Cell phone use in vehicles: 2 traffic fatalities, 2 different sentences
November 24, 2009 by Fred HosierPosted in: cell phones and safety, Fatality, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, new court decision, Transportation safety
PDF Two young women, both found guilty of causing fatal car crashes while using a cell phone behind the wheel, got different sentences for their crimes. Which one do you think was the more appropriate sentence?
Jeri Montgomery, 24, of Humble, TX, was sentenced to 30 days in jail and 10 years probation and ordered to pay a $10,000 fine for criminally negligent homicide in a distracted driving case that killed a man.
Montgomery will also have to pay the funeral expenses for the 25-year-old she killed.
Montgomery illegally changed lanes as she tried to get onto a highway on-ramp she had missed seconds after hanging up her call phone.
She will also have to write a 1,000-word essay “suitable for publication in school newspapers,” about the dangers of distracted driving. She’s also lost her drivers’ license until further notice.
Montgomery’s lawyer calls her prosecution “politically motivated,” saying they wanted to make an example out of her.
In Oxford, England, a similar story, but a different sentence.
Phillipa Curtis, 22, was sentenced to 21 months in a high-security prison for killing a 24-year-old woman in a car crash. Curtis’ cell phone records showed she’d been texting-while-driving moments before the crash.
Upon hearing the sentence, prosecutors quickly appealed to Britain’s highest court for a longer prison term, calling 21 months, “unduly lenient.” A judge declined to reconsider the sentence.
Britain’s new guidelines state that using a hand-held phone when causing a death will “always make the offense more serious” in terms of punishment and lead to prison time. This is especially the case for texting.
What do you think about the sentences in these two cases? Was one more appropriate than the other? Has your company banned employees from talking and/or texting on cell phones while driving? Let us know in the Comments Box below.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: distracted driving, fatal car crash, texting while driving
Loading ...
November 24th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
I believe the Oxford, England sentence was lenient - at best. Distracted driving kills people - maims people - destroys property - adds to the economic struggles of our world.
Traffic offenses, generally, are “poo-poo’ed” in society. They rarely get more than a wink and a nudge. Driving Under The Influence? Minor monetary fines, community service and - occasionally - short jail time (often with work release provisions). Speeding? Don’t even get me started, for many drivers don’t even consider speed limits as suggestions - they just set their own pace. Case in point - I was recently in Wyoming on business. The Interstate speed limit is 75 mph. I appeared to be the only person respecting this posting, as the doors on my rental car were getting “blown off.”
Legislators should absolutely be heavy-handed when it comes to traffic offenses - absolutely!
November 30th, 2009 at 10:30 am
I don’t agree with the Ox, England sentence. I think maybe too harsh, being put in high security for 21 months. I agree that death due to cell phone use by a drive should be punished, but these people aren’t criminals, usually, but fools. However, I suggest that any repeat offense should have the book thrown at them….
December 1st, 2009 at 8:16 am
I dont think either one is harsh enough. Who is going to take care of the victims families left behind? a thousand word essy? Get real. The oxford sentence was closer to what it should be, but TAKING SOMEONES LIFE, BY ACCIDENT OR NOT, IS A VERY SERIOUS. What do the victims loved ones do? Lawsuit lottery? The next person who kills someone because they were using a cell phone should get LIFE IN PRISON. Then maybe someone with the authority to will change things
December 1st, 2009 at 9:53 am
This should not even be a question. Laws differ among countries, in many countries you get death from DUI, or stoning for adultery. I agree the penalty should be severe for a death caused by inattention, but comparing laws between countries is worthless commentary.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:54 am
Manslaughter by phone takes away a person’s life, and is 100% preventable (similar with DUI). If you take away 40 years of a person’s life, and the privilege of that person’s family being complete, your prison term should be harsh, and your restitution should be forfiture of all your possessions, including joint possessions, with minimal exceptions. There should be a lifetime draw on your income and subsequent bank accounts. You should also lose access to any government aid programs, along with the privilege of voting. You’ve just killed for a phone call or text message. Fool you may be, but you’ve killed for no reason, so, until we learn to bring back the dead, you should pay for this callous death severely for the rest of your life. The dead person’s family will.
