I looked all over the net and the mainline news websites for the back story on this. Finally found a lot of info in the Reason comments thread.

Don’t think he should have gotten 110 years. BUT apparently the DA offered him ten for a clear case of vehicular manslaughter. He turned it down and went to trail. Oops.

42 charges? Curious what they were and if they really should have been considered one crime. Really sounds like they threw every charge against him.

This may become a politicized one quickly, because many truckers are siding with him, talking about boycotting the state.

Also seeing some parallels with the Alec Baldwin shooting. Which also looks like manslaughter to me. But is trying to be played off as just an accident.

The parallels with the recent Wisconsin parade incident are also interesting.

Wisconsin parade incident

That guy isn't going to get 110 years. TBH, if he serves more than 10 years, I'll be surprised. The system already set him free on a $1,000 bail after he - get this - ran over one of his ex's.

The prosecutor is this guy

https://wisconsinspotlight.com/no-consolation-in-john-doe-order/

Lest we forget - four people died, and many others were injured, because the defendant didn’t maintain his commercial truck, and, didn’t use one of several failed brake stopping lanes as he was going down the mountain. Modern trucks have redundant systems to prevent the type of brake failure the defendant alleged, and electronic recording systems which will prove whether or not there was a brake failure. Further, a driver can always downshift to reduce speed.

Simply put - there appears to be a lot to this story that isn’t being reported. I’d like to hear the evidence the jury heard before deciding that this guy was punished merely for exercising his right to trial.

We had a notorious incident over 20 years ago, where a drunk driver killed eight members of the University cross country team in a single collision that he walked away from.

The law struggled to give him an appropriate sentence. Think he ended up with ten years hard time. In my mind, it should have been forty.
Im thinking we have a similar situation here. The kind of reckless disregard it takes to come down I-70 in a truck at 85 miles an hour with no working brakes, in high gear, may not deserve life in prison, but pretty darn close.

Can’t tell you how many trucks I’ve seen creeping down that pass at 25 miles an hour in a low gear to avoid just that sort of calamity.

You have to know something about semis to understand just how reckless this behavior is. I have noticed a lot of truckers, once they understood exactly what happened, and what this guy did, have really backed off defending him.

...because the defendant didn’t maintain his commercial truck.... ~ Wfjag at December 26, 2021 9:43 AM

The driver was driving for a trucking company; it was not his truck. In fact, the Houston company that owns the truck reportedly has a history of brake issues, poor maintenance, lack of training for drivers, etc.

Why the company was not put on trial, I don't know. I suspect we'll see a few civil suits filed soon.

In addition, the driver was inexperienced and should never have been sent on a run through the Colorado mountains. I have friends who drive trucks and/or own trucking companies and they've all chimed in that the driver, at 23, was too new and inexperienced to be sent on a run through mountains like that. Hard to hit a brake ramp when you're in a blind panic.

Not to mention, the driver reportedly did not speak English and so may not have been able to read the sign and understand what the ramp was for.

Inexperienced or not, I do agree that he should be held to some standard of liability for the accident and that some sort of sentence for manslaughter or negligent homicide is appropriate. However, 110 years does seem disproportionate for an unintentional homicide.

One factor, as I understand it, is that Colorado law treats extreme indifference homicide as equal to intentional homicide in degree of felony. Once charged with extreme indifference homicide, the driver was facing, in effect, a felony murder charge.

I’d like to hear the evidence the jury heard before deciding that this guy was punished merely for exercising his right to trial. ~ Wfjag at December 26, 2021 9:43 AM

Agreed, we weren't there for the trial and are weighing in based on what we're hearing from the media, not the actual evidence presented in the trial.

There are countless cases like this all over the country. People make bad decisions, get a plea offer, make another bad decision, and get decades in prison for crimes where no one was actually hurt, because the enhancements and prior convictions stack up.

This guy is getting attention because he's young, he's pretty, and he cried a lot. He claimed to take responsibility, but didn't. He didn't say he shouldn't have been going that fast, shouldn't have lied about his experience, should have used one of the runaway-truck lanes. He just said, "I'm sorry -- but it was an accident!"

