Teen motorist sentenced for manslaughter

Full story: Chico Enterprise-Record

Decrying the rise of alcohol-related traffic fatalities among college students, a Butte County judge Thursday sentenced a teenage motorist who caused the death of his best friend to one year in jail.
Comments
41 - 52 of 52 Comments Last updated Aug 31, 2013
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Magalia resident

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Feb 3, 2010
 
Johnny wrote:
<quoted text>
Getting drunk, driving drunk, knowing it's both reckless and illegal, is not an accident moron.
It might not be legal but it is still an ACCIDENT, look it up if youre capable. The ACCIDENT was his fault because of the conditions but he didnt premeditate the wreck. Dont go calling people names until you know your facts, just goes to show who the moron really is here. Anyone with a law degree like to answer the ?. I have experience in law, they will tell you the same thing. Doesnt make it right but it does make it what it is.
Magalia resident

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Feb 3, 2010
 
Chico Voter wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure that the victims family could care less if it was premeditated or an accident or not. The result is the same and the punishment should be accordingly.
So, if you or one of your family members were to accidentallly back up over a child and kill it, should they be held to the same standards? From what you say, the result is what should be punishable.

Dont even ask me where this started because im really not sure. I never said he shouldnt be held accountable, I just said that it wasnt premeditated and that should be taken into consideration when dealing with a teen and a 1st time offender. Being held accountable can mean many things. I dont think this kid should rot in a cell for the rest of his life. If theres any way some good could come from this it could help everyone involved feel better and move on. The parents arent crying out for blood, neither are his friends. Shouldnt THEIR feelings regarding this matter count? Im just agreeing with the parents of the boy who was killed, everyone else has their own agenda.
Don

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
Feb 3, 2010
 
Magalia resident wrote:
<quoted text>
So, if you or one of your family members were to accidentallly back up over a child and kill it, should they be held to the same standards? From what you say, the result is what should be punishable.
Dont even ask me where this started because im really not sure. I never said he shouldnt be held accountable, I just said that it wasnt premeditated and that should be taken into consideration when dealing with a teen and a 1st time offender. Being held accountable can mean many things. I dont think this kid should rot in a cell for the rest of his life. If theres any way some good could come from this it could help everyone involved feel better and move on. The parents arent crying out for blood, neither are his friends. Shouldnt THEIR feelings regarding this matter count? Im just agreeing with the parents of the boy who was killed, everyone else has their own agenda.
Come on, man. What a preposterous example. How about if the kid stood behind the car and asked you to not run over him and you did it anyway? The dead boy asked him to slow down. Now, do we have premeditation?
Magalia resident

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
Feb 3, 2010
 
Don wrote:
<quoted text>
Come on, man. What a preposterous example. How about if the kid stood behind the car and asked you to not run over him and you did it anyway? The dead boy asked him to slow down. Now, do we have premeditation?
Nope, but nice try. Look up premeditation.
Johnny

Paradise, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
Feb 3, 2010
 
Magalia resident wrote:
<quoted text>
It might not be legal but it is still an ACCIDENT, look it up if youre capable. The ACCIDENT was his fault because of the conditions but he didnt premeditate the wreck. Dont go calling people names until you know your facts, just goes to show who the moron really is here. Anyone with a law degree like to answer the ?. I have experience in law, they will tell you the same thing. Doesnt make it right but it does make it what it is.
Travis Reinsel had a .16 percent blood-alcohol level. Twice the legal limit. Illegal. He was drinking underage. Illegal. He was driving drunk and speeding. Illegal and reckless. He ignored his victims request to slow down. And you still call this an accident? Are you really that stupid?
Don

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
Feb 3, 2010
 
Magalia resident wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, but nice try. Look up premeditation.
Far better than a nice try, you lose
Don

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
Feb 3, 2010
 
Johnny wrote:
<quoted text>
Travis Reinsel had a .16 percent blood-alcohol level. Twice the legal limit. Illegal. He was drinking underage. Illegal. He was driving drunk and speeding. Illegal and reckless. He ignored his victims request to slow down. And you still call this an accident? Are you really that stupid?
Of course he does. He doesn't need to make sense, just noise.
Chico Voter

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
Feb 5, 2010
 
Magalia resident wrote:
<quoted text>
So, if you or one of your family members were to accidentallly back up over a child and kill it, should they be held to the same standards? From what you say, the result is what should be punishable.
I would expect a lot more than a year in county, and I would feel that the victims family, justice, and the system were cheated if me or my family didn't get at least a few years for recklessly "accidently" murdering someone.
Magalia resident

