars from entering the lane and slowing down traffic further. Let's not even get into the expressway.....

 

Well age is not a protected category like race or religion. We do discriminate-under 16 no license, under 18 no cigs, etc. Only rational basis applies. And judging by some recent horrible deaths people have suffered because of elderly drivers, I think it would be fine.

 

The thing that bothers me about the ruling is that he seems to have been convicted of driving while old. Driving while elderly and mentally weak was his negligent act. Yet he was given a licence to do so by the state. I think this could open the door for lawsuits against the state because if it is gross negligence to drive while old, isn't negligence to give a license to someone who is old? Kind of like giving a drunk driver the keys to your car.

 

It's obvious this was based on emotion and not sound principles. I think old people should be banned from driving. But this guy should not be going to prison. Of course Im not sure of the full details of the case, so Im just assuming it was because he was old.

Isn't it true that the State can't be sued by a private citizen without consent from the State? I remember reading that somewhere and thinking it was pretty backwards.

 

I don't think the elderly should be banned from driving. There are plenty of elderly people who are safe drivers, and plenty of younger people who aren't. Mandatory diagnostic tests past a certain age is the only way to go.

Just keep them off the streets..

Stop trying to turn every bullpen topic into a gun topic. :thumbup

 

I'm not.

 

These horrible 4 wheel death machines should be taken off the streets and heavily restricted. If cars were banned, these 10 people wouldn't have been killed and 70+ wouldn't have been injured. Cars are the worst invention in the history of the world.

Your act is a tired one.

Your act is a tired one.

 

Uh huh.

Stop trying to turn every bullpen topic into a gun topic. :thumbup

 

I'm not.

 

These horrible 4 wheel death machines should be taken off the streets and heavily restricted. If cars were banned, these 10 people wouldn't have been killed and 70+ wouldn't have been injured. Cars are the worst invention in the history of the world.

You're pathetic.

Stop trying to turn every bullpen topic into a gun topic. :thumbup

 

I'm not.

 

These horrible 4 wheel death machines should be taken off the streets and heavily restricted. If cars were banned, these 10 people wouldn't have been killed and 70+ wouldn't have been injured. Cars are the worst invention in the history of the world.

You're pathetic.

Now when I say these types of things to people, such as... Jimmy... I get banned for a week.

 

The feeling is mutual.

Stop trying to turn every bullpen topic into a gun topic. :thumbup

 

I'm not.

 

These horrible 4 wheel death machines should be taken off the streets and heavily restricted. If cars were banned, these 10 people wouldn't have been killed and 70+ wouldn't have been injured. Cars are the worst invention in the history of the world.

You're pathetic.

Now when I say these types of things to people, such as... Jimmy... I get banned for a week.

 

The feeling is mutual.

 

I'm not going to have you making fabricated statements about your conspiracy theory about moderator actions and their correlation to your politics vs. someone else's. That's garbage and you know it.

Stop trying to turn every bullpen topic into a gun topic. :thumbup

 

I'm not.

 

These horrible 4 wheel death machines should be taken off the streets and heavily restricted. If cars were banned, these 10 people wouldn't have been killed and 70+ wouldn't have been injured. Cars are the worst invention in the history of the world.

You're pathetic.

Now when I say these types of things to people, such as... Jimmy... I get banned for a week.

 

The feeling is mutual.

 

I'm not going to have you making fabricated statements about your conspiracy theory about moderator actions and their correlation to your politics vs. someone else's. That's garbage and you know it.

It's not garbage, it's the damn truth whether you want to hear it or not. I don't appreciate being banned for something and then seeing other people make near verbatim posts and get away with it.

 

I never said it has anything to do with politics, merely some mods just don't like me and take it upon themselves to scrutinize every little thing I say looking for any excuse to ban me. I definitely deserve most of my bans and have no problem admitting it, however the fact that Fritz and countless others are able to say anything they want with no repercussions whatsoever, yet I say something similar and get banned for a week is proof positive that certain mods are playing favorites. There is no other explanation for that, and if there is I sure as hell would like to hear it.

 

Enforce the rules fairly across the board, it's not so much to ask. I will be more than happy to take this to PM's in order to not crap up the thread anymore.

In fairness, Fritz can't say what he wants to Das. He gets banned for that.

In fairness, Fritz can't say what he wants to Das. He gets banned for that.

 

I like Fritz don't get me wrong, he's probably one of my favorite MB.com members, but I just think it's bulls*** how some people can say whatever they want and others (read: me) get banned for every little thing.