Oxford Hills
Drug, alcohol tests being conducted on drivers in fatal crash
WEST PARIS — The investigation into the cause of a crash that killed a Naples man Monday night on Route 26 continued Tuesday, with drug and alcohol tests done on two surviving drivers, Maine State Police Lt. Walter Grzyb said Tuesday. Such tests are routine in fatal accidents.
Richard Ray, 60, of Naples died when his 1998 Chevrolet pickup struck an out-of-control tractor-trailer loaded with wood chips, which overturned on the pickup, Trooper Ron Turnick said.
Ray was headed south behind a 2008 Acura sedan driven by Tricia Beretz, 36, of Somerville, Mass., shortly after 5 p.m., when Beretz's car crossed the centerline and was struck by the northbound 18-wheeler driven by Warren Dunning, 41, of Dixfield, Turnick said. That caused Dunning to lose control of the Midwest Price rig and enter Ray's lane, the trooper said.
Police suspect driver fatigue was the reason Beretz's car drifted into the opposite lane near 118 Bethel Road, Grzyb said.
He said drug and alcohol tests would be done on Ray's body, and the District Attorney's Office has requested that a urine sample be taken.
"In this particular case, it's early on in the investigation and you just don't know what happened," Grzyb said. "The district attorney felt it was prudent to try to get it."
Grzyb and Sgt. Don Shead said it was difficult to predict when the tests would be completed.
"It depends on what the backlog is. We have no control over it," Shead said. The state's only lab is operated in Augusta by the Department of Health and Human Services.
Grzyb said some of the samples might need to be sent to another lab. "(Samples) used to go to a lab in Maryland," Grzyb said. "A lot of stuff the state is not set up for."
Shead said even after the results come back, the case would have to be reviewed, many more interviews conducted and technical "stuff" completed before authorities could determine whether charges should be filed.
ldixon@sunjournal.com
Advertisement
Displaying comments, from newest to oldest
verified That poor tourist was only
That poor tourist was only skiing all day, decided to drive home tired, passed several gas stations and rest stops, before falling asleep and causing an accident that took the life of one good man and affected the career (trailer truck insurance and licensing laws don't identify with at fault cases, the TT driver is always punished) and health of a second. The only explanation was that the deceased or the TT driver was drunk or on drugs and caused the accident that the poor tourist was in, not bad decisions made by the tourist. She shouldn't be punished after all, she only made a mistake.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Most Popular Today
verified on "PUC staff: No go for energy firms’ wind deal"
Enron's Bastard Son, First Wind, Caught!
Docket 2011-170, feb 2, 2012 (see it all at http://www.windtaskforce.org)
"By filing their coordinated “exceptions” and letter, First Wind and APUC attempted to subvert the intention and effect of this rule. Therefore, the Examiners correctly excluded APUC’s and First Wind’s filings.
The Petitioners’ actions give rise to particular and very serious concerns.
Petitioners have deliberately attempted to inject new evidence into the record “through the back door,” long after the record closed on December 9, 2011 and at that point in the proceeding where other parties are not afforded a chance to respond, test the evidence through cross examination, engage in discovery, present witnesses, or otherwise have the benefit of the procedural safeguards of an evidentiary record Their Exceptions, containing these new facts, were filed in blatant disregard of at least two of the Commission’s rules and in direct violation of the Examiners’ January 19 Scheduling Order, and in an obvious attempt to influence the outcome. The rules violated are rules of integrity, fundamental fairness and substance, not mere housekeeping rules designed to advance administrative efficiency"
GET THEM OUT OF MAINE!
Petitioners violated Chapter 110 section 760-A(a) and (d~ of the Commission’s Rules. The filing of “exceptions” by APUC and First Wind violated the Ex Parte rule under Section 760-A(a) Petitioners’ subornation of these filings, as evidenced by the references to the filings in Petitioners Exceptions, also violates Section 760-A(d) which reads
No party in a proceeding shall request, encourage, suggest, or provide any assistance to any other person to make a communication that would violate subsection (a) of this section.
8Petitioners chose to engage in coordinated, concerted action with First Wind and APUC to assist them in an improper attempt to have a non-party influence the Commission after the date for filing exceptions, and to inject non-record information into evidence, and to couple this with a direct violation by commingling the prejudicial material into Petitioners own Exceptions. Petitioners deliberately cited to, quoted from, and indeed made such filings a part of their own January 23, 2012 Exceptions. Their awareness of procedural issues is revealed by the first footnote in their Exceptions. Petitioners’ actions were willful, ~vith the expectation that opposing parties would have no opportunity to respond,7 and for the primary purpose of influencing this Commission’s decision.
verified on "PUC staff: No go for energy firms’ wind deal"
Enrons's Bastard Son Caught!
see Feb 2 , 2012 docket 2011-170!!!
ELECTRONICALLY FILED ON FEBRUARY 2,2012
STATE OF MAINE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
BANGOR HYDRO ELECTRIC & )
MAINE PUBLIC SERVICE COS. )
Re: Request for Exemptions and for )
Reorganization Approvals )
Docket No. 2011-170
MOTION FOR DISMISSAL
AND SANCTIONS WITH
INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM
February 2, 2012
Now come the Office of the Public Advocate, Houlton Water Company, the Industrial Energy Consumer Group (“I7ECG”), and Boralex, Inc. (“Boralex”)(collectively, the “intervenors”) by and through their respective attorneys and move to dismiss these proceedings or to enter judgment against Bangor Hydro Electric Company and Maine Public Service Company (“Petitioners”) based upon the recommended findings of the Examiners~ Report.
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioners have intentionally and recklessly violated the Commission’s Rules of Practice and the Examiners’ January 19, 2011 Scheduling Order by filing Exceptions tainted by prejudicial non-record information and by assisting and/or encouraging First Wind Holdings, LLC (“First Wind”) and Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp. (“APUC”) to file unauthorized comments doing the same. According to the Examiners, these exceptions have been reviewed by the Commissioners. As described herein, further consideration of the case at this point would violate fundamental principles of due process and would be unduly prejudicial to the intervenors in this case. Of equal importance is the fact that the actions of the Petitioners, First Wind and Algonquin Power have damaged the integrity of the adjudicatory process by intentionally exposing the Commissioners and their advisors to information outside of the record that, even if the Commission can ignore, undermines public confidence in the process. Dismissal with prejudice orjudgment against Petitioners are the appropriate remedies and sanctions for Petitioners’ violations of the Commission’s Rules and the January 19 Schedul
verified on "Lewiston's Bob Stone: New face on MTA board"
Well this was fun to read.
Well this was fun to read.
In order to make comments, you must verify your account.
In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.
Login or create an account here.
Our policy prohibits comments that are:
- Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
- Excessively foul and/or vulgar
- Inappropriately sexual
- Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
- Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
- Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.