Does he even know the names of the people he killed or injured? If he named them at his sentencing and apologized for his recklessness to their families, it wasn't reported. I can't bring myself to care too much.

“Why the company was not put on trial, I don't know. I suspect we'll see a few civil suits filed soon.”

It really depends on what the dispatcher told him, when he pulled off the road to report the issue with the brakes several miles before the crash. If it was “put the truck in first or second gear and ease down the pass at 25mph” they will probably only pay to the limits of their insurance.

Just be aware, that ownership of the tractor, the trailer, and the goods in the trailer are often three separate entities.

I was on a federal jury once for a tractor trailer accident caused by the truck driver. It was quite enlightening as to what the insurance issues are.

Sometimes I get tailgaited by speeders on mountain roads. I always look for a place to pull over. If it's a road I know, I can pull over because I know where to do so. Otherwise, by the time I see it, it's too late, I can't stop suddenly with someone riding my ass.

I imagine it must have been similar... dude was weaving in and out of different lanes and nervous and I can see missing the exit if he wasn't familiar with the road.

Nicole - that is one of the biggest benefits of a route planning app like Waze. It gives you a sort of "radar" in the form of an overhead view of what's coming.

Isab's observations are accurate. Also, brake failure is gradual and predictable by the interested trucker. If you care more than to "just get in and drive", you know what grade at what weight your brakes can withstand for how long. Heat dissipation is well understood, just not by disinterested people.

the driver reportedly did not speak English and so may not have been able to read the sign and understand what the ramp was for.

If you can't read and understand road signs, you shouldn't be licensed to drive a car, much less a semi.

If you can't read and understand road signs, you shouldn't be licensed to drive a car, much less a semi. ~ Rex Little at December 27, 2021 5:45 AM

You'd be amazed how many road signs don't require English proficiency to be understood. Shapes and colors help identify the message most road signs are trying to convey. A limited knowledge of words and numbers will bridge the gap between the visual cues and the actual message on the sign. Most DMVs offer license tests in non-English languages.

Worldwide, the movement is toward having signs that convey meaning without words, so drivers from other countries are able to navigate the roadways without having to learn the local language.

I don't think runaway truck ramp signs have been standardized yet. So, a yellow sign with an arrow tells the driver there is a potential caution ahead, but only by reading the sign's "Runaway Truck Ramp" can the driver understand that the arrow is pointing out a ramp for runaway trucks.

Now, how you get a CDL without some degree of English proficiency may be another matter. Of course, a CDL is not limited to driving semis. Depending upon the class of license, it is also required for bus drivers, limo drivers, heavy equipment operators, etc. Driving a semi requires additional training in truck handling, training in which what to do with a runaway truck should be, and perhaps is, covered. How this guy did not know what to do, I don't know.

========================================

Whether the prosecutor was ethical in piling on 42 charges against this guy (he was convicted of 27) is the announced debate topic for this thread.

Maybe Neilly was right in that the 42 charges was a warning to anyone else thinking of taking his or her chances at trial versus copping a plea offered by the prosecutor's office. No way a defendant walks out of court free on all 42 charges.

Maybe the state and county prosecutor should not be an elected office. Maybe the public defense office should be on an equal par with the prosecutor's office in terms of funding, governmental rank, and status. Lotta maybes.

@Conan:
Thank you for the response. I’ve learned more about the facts from the comments here than in any story about the accident and trial. That’s the sad state of journalism today.

I only disagree with you on one point. Truck drivers I know say that a truck is like a gun - It’s always lethal, so when you use it, you own it. Every gun is loaded until you personally check it and know it is unloaded. Every commercial truck is an accident waiting to happen until you inspect it and check the maintenance records. As one driver said to me “I get paid to deliver loads. But, I’ve I only have one life, and can always find another load to deliver.”

"But, I’ve I only have one life, and can always find another load to deliver."

My buddy, the retired trucker, had this to say: "You will go down a steep road too slowly a thousand times. You'll go down one too fast only once."