December 1st, 2009 at 10:14 am
I think you have to look to the companys and employers. There is a expectation that when called you will answer. Many companys provide cell phone and others require their employees to have them with them at all times. I have been a salaried corporate employee for over 30 years. I have progressed through beepers, numeric pagers, alpha pagers, mobile radios, car phones and now cell phones. I remember haveing to pull over when your beeper went off and call an 800 number. The point Im making here is it is I get over 15 calls a day on my cell phone. If I had to pull over and answer every one I would be on the side of the road the biggest part of the day.
This is just another media created crisis. If distracted driving is a problem then every one that eats, drinks, smokes or listens to the radio should be ticketed. Lets face it people do things while they are driving (ladies how many times have you adjusted or put on your make up in the rear view mirror).
Some times the have accidents. The young lady could have been turning the channel on the radio and ended up in the same situation. Would every one be screaming to throw her in jail.
Accidents by definition are not intentional. The young ladies will have to live there entire life with the burden of having killed another person. All we can hope in these incidents is that they will go on to help others understand, how heavy that burden can be.
December 1st, 2009 at 10:16 am
The use of a cell phone while driving is just as debilitating as drinking alcohol. It impairs you. Talking is like having a few beers. Texting is like have several shots of hard liquor. You have to look at the screen to see what you are texting therefore taking your eyes off the road. I have to admit I have tried texting while driving and found it difficult and scary. So, I wait for the next red light or my destination.
Texas should have had more jail time and community service. Something where the person would have to face the reality of distracted driving. An essay doesn’t cut it for me, either.
Oxford I think did it right with the exception of their driving license should be revoked or at least restricted to work travel only.
December 1st, 2009 at 10:20 am
Both sentences may seem harsh to someone who doesn’t recognize that a driver who is talking or texting on their cell phone is being irresponsible. The irresponsible drivers that talk or text on their cell phone while driving increase their likelihood of being involved in a collision and injuring others. These court rulings indicate that court officials in different countries recognize that drivers have an obligation to be responsible for operating their vehicles safely and prudently.
Irresponsible drivers that are talking/texting their cell phones are not the exception…they are prevelant! All drivers must understand they have an obligation to themselves and to others to focus on driving so they complete every driving segment without having or causing a driving collision. Regulators should enact legislation prohibiting the use of cell phones while driving. All drivers should understand that legislation. Law enforcement personnel should cite violators and ALL courts should exercise substantial penalties for drivers who knowingly do not meet their safe driving obligations by talking/texting on their cell phones. This is a rampant problem. Until the problem is seriously addressed we will continue to hear about the tragedies caused by distracted/irresponsible drivers.
December 1st, 2009 at 10:37 am
To Joe2, would you agree it was too leient if it was your son or daughter thatw as killed? Why is it a criminality deserving of jail time to kill with a gun, knife, or violence but somehow just a minor issue if it involved negligence or chosen behavior that kills others? The victim is just as dead in eather case. The crime is murder. The sentence should be the the same order of magnitude regardless of how the murder occurred. I am no saying that a person who kills accidently with a car should get a mandaory death penalty but I am saying that they should spend hard time and the loss the privilages they abused to commit the murder in the first place. Felons are barred from gun possession. drivers who murder should be barred from driving. They have proven that they can not be trusted with the power of destruction entailed in car operation. I am sure it is very inconvenient for them but how inconvenient is it for their victims to be dead?
December 1st, 2009 at 10:38 am
Joe,
The majority of inmates are there because they made a mistake and not because they were criminals. There are a lot of people that make dumb decisions, often times under pressure or emotion that end up in prison.
One sentence was more monetary and the other was more time consuming. Both are basically equal it’s just a matter of your perspective.
Both women will have to live with their error for the rest of their lives. It doesn’t matter if penalty was awarded or not.
