Arrest reported in ISU hit and run death

[CyFan61]

kinda sorta... it's still vehicular homicide according to Iowa Code Chapter 707.6A. But I was wrong that it could be a Class B. This would be a Class C if they decide to call it negligence.

707.6A only applies if the driver is:
*Drunk
*Willfully or wantonly reckless (i.e. observing and appreciating significant risk and engaging in risky behavior anyway)
*Running from the cops
*Drag racing

Not this case.

We already know what Clague is charged with; see my earlier post. Class D felony.

 

[IAStubborn]

I think Clague's (the bus driver's) position is a lot worse than some people seem to think on here, based on some of the facts from the Ames Tribune's story today:



The facts alleged by the Story County attorney indicate a knowledge of the accident. I can see Clague striking Ms. Jacobs and not knowing what occurred right away, but I do not think it likely at all that he went on for weeks without the thought crossing his mind that he might have been the driver who struck her.

While I can perhaps understand his position in that moment - as a person, you wouldn't want to admit to anyone that you're responsible for a death, especially if there's a part of your brain desperately saying "Maybe it wasn't me" - the alleged facts would pretty easily prove guilt if it did come to a trial, I would imagine, and any sympathy that I might feel for a person who made a small mistake with such enormous consequences is washed away by his selfish and cowardly actions that prevented the victim's family from gaining closure.

Again, he could be innocent of knowingly leaving the scene of a fatal accident (knowing he hit something but not knowing what) and later putting the pieces together thus guilty of failure to come forward with evidence. The latter,is not a crime that I am aware of in fact I would argue it would be failure to self incriminate qhich is not only not a crime, he is constitutionally protected from having to come forward at that point if he believed it could incriminate himself.

Based on what we know so far I don't think he does jail time.

 

[chuckd4735]

I don't see how this point responds to anything I said or claimed in my post. Curious what you are getting at.

I think Clague's (the bus driver's) position is a lot worse than some people seem to think on here, based on some of the facts from the Ames Tribune's story today:



The facts alleged by the Story County attorney indicate a knowledge of the accident. I can see Clague striking Ms. Jacobs and not knowing what occurred right away, but I do not think it likely at all that he went on for weeks without the thought crossing his mind that he might have been the driver who struck her.

While I can perhaps understand his position in that moment - as a person, you wouldn't want to admit to anyone that you're responsible for a death, especially if there's a part of your brain desperately saying "Maybe it wasn't me" - the alleged facts would pretty easily prove guilt if it did come to a trial, I would imagine, and any sympathy that I might feel for a person who made a small mistake with such enormous consequences is washed away by his selfish and cowardly actions that prevented the victim's family from gaining closure.

You brought up that you thought there was no way he could of gone on for weeks without knowing. I agree, but there is no charge of knowing what he did and not coming forward, so that point is pretty much moot.

 

[CycloneRulzzz]

Just reading through this thread now. Wow, glad they have found the guilty party and the family can have a sense of closure.

 

[CyFan61]

I would argue it would be failure to self incriminate qhich is not only not a crime, he is constitutionally protected from having to come forward at that point if he believed it could incriminate himself.

 

[CY88CE11]

The news stories lead you to believe that the video wasn't connected to the crime until two weeks ago. That could be sloppy reporting or for some reason the police didn't want the public to know about the video earlier to make sure they had everything in place before making an arrest and going public. They were pleading for the public to come forward with any information in December which seems odd if they had this video then. I also thought I read where they were going to body shops interviewing employees and looking for cars that would have damage from this type of accident. Seems like a waste of a lot of man power if they had this video on the first day.

That's not odd at all. Why would they stop after gaining one piece of evidence? You keep looking for evidence to make your case stronger. Seems to me the authorities handled this pretty well.

 

[CyFan61]

You brought up that you thought there was no way he could of gone on for weeks without knowing. I agree, but there is no charge of knowing what he did and not coming forward, so that point is pretty much moot.

I agree; I think it's more indicative of Clague's character than it would be a legal point, because it seems that the key for the state here is to prove that he was reckless in leaving the scene at the time of the accident and not later.

 

[chuckd4735]

I agree; I think it's more indicative of Clague's character than it would be a legal point, because it seems that the key for the state here is to prove that he was reckless in leaving the scene at the time of the accident and not later.

Based off the charge, I think that is correct. Im not a lawyer, but Im assuming Clague did not wrong legally after he left the scene of the accident.

 

[IAStubborn]

I agree; I think it's more indicative of Clague's character than it would be a legal point, because it seems that the key for the state here is to prove that he was reckless in leaving the scene at the time of the accident and not later.

Exactly, which given the situation may be pretty hard to do (depending on how obvious the audio is that he knew or should have known he hit a person). They say he clearly knew he hit something but their burden of proof is higher for the charge. I can see this becoming a plea deal for leaving the scene of an accident (a serious misdemeanor I believe) since they can likely show he had reason to believe he hit something and should have stopped to find out what but a hard time proving beyond a reasonable doubt he knowingly hit a person and fled the scene leaving her to die.

