Charged filed in fatal farm wagon crash

Charged filed in fatal farm wagon crash

There are 63 comments on the The Indianapolis Star story from Dec 22, 2006, titled Charged filed in fatal farm wagon crash. In it, The Indianapolis Star reports that:

An eastern Indiana man faces reckless homicide charges in the deaths of two motorists killed when their car rear-ended a grain wagon that lacked working tail lights.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Indianapolis Star.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Eric D

Plainfield, IN

#1 Dec 22, 2006
IndyStar.com Metro & State

10:49 AM December 22, 2006


Charged filed in fatal farm wagon crash

Once more, outstanding editing and proof-reading from the fools at the Star and News.

How do these people dare to write a single line about education downfalls when this type of work is their norm rather than the exception?
Farm Girl

Jacksonville, FL

#2 Dec 22, 2006
Okay...I understand that working taillights are a convient thing to have, but there was a time, once long, long ago, when we didn't have such things. Just because a piece of farm machinery does not have these lights does not give you carte blanche to go flying into the back of it. ITS A HUGE PIECE OF MACHINERY. How could you miss it? I see idiots out all the time with their stupid trailer hitched up to their SUVs with the lights done wrong (where if they turn their left signal on, the right one blinks).

Bottom line: This poor guy should not have charges filed against him because some moron took it upon himself to come slamming into the grain wagon. How could they even prove that they weren't working, since they were probably smashed up in the crash???
Anonymous

Hartford, CT

#3 Dec 22, 2006
I do not believe Farm machinery is required to have working signals, that may have changed, but a rear end collision is always a 100% fault in Indiana, I work for an insurance company as an adjuster so yes, I know.
Eric D

Plainfield, IN

#4 Dec 22, 2006
Farm Girl wrote:
Okay...I understand that working taillights are a convient thing to have, but there was a time, once long, long ago, when we didn't have such things. Just because a piece of farm machinery does not have these lights does not give you carte blanche to go flying into the back of it. ITS A HUGE PIECE OF MACHINERY. How could you miss it? I see idiots out all the time with their stupid trailer hitched up to their SUVs with the lights done wrong (where if they turn their left signal on, the right one blinks).
Bottom line: This poor guy should not have charges filed against him because some moron took it upon himself to come slamming into the grain wagon. How could they even prove that they weren't working, since they were probably smashed up in the crash???
Last I knew, all that was required was a reflective slow moving vehicle sign installed on the rear most bin.
Mary Gray-Brocksmith

United States

#5 Dec 22, 2006
I think the accident involving the farmer is very sad...it has been "a long time commin" though. I'm not really sure about my feelings on the charges he will face, because this situation is not just about Mr. Reyes, it is about ALL farmers. Of course my heart is pulling for the people who lost their lives and their families in this awful accident. It's time to make a change, and the change is this...farmers need to follow the very same rules as any other driver on the road...period the end!!! thank you
Jacquelyn

Troy, MI

#6 Dec 22, 2006
I feel sorry for mr. Duvall and Ms. Guffey's family. God watch over you during this holiday season.
an observation

Indianapolis, IN

#7 Dec 22, 2006
How many times have we seen heavy farm equipment towing trailers down the roadways that have no tail lights, brake lights nor turn signals? If farmers wish to move their equiupment on the road, their trailers should not be exempt from any law governing other trailers. I've seen some with yellow hazard lights, but many more have had nothing. This is a sad accident that could have been prevented.
Jacquelyn

Troy, MI

#8 Dec 22, 2006
Farm Girl wrote:
Okay...I understand that working taillights are a convient thing to have, but there was a time, once long, long ago, when we didn't have such things. Just because a piece of farm machinery does not have these lights does not give you carte blanche to go flying into the back of it. ITS A HUGE PIECE OF MACHINERY. How could you miss it? I see idiots out all the time with their stupid trailer hitched up to their SUVs with the lights done wrong (where if they turn their left signal on, the right one blinks).
Bottom line: This poor guy should not have charges filed against him because some moron took it upon himself to come slamming into the grain wagon. How could they even prove that they weren't working, since they were probably smashed up in the crash???
I doubt a car (or even a truck for that matter) would smash the lights (that are on the back on each side respectively) so they aren't recognizable. Furthermore, you can check the bulbs and inside of them (even if broken) to see if they were working. That's what accident investigation is for.
It says this happened Wednesday night...anything after 5:30pm almost ensures it was dark out (and it'd been raining all day here). Odds are he might've been going too fast on the road, but grain trucks are dark and it'd be too late to slow down to miss it. I understand he could've slowed down, I'm not denying that; but I do believe the grain driver is at fault and I'm sorry if that offends someone.
David

United States

#9 Dec 22, 2006
Not just farm equipment, but too many drivers in the evenings without lights on - "I can see fine" does NOT mean you're visible ...
talon

Arcanum, OH

#10 Dec 22, 2006
Seriously people is this a huge problem statewide? Or a tragic isolated accident? Let me guess lets press charges and create new laws does this seem goofy to anyone else
let go Star proof reader