No David, it does not justify a life sentence. Neither case is equivalent to Murder. They are both manslaughter cases. It’s just like the person that backed up his forklift without looking behind him first and hitting his supervisor, killing him. They were negligent but not with criminal intent.
A situation you could very well find yourself in just by taking your surroundings for granted because you’ve become too comfortable.
December 1st, 2009 at 10:53 am
TC - that doesn’t make it right either. In my younger days I drove drunk many times and shouldn’t have and for the grace of God I didn’t have an accident or worse. So all the activities you describe are distractions and shouldn’t be done while driving. Driving is a full time job and should remain so.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:05 am
I don’t think it should matter that a person was on the phone or texting while using a phone. Should a sentence be any different if a person was reading a map or looking at a website on a laptop in the passenger seat? The sentence for these 2 women should coincide with a typical sentence for driving while distracted regardless of the means of the distraction.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:25 am
The commentary and thrust & parry on this subject is both intriguing and expected.
My suspicion is those who seek strong judicial response are those who are generally law-abiding citizens. They recognize laws and rules are for obeying, not disregarding. They understand order and discipline, structure & conformance.
My further suspicion is those who argue against swift, severe punishment are those who will wink and nod at violations. Perhaps it is to make themselves feel better about their own lifestyle choices - dodging the proverbial bullet aimed at them for anti-social and irresponsible behavior.
Driving is a full-time job, and must remain so. Re: the comment about “calls expected to be answered: - in my last position, we had a firm policy that instructed all drivers on “company” business were to 1) pull over, and 2) park safely and legally to use their cellular phone. Violation of that policy, particularly if involving a collision, would jeopardize the driver’s employment.
I’ve seen EHS “professionals” apply selective compliance in their own behavior. How do we dare call ourselves “professionals” if we do not live our lives consistent with law, policy, rule, procedure, and protocol?
Irresponsible behavior must be met with appropriate negative consequence. How do we “wink and nod” at the taking of a life? Whether driving a motor vehicle on public thoroughfares, or (as stated in a post) driving a forklift, Dead Is Dead! Either driver should be civilly and criminally exposed as a result of their irresponsiblity.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:28 am
The company I work for has a policy that using any portable electronic device while driving on company property or in a company vehicle anywhere will subject the offender to immediate termination. I believe that distracted driving is a serious issue and should have serious consequences. But, I believe it should apply to all dsitracted driving. I have a 50 mile roundtrip commute every day and cell phone use isn’t the only problem; shaving, applying makeup and reading books or newspapers are not uncommon sites. Two of the more unusual sites were a man eating a bowl of cereal and a woman turning to look at her child in the rear carseat while holding up flash cards and waiting for the chid to respond. These are all bad ideas that can lead to serious injury or death just as driving impaired can.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:50 am
Mike, David, Kevin, I think we all agree that taking a life, by any means, is heinous and curel, whether it was done with intent, or by accident. I think we also all agree that Texting, especially, while driving is being irresponsible, and dangerous. However Mike, I would want you to be treated the same way if it were you who killed my son (by accident) when you forgot to put your car in park and it rolled him, not as a murderer. I think we need to make everbody aware of this danger, then put laws on the books, and then punish everybody accordingly. But you know as well as I that Most poeple don’t preceive it a dangerous and will continue to act freviously (and maybe not criminally). Until then, not all States consider Testing while driving a crime. I think we will have to impose on our government to deliver us from this evil, by inacting laws, fair laws.
December 1st, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Weather it is Driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs or cell phone/texting. I believe it should all fall under the same punishment , more so when someone is killed.
December 1st, 2009 at 1:26 pm
The laws against irresponsible behavior are already out there, what we need to do is package them together in a bundle, and call them something like “Irresponsible, Idiot Statutes”, and use the same punishments for all. We have become a world of “Me” people with very little regard for our fellow man/woman. There needs to come a time when we start taking responsibility for our own actions, and answer to the consequences as such. It doe not take a rocket scientist to know that if you take your eyes off the road, then chances are you are going to end up in the ditch.
