Bobby Cann Updates: Ryne San Hamel Pleads Guilty, Receives 10 Days in Jail

Jason Jenkins at ActiveTrans is helping to coordinate community response.  If there is any chance you can attend proceedings, please reach out to him: 

jason@activetrans.org.

 

Views: 44154

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Andrew on January 27, 2017 at 5:40am

It's a typo.

Permalink Reply by Duppie on January 26, 2017 at 12:44pm
I went to the hearing today.

A video was shown to the attorneys, defendant, and judge. They all seemed to agree that:
1. Bobby Cann rode through the red light.
2. Rune San Hamel showed no signs of being drunk especially not the high BAC level that the state attorney alleged.
3. It showed Ryne San Hamel speeding.
4. It showed Ryne San Hamel trying to avoid Bobby Cann by swerving into the oncoming lane

Thoughts
1. Was the video shown before? I wonder if this video had been shown before, the case would have over a long time ago.
2. I am no legal expert, but I got the impression that the state attorney was unprepared. They repeatedly were unable to answer the Judge's questions.

If I ever were to die in a traffic accident, I can only hope that my family, friends and coworkers show up so punctually. It's clear from the few times that I attended that Bobby was much loved by his family, friends and coworkers.
RIP Bobby.
Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on January 26, 2017 at 12:54pm

I am very surprised by the "running a red" and Ryne trying to avoid Bobby by swerving into the oncoming lane - first I've heard of this. But the BAC 1.5 is what it is no matter if he showed no signs of being drunk. That probably means he is an alcoholic which isn't surprising given his history of driving while intoxicated. 

Yes, every time I attended, I also had the impression the prosecution was not prepared. It was disturbing how disorganized it was. His family flew out for every court date. Just heartbreaking.

Permalink Reply by Cheryl on January 29, 2017 at 2:28pm

"But the BAC 1.5 is what it is no matter if he showed no signs of being drunk. That probably means he is an alcoholic which isn't surprising given his history of driving while intoxicated."

Agree. This is deeply troubling to me. It should have been another strike against him, not in favor. 

Permalink Reply by D on January 26, 2017 at 4:44pm
Now that this video has emerged can someone explain exactly how the accident happened? I ride thru there all the time and have never understood which direction Bobby was coming from (I know he was headed home, but not clear how he was going through intersection).
Permalink Reply by Bob Kastigar on January 26, 2017 at 1:19pm

I trust the family will seek results in a civil trial. At least I hope so.

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on January 26, 2017 at 5:55pm
Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on January 27, 2017 at 3:47am

In both cases, even though both were clearly DUIs, Bobby and Hector were partially blamed for losing their lives. Also, both sentences took into account "remorse" of the defendant. I was very upset when I read the news yesterday. Sadly, I wasn't surprised but worried about how the value of a lost human life was minimized. 

I do think there are laws that need to be modified for cyclists e.g. Idaho Stop but I also worry about how Hector was blamed as "not visible" (not sure if he had lights on) and Bobby was blamed for being in the intersection on a red. In both cases, the defendant received a significantly lighter sentence and both cyclists cited for sharing fault. If both drivers were sober, most likely both men would be alive today. I don't want to get into any victim-blaming but it does give me pause about how easily we (cyclists) will be blamed in what seems like the most straight-forward of DUI cases. 

We need to be mindful if we don't have lights on our bikes or we venture into an intersection on a red light, we are doing so at a greater risk to ourselves - not only our safety but our rights. 

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on January 27, 2017 at 4:20am

A police officer I know says that he almost ended up handling that crash scene, but was delayed by another job that took longer than expected. He said there were a lot of procedural errors that didn't help the case from a perspective of really getting justice. He's handled a LOT of DUIs over the years, and said that the responding officers' handling of the scene and the state's attorney's handling of the case (appropriate charges, etc.) was less than ideal and ended up helping the defense. 

A bit issue that's starting to get more attention in light of the recent federal report is that CPD training is inadequate for many officers. The officer who commented has gotten specialized training in handling DUI cases, including thorough training on properly administering a breathalyzer and accurately interpreting field sobriety tests. Most officers do not get this specialized training. 

A "career drunk" (habitual DUI offender/alcoholic) can fool most officers with most steps in the field sobriety test. There's one particular test that this officer considers absolutely foolproof with even the most hardcore long-term alcoholic. He's done breathalyzers on drivers who tested higher than .30 (a level at which the average person would be extremely wobbly or passed out) who could pass most steps of the field sobriety test but failed that one.

Many officers who really want to make the streets safer find it discouraging when the judge grants endless continuances, so the officer ends up being called to court many times to sit around and do nothing. It's worse when the judge ends up assigning a "slap on the wrist" sentence like this after the officer has done his or her best to help make a solid case.

Just wanted to give you a perspective from the other side of the fence. As antagonistic as things may get with police at times, many of them really do care, and they hate it when the system ends up giving out injustice.

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on January 27, 2017 at 4:25am

Thanks for the insight Anne. It must be incredibly frustrating as an officer to see cases like these with the defendant getting a slap on the wrist after the case has dragged on for years.

Permalink Reply by Bob Kastigar on January 27, 2017 at 4:29am

I agree there was unnecessary time spent on hearings, and too many hearings necessary before proceeding on to a plea bargain or trial.  Why did Judge Hooks allow this continuous back-and-forth of hearings?

This is a classic example of justice delayed is justice denied.

Permalink Reply by Jack Crowe on January 27, 2017 at 5:32am

This was discussed as a recommendation by the Prosecutors. There was a also discussion of preventing him from driving but the Judge mentioned that was the department of Secretary of State's jurisdiction.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service