 

[Chitowncy]

Agree with the posters to reserve judgment on the driver until more facts come out. I feel bad for him.

Sad all around. Of course, I feel worse for that poor girl and her family. How tragic.

 

[cstrunk]

I'm not trying to make excuses here, but those buses have the internal lights on at all times. No night vision, heavy rain, dark morning. It's far more likely that bus driver didn't see the girl than the girl didn't see the bus. Those lights inside the bus are a huge safety problem.

They can definitely hinder your vision with reflection in the windshield, but you can turn them off if you're not in service or you can turn off one side of them (usually the passenger side) to reduce the amount of glare. It's not the best thing to have on in poor lighting conditions, but it's not a huge issue. The darkness outside and pouring rain (foggy windows likely) would have been much worse contributors to poor vision.

I'm sure defense attorney's are licking their chops. He may be guilty, but some easy things to defend - how do you arrest someone for hearing something hit a bus but not see it? What if he walked out of the bus because he heard a loud sound, but had no idea what it was? Could he have mistaken it for something other than a human?

Really excited to see this trial go down.

It really sounds like he knew what happened the next time he came to that spot about 20 minutes later, even if he didn't realize it at first.

 

[cyclone83]

That's not odd at all. Why would they stop after gaining one piece of evidence? You keep looking for evidence to make your case stronger. Seems to me the authorities handled this pretty well.

Good point. How often do we hear of the first evidence leading a certain way so law enforcement quits looking at other scenarios which can result in wrongful convictions.

 

[ISUCyclones2015]

Well this is just ****ed up

 

[Tornado man]

It really sounds like he knew what happened the next time he came to that spot about 20 minutes later, even if he didn't realize it at first.

I realize that a bus would come by every 20 minutes, but was it his bus? If so, he was driving a very short route, correct?

 

[Mr Janny]

I realize that a bus would come by every 20 minutes, but was it his bus? If so, he was driving a very short route, correct?

That's a good question. If evidence shows that he drove by the site multiple times... man I hope he was just ignorant, because if he knew and drove by again and again... that's just evil.

 

[roundball]

Again, he could be innocent of knowingly leaving the scene of a fatal accident (knowing he hit something but not knowing what) and later putting the pieces together thus guilty of failure to come forward with evidence. The latter,is not a crime that I am aware of in fact I would argue it would be failure to self incriminate qhich is not only not a crime, he is constitutionally protected from having to come forward at that point if he believed it could incriminate himself.

Based on what we know so far I don't think he does jail time.

That's...not how protection from self-incrimination works.

 

[Incyte]

Exactly, which given the situation may be pretty hard to do (depending on how obvious the audio is that he knew or should have known he hit a person). They say he clearly knew he hit something but their burden of proof is higher for the charge. I can see this becoming a plea deal for leaving the scene of an accident (a serious misdemeanor I believe) since they can likely show he had reason to believe he hit something and should have stopped to find out what but a hard time proving beyond a reasonable doubt he knowingly hit a person and fled the scene leaving her to die.

He doesn't have to be aware that there is a fatality, just that the accident was likely to involve a personal injury. The fact it was a fatality just increases the severity of the charge.

"Our above determination that the State must prove defendant's knowledge of the accident is not to be interpreted as imposing a requirement that the defendant also know the accident has caused injury or death."

"[T]he driver who leaves the scene of the accident seldom possesses actual knowledge of injury; by leaving the scene he forecloses any opportunity to acquire such actual knowledge. Hence a requirement of actual knowledge of injury would realistically render the statute useless. We therefore believe that criminal liability attaches to a driver who knowingly leaves the scene of an accident if he actually knew of the injury or if he knew that the accident was of such a nature that one would reasonably anticipate that it resulted in injury to a person."

http://law.justia.com/cases/iowa/supreme-court/1981/65010-0.html

 

[cstrunk]

I realize that a bus would come by every 20 minutes, but was it his bus? If so, he was driving a very short route, correct?

That's a good question. If evidence shows that he drove by the site multiple times... man I hope he was just ignorant, because if he knew and drove by again and again... that's just evil.

It may not be exactly 20 minutes (it's been 8-9 years since I drove that route, might be every 40 minutes for the same bus to make a trip, with two buses leaving on 20 minute intervals?), but if he was driving the Gold route, it's a continuous route that you just do a loop on. It's possible that he could have been an extra (an additional bus sent to help especially busy routes at certain times of the day), but most likely he drove by there several times.

 

[CyArob]

I realize that a bus would come by every 20 minutes, but was it his bus? If so, he was driving a very short route, correct?

It's ~2.5 mile route.

 

[GrindingAway]

I'd be very interested in seeing the texts he sent. This just seems awful.

I'd also wonder about the reaction of those that received the texts. Why didn't they come forward.