December 1st, 2009 at 3:22 pm
There is a serious difference between forgetting a parking brake and INTENTIONALLY deciding to text or engage in other distracting behavior while driving. If I fail to put a car in park it is an oversight. If I decide to text it is a premeditated act which I intentionally perform. Compare apples to apples.
December 1st, 2009 at 3:56 pm
MikeJ, it is non-the-less an accident. No one using their cell phones deliberately sets out to kill someone while dricing, I’m sure. Deciding to text while driving may be a premeditated act, but certainly not to Murder. So, therefore, it is an accident, and should be judged as one. Until our government inact laws across every state just like they did for drunk driving, it shall be left up to individual state to meter out punishment, and some may always seem to be unfair, as is the case of our stories….1 question, when is the last time you used your Parking Brake?
December 1st, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Mike J,
Both situations are due to carelessness.
Those two girls are not reading these forums like we are they are not receiving the information, it is a matter of education.
I learned that when talking on a cell phone, it takes 85% of your attention away from the road and it makes no difference if it is hands free or not. I learned that in Defensive Driving Class when I got a ticket. I never heard that anywhere else.
The burden for carelessness that you’re referring too, the burden is heavier on your shoulders because you knew better then those girls did when they committed their error.
Regardless of which one is more severe doesn’t matter when someone gets killed as a result. The burden would rest on your shoulders just as heavy as it is going to rest on theirs.
I would take one of those girls right now to be a wife over most anyone else because they’ve just experienced a hard lesson and I can guarantee you they will be much more concerned about what they are doing.
I’m not going to contend that either of those girls were stupid. They just weren’t very well informed.
December 1st, 2009 at 4:54 pm
You should look up the definition of carelessness. Texting while driving is NOT carelessness. Carelessness involces an oversight. texting while driving is NOT an oversight, it is a conscious decision. Drinking too much and then getting behind the wheel is a consciuos decision. Forgetting the parking brake is an oversight. Your marriage proposals are your own and rather irrelevant to the discussion. (Your reasoning is a little sispect but thats another issue).
Joe2, I used my parking brake 2.5 hours ago and it is engaged as we speak. (I drive a 5 speed). Please look up the definition of an accident. It is when something occurs which is unforseen and unaviodable. Are you trying to say that there is no way that texting while driving could not be seen as something that could cause an accident and therefore a death? Are you saying that just because a person doesn’t think of the consequences of their actions we should write the entire thing off as a “learning experiance”???? That works well with children when they throw a ball through a window. it is a poor philosophy when dealing with a persons life. Dead is dead and we should all be responsioble for our actions. Do you think it makes the funeral any more happy because “it was an accident”????
December 1st, 2009 at 5:34 pm
I believe this exchange between peers is healthy and appropriate, regardless of the direction from which each author writes.
With that said, I am concerned about the functional illiteracy in select postings. If the authors are EHS professionals, it makes their “professionalism” suspect - at best! Malaprops, spelling, sentence structure, word usage, tenses - all have been violated in select posts.
Perhaps those posting could assemble their message in Word, run a spelling & grammar check - and copy/paste the “scrubbed” version on SafetylNewsAlert!? It would lend more credibility to the authors’ posts.
December 1st, 2009 at 6:24 pm
OSHA Does not agree with your definition of accident. OSHA believes that all accidents can be prevented and avoided.
I do not agree with your opinion that leaving the parking brake off is any less than talking or texting while driving.
Both involve becoming too comfortable with your environment and believing nothing bad is going to happen to you.
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:33 am
Robert That is because if you did you would have to admit that your reasoning is faulty. I’ll make it easy. One involves a decision. You DECIDE to text or talk on the phone. The other involves a lapse in attention. I FORGOT to set the parking brake. Your decision tree would have the same level of guilt to someone who shot someone because they handled a gun withiout checking that the safety was on and to someone who stalked a victim to intentionally shoot and kill them. This is faulty reasoning and abysmal logic.
Mylon, don’t fret, there is still time for you to make a career change to what is clearly nearest and dearest to your heart, you can still become an english teacher. i understand they are in great demand.
