CASE LAW - R v Hecimovic

BC Courts Coat of ArmsThis decision as reported in the press last week made me scratch my head. We have a driver who was doing at least 20 km/h over the speed limit, went straight through from a right turn only lane against a red light, hit a concrete median, lost control and collided with another vehicle, killing both occupants. She had driven through the intersection twice before and had ridden through it a number of times as a passenger in her boyfriend's car. There is some indication that her emotional state affected her ability to drive. Madame Justice Gropper decided that this was not dangerous driving and acquitted Hecimovic.

Even after considering the judgment, this still seems like dangerous driving to me and it must have seemed so to Crown as well or they would not have prosecuted the charge. Is this another disconnect between what the average person would consider dangerous in the real world and the courts fail to acknowledge?


Read the Reasons for Judgment - R v Hecimovic


I was thinking about this for

I was thinking about this for a few days...

Here's a driver who obviously made an egregious mistake, which ended up in tragedy.
Should they be punished? Justice does not think that they should be criminalized.
So the criminal charges got dismissed. Aside from the increased premiums,
the offending driver does not seemingly suffer anymore punishment.

Personally I believe that living with a thought of having killed two innocent young people by mistake would be punishment enough - it stays with the person for life; it morally moves the person into a category of "having killed someone before".
The phycological effects of this are far reaching and "for life".

Perhaps, from certain perspective, the offending driver would have benefited from "society assigned" punishment,
as they would at least have a sense of "having served and paid for their mistake".
Unfortunately they will never get to "enjoy" the atonement,
unless the offender is a psychopath, which is unlikely in a nursing profession.

In the end, from the victims perspective, this was a freak accident - inevitable risk of driving.
No matter the safety precautions one may consider, a flying Paseo can possibly rip the roof off your Suzuki, while you are waiting for the light to turn green. It's a grim reminder that the risks we may take while driving, can affect others to a fatal extent.
This story will be in my mind next time a thought of "right lane dash" visits me in-traffic.

Just noticed this one ...

... the judgment was wrong.

We're all responsible for our actions behind the wheel, it's inherent in accepting responsibility for operating a motor vehicle.

That woman was driving her car far too fast for conditions, without paying sufficient attention to her surroundings.  Other people were killed as a consequence of this.  Criminal Negligence causing death is the only reasonable finding in a court of law.

You know, very often these days we see all these 'statistics' trotted out to justify this, that or the other action by police, or ICBC, or the courts, etc.

But why don't we ever see this: The Vast Majority of fatal collisions are caused by sober drivers.


Google Ads