Jury finds Vasquez guilty on all counts

There are 20 comments on the Suburban Chicago News story from Jun 30, 2010, titled Jury finds Vasquez guilty on all counts. In it, Suburban Chicago News reports that:

After more than seven hours of deliberations, Kendall County jurors determining the fate of Sandra Vasquez were sent home Tuesday, having failed to reach a verdict.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Suburban Chicago News.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
oswegoanne

Sandwich, IL

#1 Jun 30, 2010
This is good news. Does anyone know what her maximum sentence could be>

“I don't know my own strength!”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#2 Jun 30, 2010
She can be sentenced to up to 28 years.
observer

United States

#3 Jun 30, 2010
good news? maybe...

sad news for sure.

The entire story is just so tragic, 28 years in jail will not change that.

“BEWARE I BITE”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#4 Jun 30, 2010
Drunk drivers who cause a death should be executed.. Maybe then these loosers would learn you can not drink and drive!!!
Debbie

Lombard, IL

#5 Jun 30, 2010
i was in a car years ago going home husband at time was driveing a guy hit us and 6 other cars he was drunk ran out of car started running into indiana i was pregnant at time and my son was little well my daughter is mentally challaged so i hope this woman gets fried .
Oswego2

Yorkville, IL

#7 Jul 1, 2010
difrntbrdofxian wrote:
Drunk drivers who cause a death should be executed.. Maybe then these loosers would learn you can not drink and drive!!!
No, DRUNK DRIVERS should have EVEN STRICTER PENALTIES.

However, in this case, under our current law, justice is being sought out wrongfully.

The driver, under state law of "DRUNK DRIVING" should pay the price. THAT law.....is the weak link.

Instead, now we are making the actions of a "DRUNK DRIVER" to be a murderer. I don't think she INTENDED to kill five people. I don't like that those five lost their lives any more or less than the rest of us.

MY POINT is..... The "drunk driving" law "ALONE" should be made to fit the required punishment. We've experienced enough "accindents" all over this earth to know - it's a danger. Not only to them, but each and everyone of us reading this here.

The "Drunk Driving" is what killed those kids, or is it? Was Sandra just "nuts" to begin with and could have driven much safer? Have none of us NOT ever, I mean .....EVER driven when we know by law, we shouldn't have? Do we consider ourselves murderers on the street? NO. I'm sure we are not as careless as Sandra seemed to have been.

However, I'm sure If we knew the penalty for "DRUNK DRIVING" was more than a risk of a DUI and loss of driving priveleges for a while - we might think a little harder about acutally getting behind the wheel with "any" amount of alchohol that might even be in question to begin with.

If we feel as a state that we HAVE lost enough people due to "accidental" deaths by "Drunk Drivers," then, I seem to feel the "Drunk Driving law" seems to be rather inadequate in that case!

My point - Our current law ALLOWS Sandra to walk. I didn't write the law. I don't have to like it or dis-like it. I just have to obey it. That's my choice in the matter.

I think what the state and the jury did to make her "guilty" of killing people should have been covered under the drunk driving law to BEGIN with. Maybe then, we "might" be able to prevent accidental deaths. The law is only to protect the living. NOT THE DEAD! The "current law" failed to assist in keeping those 5 dead - alive.

I can sit in a bar and not be at risk for lung cancer quite as much anymore. However, I can't stop someone killing me by walking out of the bar and getting into their car and "accidently" plowing foward and crashing into the building and parking his/her car on top of us in the "smoke free bar."

The laws can't save us all from everything. People have choices.

EVEN with ANY law, to not "murder," that doesn't mean I never will be.

When people are dead, the laws are as worthless as the paper their written on and as worthless as those who try and "twist" the worthless laws.

Our actions are the only thing that protect us. Most of the time, those actions anymore in the country leave us to sitting quietly in the corner with our eyes closed and our mouths shut, too. Let's try and wear a symbol of our American Flag or express our religious views. Our law does more to stop that, than it really does getting me killed.

mary

Warrenville, IL

#8 Jul 1, 2010
this is my point she was the adult in the situation and having children of her own she knew better! besides the drinking and driving even if that wasnt a factor she was going 25 miles over the speed limit. She needs to take responsibility for what she did. It wont bring those kids back or change the fact that families have been torn apart but she needs to pay for the dumb decision she made!
Oswego2

Yorkville, IL

#9 Jul 1, 2010
mary wrote:
this is my point she was the adult in the situation and having children of her own she knew better! besides the drinking and driving even if that wasnt a factor she was going 25 miles over the speed limit. She needs to take responsibility for what she did. It wont bring those kids back or change the fact that families have been torn apart but she needs to pay for the dumb decision she made!
Agreed 110%, Mary.

She does need to be responsible for her actions as well. I'm fairly confident Sandra's family wouldn't disagree. It seems they've had their "hands full" with her too.

I just don't like how she's been made out to be a "murderer." Killing and murdering are TWO different actions, that come from two different parts of the though process. However, I realize the "results" of the two actions are typically the same!