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:37 am
The Texas sentence is ridiculous. the idea of jailing someone who has caused a traffic death for thirty days is laughable. The British sentence is much more realisitc, but probably should have been more like 5-10 years, rather than 21 months. Once a person qualifies to drive and receives a license, they assume some responsibility to the public.
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Hill,
I agree with your comment that the Texas sentence for Jeri Montgomery in the daeth of MY son, Chance Wilcox, is ridiculous. 30 days in jail and probation. They also appealed the sentence and we get to do this all over again possibly. My son’s life was more than the slap on the wrist that she got and it appauls me they will appeal. All I can say, is the next time she is in jeopardy of prison time and I support if that happens. http://www.chance-wilcox.last-memories.com
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:32 am
Should the sentence be any different if the person driving was changing the radio station instead of on the phone? Should the sentence be any different if the person driving was talking with a passenger instead of on the phone? Should the sentence be any different if the person driving was eating fries instead of on the phone?
I’m not trying to say the 30 days in jail sentence was too harsh or too lenient. I’m just curious why being distracted by a cell phone is different than being distracted by anything else. Personally, I think distracted driving is distracted driving and the source of the distraction is inconsequential. So, if you were driving and turned your head to yell at your child in the back seat which then led to a tragic accident in which a person died, how long of a prison sentence do you think you should receive?
December 3rd, 2009 at 11:46 am
Good morning Ms Wilcox. Like many others I have made several comments regarding this story, printed in my Safety magazine. As you may know we don’t always get the full story. But please know that we all across America share with you in your grief, and appreciate you putting a face to the name. BY NO stretch of the imagination are we ignorant to the fact that Cell phone use while driving is dangerous. We only hope that the driving, and texting public is welling to change this behavior.. Your web site is 1st class! Thanks and Take Care Joe.
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Mike K,
It isn’t any different, it’s just that cell phone usage is becoming so common place that no one is thinking of the dangers and the information isn’t getting out there.
What about the person that is changing CD’s and drops one on the floor board of the car to see where it went. That person might think they only took their eyes off the road for a second but it was enough time to close the gap quite quickly when a car in front of them had to slow down to 55 mph from 80mph when a truck traveling at 56 mph changes lanes to pass a truck traveling at 55 mph. BAM! That car being rear ended at 25mph loses control and crashes into the guard rail and is killed.
Like I said before, I did not learn the severity of the danger of just talking on a cell phone until taking a defensive driving class and they said it takes 85% of your attention away from the road as very apparent in what we see people doing when they are talking and driving at the same time.
Those two girls were doing nothing different then what they see happening everyday with what other people are doing, including police officers.
The objective should not be to see how hard justice can be hammered on these two girls. The objective should be in getting the message out there that cell phones and driving do not mix because. Hammering these girls is not going bring dignity to the death of Ms. Wilcox’s son, but starting a cause to make changes that will save someone else from getting killed will. Be proactive, not reactive.
Ms. Wilcox,
The appeal is not the idea of the girl, it is the idea of her attorney to get more money out of the situation.
December 3rd, 2009 at 4:32 pm
I’m with the respondent that equates text while drive to DUI. It takes your hands off the wheel.
“I think you have to look to the companys and employers. There is a expectation that when called you will answer. Many companys provide cell phone and others require their employees to have them with them at all times.”
To this respondent:
Our companies cell phone policy is strict. They are not allowed in our company vehicles for the trucking part of our company. Employees who violate this policy are subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination. It’s a serious safety hazard. Those companies who discipline employees for NOT taking calls while en route are violating the “public policy” portion of employment law. An employer can not take adverse action towards an employee for attending jury duty, or following the law. If they do discharge an employee, or an employee that ‘turns in” an employee for doing so that’s a violation of the whistleblowers act. So, your statement has no merit. While well intentioned employees want to be “in reach”, employers, managers, need to know what the employees rights are. Please stay on the right of safety because the COMPANY is at fault for your carelessness! Thanks for letting me share.
