Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
An adult (1) mows down two girls (2) who were walking on the d@#m sidewalk (3) and turns out to have been unlicensed (4), yet they won't release the driver's name (5) and will only say that she will "likely face a citation" and, if the one sister takes a turn for the even worse, "could be charged with operating without a license" (6). Could? Could?!?!
I could see not releasing the name if the driver was a minor, or that the situation might be different if the girls had darted into the road. But damn, how do the cumulative effect of points 1 through 4 possibly result in 5 and 6? She was unlicensed and behind the wheel. "Ongoing investigation" or not, why hasn't she at least been charged with operating without a license?
This reeks of mayor's-daughter-protection type of nonsense... or are citations a lot more serious in PA than they have been anywhere else I've lived?
Since there really isn't a reason for the police to be forthcoming--this isn't, for example, a suspect at large they are trying to find--I guess I don't see any significance to the limited information available so far.
Obviously the big question is how/why the driver lost control, and they will need an answer for that question before deciding on a final list of charges.
In neither the justice system nor journalism is there a standard norm that the names of criminal suspects should be revealed prior to the filing of charges (it happens sometimes, but isn't automatic by any means). In fact, see here:
Journalists should:
. . .
— Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
Of course people are free to disagree with these norms, but my point is that it doesn't have any particular significance if you don't see a suspect's name published while they are being investigated and before they are charged.
I agree with Caroline, who cares if it was a medical situation or otherwise, if it wasn't a minor, the name should be published.
Why? What does it do for you to know that THAT specific person was involved in an accident? All it does is cause a media circus depending on the reported events, and then by the time they get their day in court they've already been found guilty by public opinion, and it doesn't matter if they get cleared of all charges because the gossips have decided that they're guilty no matter what.
Like Casey Anthony. She was found innocent, but everyone says she's guilty and her life is pretty much ruined despite a not guilty verdict.
Like Casey Anthony. She was found innocent, but everyone says she's guilty and her life is pretty much ruined despite a not guilty verdict.
And there's already one juror who has left the stated of Florida and is in hiding, and the rest are all complaining about how upset they because they know they did wrong.
Some of you couldn't identify the truth if it smacked you hard in the face.
And there's already one juror who has left the stated of Florida and is in hiding, and the rest are all complaining about how upset they because they know they did wrong.
Some of you couldn't identify the truth if it smacked you hard in the face.
I like how you ignored my question and focused on my example. Cute!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