Based on that last paragraph alone, I think too many "personal" unbiased opinions we're created. Seeing as she didn't intend to kill anyone, I feel 28 years a bit much. On that same thought, knowing the outcome of Sandra's actions that accidently killed 5 (not completely innocent)people, "how time should she really get"?

Do we have a breakdown on how the court/jury came up with 28 years?
bad data

Hillside, IL

#10 Jul 1, 2010
THe jury doesn't get to decide the punishment. Only guilty/not guilty.

The sentence has not been announced yet.

28 years is the maximum penalty for aggravated DUI with multiple fatalities.
An_Observer

Hillside, IL

#11 Jul 1, 2010
I know that I will never ever EVER lend a hand to any privileged kid in the Village of Oswego. This whole case is such BS. I hope Sandra gets probation. Those kids ruined her life just as much as she ruined theirs. You honestly think she does not have remorse and regret? Whatever. If that's what makes you all feel better than so be it.
Oswego3

Sandwich, IL

#12 Jul 1, 2010
bad data wrote:
THe jury doesn't get to decide the punishment. Only guilty/not guilty.
The sentence has not been announced yet.
28 years is the maximum penalty for aggravated DUI with multiple fatalities.
True. AND defense attorney will start the appeals process and is also requesting a new trial. This thing will keep dragging on.

“I don't know my own strength!”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#13 Jul 1, 2010
The penalty for her Aggravated DUI charges is spelled out in the Illinois Rules of the Road Handbook just before the last sentence in the Aggravated DUI section. The penalty is much higher (6-28 years) since there were multiple deaths than if only one person died (3-14 years).

http://www.cyberdriveillinois.com/publication...

Aggravated DUI

You may be charged with Aggravated DUI if you are involved in a death or personal injury crash while driving under the influence; have received a third or subsequent DUI; committed DUI while driving a school bus with children; committed DUI without a valid driverís license, permit or vehicle insurance; or received a DUI after a previous history of reckless homicide or Aggravated DUI involving a death. This is a Class 4 felony punishable by a possible 1-3 years imprisonment (1-12 years if a personal injury was involved), UNLESS the DUI is a third or fourth conviction, which is a Class 2 felony (3-7 years imprisonment); a fifth conviction, which is a Class 1 felony (4-15 years imprisonment); a sixth or subsequent conviction, which is a Class X felony (6-30 years imprisonment); a DUI committed after a prior reckless homicide DUI or aggravated DUI involving a death (regardless of vehicle, boat, snowmobile, etc.), which is a Class 3 felony (2-5 years imprisonment); OR the DUI involves a death, which is a Class 2 felony with 3-14 years imprisonment (if multiple deaths, 6-28 years). All felony fines are up to $25,000.

“I don't know my own strength!”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#14 Jul 1, 2010
I am betting the minimum sentence of 6 years. I have seen something written in an article that she has to spend at least 75% of her sentence in prison. Usually they make you spend 50% of the time in prison and then give you up to 1 day off for good behavior so some people only spend 25% of their sentence behind bars and then the rest on parole if they behave.

“I don't know my own strength!”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#15 Jul 1, 2010
Oswego3 wrote:
<quoted text>
True. AND defense attorney will start the appeals process and is also requesting a new trial. This thing will keep dragging on.
The defense attorney has already stated yesterday that she was going to start some appeals. It will be some time before anyone know what the final deal will be but the families on both sides needed this first step to be behind them. Only time will tell and as noted by many - there are no winners here no matter what happens.
Oswego2

Yorkville, IL

#16 Jul 1, 2010
Think-About-It wrote:
The penalty for her Aggravated DUI charges is spelled out in the Illinois Rules of the Road Handbook just before the last sentence in the Aggravated DUI section. The penalty is much higher (6-28 years) since there were multiple deaths than if only one person died (3-14 years).
http://www.cyberdriveillinois.com/publication...
Aggravated DUI
You may be charged with Aggravated DUI if you are involved in a death or personal injury crash while driving under the influence; have received a third or subsequent DUI; committed DUI while driving a school bus with children; committed DUI without a valid driverís license, permit or vehicle insurance; or received a DUI after a previous history of reckless homicide or Aggravated DUI involving a death. This is a Class 4 felony punishable by a possible 1-3 years imprisonment (1-12 years if a personal injury was involved), UNLESS the DUI is a third or fourth conviction, which is a Class 2 felony (3-7 years imprisonment); a fifth conviction, which is a Class 1 felony (4-15 years imprisonment); a sixth or subsequent conviction, which is a Class X felony (6-30 years imprisonment); a DUI committed after a prior reckless homicide DUI or aggravated DUI involving a death (regardless of vehicle, boat, snowmobile, etc.), which is a Class 3 felony (2-5 years imprisonment); OR the DUI involves a death, which is a Class 2 felony with 3-14 years imprisonment (if multiple deaths, 6-28 years). All felony fines are up to $25,000.
"The penalty is much higher (6-28 years) since there were multiple deaths than if only one person died (3-14 years)."

Thank you for clarifying that. I wasn't sure what they were basing the time served on. If this was the law for "Drunk Driving" then - I feel much better as my entire point was feeling she was doing more "above and beyond" by finding her guilty of causing the death's of the 5 that we a "mutal agreement" for a ride home, or wherever.

