Truck driver charged in fatal collision

Dateline: 
THE NATION
Justin Bromberg

The police investigation into last week's fatal collision on Concession Road 2 has resulted in criminal charges being laid against the driver of the flatbed trailer.

The truck driver, a 43-year-old man from Hammond, was asked to meet with the case's lead investigator, Const. Dominique Sauvé, at the Hawkesbury detachment of the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) on Wednesday night, January 19.

He was subsequently arrested and charged for two counts of criminal negligence causing death under section 220 (b) of the Criminal Code of Canada.

The man was released on a promise to appear in court and is scheduled for a first appearance at the L'Orignal court in mid-February.

The maximum penalty for a conviction under this charge is life imprisonment.

Earlier this week, Hawkesbury OPP Const. Pierre Dubois told The Review a technical traffic accident investigator's report had to be received before the police could determine if charges were to be laid.

However, he said the normal procedure for stopped vehicles is to warn other drivers of their presence on the road.

"Any vehicle stopped on the road, especially a commercial vehicle, should warn others of its presence on the road whether broken down or just parked. They should put down flares or cones or anything - a lot of truckers will use the reflective triangles - but you have to make sure the vehicle is visible. That's just being careful," he said.

Eighteen-year-old Garett Allen and 17-year-old Naomi Théoret were traveling westbound on Concession Road 2 near Vankleek Hill when the pickup truck they were driving in struck a loaded semi-trailer that was parked, blocking the westbound lane, last Monday, January 10 around 5 p.m.

Hundreds of people, many of them family members and close friends, attended funerals in Vankleek Hill this past weekend for the young couple.

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Comments

My heart goes out to the

My heart goes out to the families of these two teens and the trailer driver. But when you hear both sides to an accident like this . You hear there is negligence on both sides. But only one left to take the blame for both. Not all details are told in the news , so this leads people to blame one and the other.
Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 30/01/2011 - 12:46.

VANKLEEK HILL ACCIDENT

For those of you who don't know the real story,let me tell you the truth. The driver was getting his flares out of his truck when this kid hit the back of the trailer. He ran over to see if he could help them but there was nothing he could do.How can someone not see a loaded trailer of shingles wrapped in white paper.If anyone has ever followed a transport truck loaded it is not hard to see(day or night).The back of that trailer already has lots of reflectors,obviously the kid was not paying attention where he was going. There is no doubt about it, this pick up was definitely well over the speed limit and everyone knows that, there were no skid marks found anywhere, it was still daylight outside at exactly 5:05pm is when it all happened. Oh and also the service station he was going to was right there where the trailer was parked it was unattended for approximately .02 seconds,just enough time for the driver to grab his flares.Why were these kids not wearing seatbelts.(MANDATORY) why were these kids speeding (SPEED LIMITS) it's the law. Where are the police when you need them. Why is it, that kids can get away with anything but the minute an innocent person makes a mistake he is punished for it. Andre Duquette has 2 children of his own (17 and 19) and he always emphasizes to drive safe, don't SPEED, and WEAR your seatbelts. Someone should have to pay the price for these kids afterall they broke the law but unfortunately they are not here to get punished for it. As far as I am concerned Andre Duquette is innocent this kid hit his trailer on his own. Andre didn't ask him to,so before people start accusing people of things maybe you should get the facts before publishing gossip in the paper. Anyone who knows Andre personally knows he is a very cautious driver he has been doing this all his life and has never had anything like this happen to him before. He will come out a winner and prove to all of you out there that he is INNOCENT.
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 25/01/2011 - 01:34.

Hmmmm

I am sorry for the lost of the family, but this truck driver, even by being negligent, does he deserve to be in a criminal court. Because he did not make his presence known, well I have seen all sort of vehicles on the side of the road for the longest time, would that make any one of them criminally responsible if anything happened. I am really not sure of that. I do not know all the fact but not sure If I would have been the victim or the family that I would want this. Here is 220 B 220. Every person who by criminal negligence causes death to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable. (a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and (b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life. R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 220; 1995, c. 39, s. 141.
Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 23/01/2011 - 15:51.