December 3rd, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Mylon,
While I appreciate your attention to detail, I believe your comment regarding spelling and grammar to be overly academic, arrogant and inappropriate. No one needs to feel “stupid” for lack of a better word for a spelling error made quickly when trying to work and comment at the same time. Sort of like texing while driving, huh?
Melissa
December 3rd, 2009 at 5:21 pm
MAC, I always park my desk while commenting and a such have never rear ended anyone nor run a stop sign with it. ( I have mispelled a word or three thouigh)
December 4th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
All these comments make me worry that as a society we have decided that in every situation there is someone to blame and nothing is ever an accident. (Yes, I do know both girls here caused the death of another, no need to point it out). In both situations this was a horrible accident. Both girls where at an age where there frontal lobes have not yet fully developed and still live it that happy, rainbow filled world of “It won’t happen to me”. I’m sure they where told one hundred times about the dangers of using a cell phone while driving, but the consequences of their actions didn’t seem real to them.
They both definitely deserve some type of punishment and it may take a while for our legal system to figure out what exactly that should be. In my opinion, all vehicular manslaughter cases should at least start with a permanent loss of a driver’s license, repayment of the costs involved with the death/injuries they caused, and at least some prison time. What I think will actually happen…..wrongful death law suits.
Enjoyed reading all your comments on this controversial topic.
December 9th, 2009 at 11:09 am
First let me say, whatever the penalty is for distracted driving should be universal. Using a cell phone while driving and causing a death should not be punished more harshly or more leniently than being distracted with reading the paper or digging under the seat for the CD case. Both are examples of being distracted so the cell phone issue shouldn’t be singled out for special treatment.
As for the texting is the same as driving under the influence crowd, I think it’s completely different. However, if you want to go that route then you have to use all distracted driving as the same thing. Should the lady applying her make-up and that construction worker leaving the bar should both lose their licenses if they cause an accident?
December 9th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Mike K,
I don’t think it is being handled anymore harshly then any other form of distraction caused accident.
I just think that you hear about the cell phone usage cases more because it’s the most common distraction out of all them.
December 17th, 2009 at 9:53 am
There has always been distractions but think about the amount of change in traffic on the road in the last ten years.The amount of the computer generation on the road is starting to have an impact on traffic. These are usually the younger drivers who have been raised with cell phones-texting- and all the latest electronic devices for communications.Some are able to show TV programs,movies and heaven knows what else.This cannot be allowed to continue” They are not only killing others but themselfs at a very alarming rate which will only keep rising if we don’t act NOW.
This shows me that some companies do not value life as they do $. I can not believe that thier lives have not been touched by this if not in time it will.
January 5th, 2010 at 9:27 am
In all the areas where drivers are distracted, you still have to prove what they were doing at the time. Cell phones are easy to prove time of use, other items not so easy.
Back up about 20 posts or so, I think Kevin has it right - a lifetime payment of income and deprivation of property is a whole lot more painful than 30 days in jail. It would probably end up like those ilk who are required to pay child support but instead just live off government handouts, and quit jobs everytime the court catches on they are working again.
Nothing is perfect but there does need to be penalties.
I believe the strict penalties on DUI have really driven down druink driving, but it did so only after many a person were publicly ruined through both criminal and civil court, and made the headlines.
January 12th, 2010 at 10:14 am
I have enjoyed all of the comments and it is certainly evident that there are a few of you that are very entrenched in your beliefs. While everyone is making a great effort to swing the others their way, forget it. You can’t change others’, it will take a tragic accident like this that hits near to the heart or family to forever remind you of the dangers of any distraction. My heartfelt condolences and prayers or for the families that are left behind to try and cope with such a tragic accident. I would also like to thank the Wilcox family for taking their message to the masses. It must be very difficult to deal with the loss of a loved one and I can see the love that the family took in putting the website together. I copied it to my favorites because it has many wonderful messages and I love the music. A 50 year old man had to dry his tears while typing this. Peace be with you
And yes Mylon, I copied my comment to WORD and cut it to the post.