WEST PARIS (AP) — Law enforcement officials say four young people were returning to an underage drinking party at the time of a crash that killed two teenagers in western Maine.
Troopers say the driver had been drinking and was texting when her car went off the road, became airborne and struck some trees early Saturday in West Paris.
State Trooper Tom Welch said 19-year-old Logan Dam and 16-year-old Rebecca Mason, both of West Paris, were killed instantly. The driver, 18-year-old Kristina Lowe of Paris, was seriously injured and remained hospitalized Sunday; another passenger was treated and released from a hospital.
Lowe had been listed in critical condition but her condition at Maine Medical Center in Portland was upgraded to serious on Sunday.
Maine Public Safety Department spokesman Steve McCausland says the four had attended the party and were returning when the crash occurred.
Report a correction
My prayers go out to all effected
I would like to send my thoughts and prayers to the family,friends,classmates, Law, fire and Rescue personel, effected by this tragity.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Supplier
The supplier of the alcohol is the one to blame as well as the driver...What a waste of life all the way around..My prayers go out to the families and friends...
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.PARTY
Of course the police will be making an arrest, RIGHT?! The person who had the party should be accountable.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (4)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Okay, so the drunk driving
Okay, so the drunk driving teens were at a party. I am sure that law enforcement will go after the hosts. People have died as a result of all this.
Why do I have a feeling that the operator, the actual perpetrator in this incident, will likely get less than 10 years for ending 2 lives? By choices that were made, starting at a time when the perpetrator was sober? Why do I also think that the hosts, who certainly are guilty, will get stiffer punishment than the actual perpetrator? Two young lives have been snuffed out here. What is the deterrent for this not happening again? The driver, the person who actually took those lives, needs to be punished on a scale with the results of her actions.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (3)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.okay
But don't forget, the host was behind that wheel, too. They are also responsible for those deaths as well. I don't know what the out come will be, because it seems to change every time this happens. But i do know this, no matter how many times people are told about drinking and driving, ever one nods their heads in agreement then go get drunk and drive, because "it's not going to happen to them." Even your law enforcements drink and drive, seen it. But i'm not disagreeing with you, just adding my opinion.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (2)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Oh, but you can't....
The liberal authorities will likely say "you can't punish the driver, she has been punished enough, having to live with knowing she was responsible for the death of her friends".
Here is my opinion:
Hosts - Punished with a significant fine for hosting the party, and ordered to not have contact with people under 21 in their homes for 10 years, and no contact with alcohol for the remainder of their lives.
Driver - Suspension of license for 5 years, responsible for paying funeral costs of those killed, no contact with alcohol for the remainder of her life, and not allowed to text message ever again.
This is a little bit more lenient than I would like, but I have to remain reasonable.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Kevin, I understand, but here
Kevin, I understand, but here is the big "but": But two people died as a direct result of her actions. These days, no one can claim ignorance about the hazards of drinking and driving. And ever so typically, the hazards of drinking and driving are born upon those who are not drinking and driving. Relatively speaking, the driver gets off so much better than the victims of their actions. The deterrent, punishment, whatever you call it is not on a scale with the harm being done.
I agree the hosts are also culpable, and should face justice also. Ultimately, IMO, the driver should get a more severe sentence than the hosts, because the driver is the one who actually killed two people. The hosts certainly facilitated it, but they did not do the actual killing.
To me, it comes down to what is reasonable in a case where a person takes another persons life. Where is equal justice? We are not talking about an accident where there was no fault of the driver. The driver was at fault in multiple areas: Drinking, driving too fast, texting at the same time. It's not like she was sober, driving appropriately for conditions, paying attention to driving and a moose jumped out in front of her. She was lax, to say the least, in the responsibility of driving a motor vehicle, and two people have died as a result.
Let's not forget that two people are dead here.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Jails
Jails should be reserved for people who are likely to harm someone else again. We can be sure that the young lady did not intend to kill anyone. The punishment I suggested would significantly reduce further incidents without costing the taxpayers for jailing the young lady. Also, by letting the young lady continue with her education and career, she will be much more likely to be self supporting, reducing the chances of her ending up on state assistance.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Totally disagree
What ever happened to "If you break the law, you WILL go to jail? Where is the deterrence factor. That is like giving everyone who drinks and drives a mulligan:
If you kill someone because you were drinking and driving, we think you'll see how terrible it is and we think you'll probably never do it again, so we won't jail you. Besides we know you didn't intend to actually kill anyone. You only did everything to make it possible/probable, but you didn't really intend kill anyone.
And while we are at it, you have robbed two people of their lives. Let's now make sure you continue your education and go on to live a productive life, supporting yourself, of course.
To me, allowing her to walk away Scott free makes an entire mockery of the law, as well as the safety of the general public. She broke the law, multiple times, ignored common sense and made poor decisions, and killed two people as a result.
Two people are dead because of her. Whatever harm has become her, the harm that has become those two is much greater. They are dead as a result of her.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.TOUGH LAWS...YA RIGHT...
In 1993 a drunk woman put her young son in the back seat of a car around two in the afternoon. She was taking him to get his haircut. My sister and niece were coming back from looking at furniture for my niece and her soon to be husband. That drunken woman killed my sister and niece. Thanks to my sisters and brother, she got 5 years. The law was going to give her 3 years with 2 years suspended. We don't have tough laws on drinking and driving. Heck, the stores help encourage it by putting the beer in the refrigde for their ride home or to where ever. I say, if your going to pass a law, then BACK IT. That goes with all these laws out there. We have so many darn laws that the law enforcement can't keep up with them all. I can't even come close to imaging how the police can handle this stuff that their suppose to back. One error it could be their jobs, they have to be fast thinking all the time and hope they did everything right. But driving drunk has been out their for decades, so no excuse, slam them and do it hard....
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.