I know so many people are mad, angry and upset, just as I am. However, as I've said repeatedly, it was an accident. If that is the charge for being the cause "of an accident" while "driving drunk" whether or not they were in her vehicle or not durning the accident, then - I understand and agree with the pentalty.

I agree, based on - "that" was the current rules we all live under. That's a risk we all take if we choose to drive when we know we shouldn't.

However, there are some that would just as soon see Sandra dead, or punished more severly. All I wanted to know was, did the "actual" crime (DRUNK DRIVING) that 'resulted' in death's recieve anymore than the crime called for.

It's a pretty fair statement, really. Knowing I wish those five were still alive as well. But realizing, it was a horrible accident that shouldn't have even have happened. There should have been no partying and playing around by any involved.

Sandra needs to serve what ever time the law required of her for driving drunk. It appears she is.

I hope your doing "better" today, "think-about-it." =o)

I know this is tough on you.
JAA

Montgomery, IL

#17 Jul 1, 2010
Oswego2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed 110%, Mary.
She does need to be responsible for her actions as well. I'm fairly confident Sandra's family wouldn't disagree. It seems they've had their "hands full" with her too.
I just don't like how she's been made out to be a "murderer." Killing and murdering are TWO different actions, that come from two different parts of the though process. However, I realize the "results" of the two actions are typically the same!
Based on that last paragraph alone, I think too many "personal" unbiased opinions we're created. Seeing as she didn't intend to kill anyone, I feel 28 years a bit much. On that same thought, knowing the outcome of Sandra's actions that accidently killed 5 (not completely innocent)people, "how time should she really get"?
Do we have a breakdown on how the court/jury came up with 28 years?
I have to agree it was the fault of ALL Sandra, the kids, and the parents she deserves to pay but how much was her fault , the kids payed with their lives, the parents too, but should Sandra rot in jail, she should do some time but 28 years is a bit much my heart goes out to all the families, but parents be parents not friends parents need to grow up themselves sometimes
someone

United States

#18 Jul 1, 2010
An_Observer wrote:
I know that I will never ever EVER lend a hand to any privileged kid in the Village of Oswego. This whole case is such BS. I hope Sandra gets probation. Those kids ruined her life just as much as she ruined theirs. You honestly think she does not have remorse and regret? Whatever. If that's what makes you all feel better than so be it.
If she had remorse she would have at least apologized when she took the stand. That she did not do!!!! Again unless you know it all dont take sides.

“I don't know my own strength!”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#19 Jul 1, 2010
Thanks Oswego2. To be honest - it's all just still weird today.

My nephew told me today that he has a friend who was driving crashed while trying to avoid a deer. He crashed and his passenger (his good friend) died. He tested above the legal limit of .08. He never tried to say that it was his passenger's fault they crashed. However, he still got sentenced to 7 years in prison for Aggravated DUI.

It is a tough law out there now and I don't think people are really aware it is there because most people don't look at the Handbook after they get their license.

I still find it amazing that the Handbook has spelled out punishments for 4th, 5th, 6th or subsequent conviction.

There are no good answers but we cannot keep slapping people on the wrist for doing something we all know results in death all to often.

Don't Drink and Drive. It's simple.
Mother of 3

Winfield, IL

#20 Jul 1, 2010
Oswego3 wrote:
<quoted text>
True. AND defense attorney will start the appeals process and is also requesting a new trial. This thing will keep dragging on.
But during that time she sits in jail.....
Concerned

United States

#21 Jul 1, 2010
She deserves to be sitting in jail. She also deserves all 28 years in prison but we all know that she won't have to serve them all. Some of you think that punishment is a little harsh? How would you feel if someone was drunk, driving like an idiot and killed your child, spouse, parent, or anyone else close to you. No time to say good-bye, no last kiss or hug, no more words ever exchanged between the two of you?? No, it is not going to bring the kids back but it will show people that Drinking and Driving is against the law and you will serve time. I don't think that Sandra is sorry for the loss because she has never said it, so maybe some jail time will help that. She needs to reflect on how much her actions changed so many lives. As far as the fact that she did not "INTEND" to kill them, nobody ever said that but everyone has heard that drinking and driving can have fatal consequences so she knew she was drunk, she knew it was illegal to speed and pack the kids in the car but she wanted to "help" so she ignored the law and drove them anyhow. She is FINALLY having to pay for her crime. The bars are going to lose a faithful customer who should of been home with her kids if that is so damn important to her!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Oswego Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Kendall County Property Taxes OUT OF CONTROL!! (Nov '07) 7 hr KendallCountyTaxes 131
News Accountant brought people together (Mar '09) 15 hr realityisabitch 10
News Metra tries to put a price on riders' priorities Sun Einstein 1
wtf!!!!!!!! (Jul '14) Sat HilltopHitter-Ill... 4
Poll Would you go in a hottub naked? (Nov '07) Sat HilltopHitter-Ill... 91
Plainfield schools suck! (May '13) Apr 30 Tax Payer 5
Review: iLoveKickboxing - Aurora Apr 25 notso 16
More from around the web

Oswego People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]