Indianapolis, IN

#11 Dec 22, 2006
The story doesn't clearly say the wagon's tail lights weren't working. It says it "lacked working tail lights" which could mean it didn't have any.
Jacquelyn

Troy, MI

#12 Dec 22, 2006
talon wrote:
Seriously people is this a huge problem statewide? Or a tragic isolated accident? Let me guess lets press charges and create new laws does this seem goofy to anyone else
I guess it's only goofy if you're not into preventable death.
If this is goofy, I'm disconnecting my brake/turn/reverse lights in the back and suing the next person that hits me. I don't think this is goofy at all. Somebody died and I'm not trying to sound mean. I know it may seem harsh because it's a grain truck; but think, if it was a car hitting another car..I think people would be more outraged but it's getting overlooked and the deaths are brushed off because it's farm equipment.
Dawn

Harrison, NJ

#13 Dec 22, 2006
Anonymous wrote:
I do not believe Farm machinery is required to have working signals, that may have changed, but a rear end collision is always a 100% fault in Indiana, I work for an insurance company as an adjuster so yes, I know.
Well, there you have it. I suppose it's possible that the prosecutor in this case, unlike you, could neither "Draw the Pirate" nor earn the coveted Insurance Adjuster Certificate in the privacy of his own home. More likely though, is that this isn't quite so simple a case as you imagine, and you're actually a total "maroon."
Brian

United States

#14 Dec 22, 2006
This doesn't make sense at all. Its not illegal for farm equipment to be on the road without lights. If they have the orange triangle on they are legal. There is no mention of this in the article. How are the pressing charges on someone who didn't break Indiana state law? Sounds fishy. I feel sorry for the farmer. Either way this turns out, they will get screwed.
Brian

United States

#15 Dec 22, 2006
The previous post was supposed to say "How are they pressing charges on someone who didn't break Indiana state law?" Please excuse my typo.
DeseHere

Harrison, NJ

#16 Dec 22, 2006
Eric D wrote:
IndyStar.com Metro & State
10:49 AM December 22, 2006
Charged filed in fatal farm wagon crash
Once more, outstanding editing and proof-reading from the fools at the Star and News.
How do these people dare to write a single line about education downfalls when this type of work is their norm rather than the exception?
OMG - a typo on the internet! Someone call 911 - "boil some iodine!"

Get a life
DeseHere

Harrison, NJ

#17 Dec 22, 2006
Brian wrote:
The previous post was supposed to say "How are they pressing charges on someone who didn't break Indiana state law?" Please excuse my typo.
The charges are reckless homicide - which *is* against the law - it's not a traffic violation.
Farm Girl

Jacksonville, FL

#18 Dec 22, 2006
Jacquelyn wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess it's only goofy if you're not into preventable death.
If this is goofy, I'm disconnecting my brake/turn/reverse lights in the back and suing the next person that hits me. I don't think this is goofy at all. Somebody died and I'm not trying to sound mean. I know it may seem harsh because it's a grain truck; but think, if it was a car hitting another car..I think people would be more outraged but it's getting overlooked and the deaths are brushed off because it's farm equipment.
Oh yes, just brushed off by charging the driver of the farm equipment with reckless homicide. That's definitely my definition of a slap on the wrist.

And this is absolutly the exception and not the rule when it comes to farm equipment. Only very old machinery does not come fully equipped with lights and slow moving signs. I'd be interested to know if this gentlemen had a SMV sign, which would may have made a difference. If you see that bright orange triangle, you should know off the bat that you are going to be going no faster that 20 mph.
Hitchin A Ride

Palo Alto, CA

#19 Dec 22, 2006
This is ridiculous. How can you arrest someone for being stationary on the road?

Example: if your car was at a stoplight, and the engine suddenly died, causing the tail lights to go out, and someone rear-ended you at that moment, would you be arrested?

I don't think so.

Or, put it another way, there are literally dozens of deaths a year at railroad crossings that do not use mechanical arms to block the road, only signs, and speeding drivers do not see the train coming until it is too late.

Should the train engineer be arrested for someone else's negligence?

Again, I don't think so.

In any kind of driving condition, be it night, snow, fog, etc., it is the person behind the wheel who takes responsiblity for their actions.

Speed was the cause of the deaths, not homicide.
Please Explain

Bargersville, IN

#20 Dec 22, 2006
Did I read that right being held without bond. Why? Seems to me this is a bit harsh considering the circumstances. They let drug dealers and child molesters out due to over crowding. But this although preventable was clearly an accident and he is held without bond. Must be more to this then we are getting.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
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.

Indianapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
son murdered mother in early 90's (Oct '15) 2 hr Ft Wayne Native 5
Spiro Agnew (Nov '14) Aug 27 OPERATION GLADIO 11
Carriage House East Apts (Jun '13) Aug 25 The REAL Moon God... 16
Custody attorney Aug 25 Ealj1818 3
Closing of the Marion County Children's Guardia... (Apr '09) Aug 24 Iansane90 35
Bruce Springsteen sucks anyways Aug 24 Ivyawe 7
does pepsi drug test? which type? (Jul '14) Aug 24 Amanda 20

Indianapolis Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Indianapolis Mortgages