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#51
Feb 5, 2010
 
Chico Voter wrote:
<quoted text>
I would expect a lot more than a year in county, and I would feel that the victims family, justice, and the system were cheated if me or my family didn't get at least a few years for recklessly "accidently" murdering someone.
AGREED!!! Thank you!!!! This whole arguement has been over the definition of "Accident", never responsibility. The only other thing I said was he shouldnt sit in jail for the REST of his life if something good could come out of this and also because this is what the parents of the victim wanted. Thats it! Also the definition of "premeditated" which also doesnt apply here rather people want it to or not. When defining the words in legal terms, which is where this is at, premeditation was NOT involved. Simple. In order to premeditate, you have to plan BEFOREHAND the results of the incident. Is he responsible? YES. Should he be held accountable? YES. But its not up to the people to decide this kids fate, its up to the law and as far as im concerned, should be up to the parents of the victim whom have clearly stated what they would like to see happen. Please let me just also clear up Accident. The chp, fire and ambulance were not called to the scene of an "drunk kid driving wrecked and killed his best friend", they were called to the scene of the "Accident". Thats all, just a word with more than one meaning. Thank you for hopefully giving me a chance to clear this up.
Magalia resident

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#52
Feb 5, 2010
 
Johnny wrote:
<quoted text>
Travis Reinsel had a .16 percent blood-alcohol level. Twice the legal limit. Illegal. He was drinking underage. Illegal. He was driving drunk and speeding. Illegal and reckless. He ignored his victims request to slow down. And you still call this an accident? Are you really that stupid?
Please read post #51. Defining words in legal terms does not make me stupid.
Thank you.
ChicoGirl

Oroville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
Aug 30, 2013
 
Don wrote:
<quoted text>
You, sir, cannot even define intelligent thought. What is a non-intelligent thought? You don't even understand the process of thinking and purport to decide what is reasonable and not reasonable? I have no desire to be a judge, where did that come from?
How do you make up for a mistake? I want to hear this one. How do you make the mistake meaningless? How do you make a mistake disappear? He can add something TO what he has done but he CANNOT make up for it. This isn't a savings account where you put crime in then redeem it with some substitute act down the road. We have a 17 year old in Oroville doing 22 years for shooting a gun in the ceiling of a classroom, and you think a year is enough time for killing a best friend drunk? Do you think it's possible in America to NOT know that alcohol is illegal to 18 year olds? Do you think it's possible to NOT know that driving drunk is illegal? Do you think it's possible to NOT know, for a high school kid who takes health in order to graduate, that the number one killer of teenagers is drunk driving? All this and you want to take it easy one the boy? HE hasn't even begun to pay for what he has done and you want him to skate?
Come on Mr. Expert on thoughts and reasonableness, let's hear what you have to say.
You say that a kid in Oroville is doing 22 years for shooting a gun in a school, and you think that is a better situation then a young boy who ACCIDENTALLY killed his best friend in a car accident. You don't think that he wakes up everyday and reminds himself that he killed someone; and not only just someone, but someone who he cared about very much. 120 days in county is a slap on the wrist compared to the guilt he already has to live with for the rest of his life. The judge gave him an opportunity to better himself! He was 18! He was not going to get better sitting in county with a bunch of low lifes who are in there for drug dealing and gang related activities. Yes, his friend will still be dead everyday for the rest of his life, but don't you think the victims family(who have known him since he was a little kid) would like to see him do something good with his life someday. I mean come on, on the day of the accident both teenagers were drunk, and they were on the way to the victims truck so he could get in it and DRIVE! It wasn't just Travis' fault. It could have been the other way around that day, and I don't think the victims family would have wanted their son to sit and rot in jail. By Travis being out speaking to schools, It gives teenagers a first look at what can happen when you drink and drive. its different when you watch shows about it or listen to adults talk about it. This is one of their peers, they can trust what he has to say. You don't even know Travis or what kind of person he is, you only think he is a piece of scum because he was drinking and driving. Well this may be news to you, but 70 percent of teenagers drink and drive, it was just unfortunate of the way his turned out. Travis is actually an awesome person and doing great things with his life, and has never forgotten what happened the day of the accident. He lives his life for him and Doyle both, and continues to move forward everyday. So think about that before you act like you know the truth behind everything. Because you don't know anything.
Rick

Chico, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
Aug 31, 2013
 
You don't even know Travis or what kind of person he is, you only think he is a piece of scum because he was drinking and driving. Correct, driving drunk trumps "kind of person" you refer to.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••

Oroville Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Oroville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Oroville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Oroville
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••