SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
February 7, 2011· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

DEVELOPING – Charges filed in July 4 incident

By Mike — Mike Devlin

From an email alert just sent by the LASD:

Vehicular manslaughter charges filed in connection with 2010 Fourth of July fatal traffic collision.

The District Attorney’s office of the Los Angeles Superior Court, North Valley Division – San Fernando Courthouse has filed one felony count of vehicular manslaughter and one infraction count of running a red light in connection with the July 4th, 2010, traffic collision on Valencia Boulevard that claimed the life of 43-year-old Matilde Garnica and injured several others.

Melissa Brown, age 23, of Canyon Country is scheduled to appear in San Fernando Superior Court on Wednesday, February 16, 2011, for arraignment.

Update: More from KHTS

Comments (45)

  1. ThomasFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:14 pm
    The District Attorney filed 1 felony count of 192(c)(2) of the penal code (vehicular manslaughter) and 1 count of 21453(a) of the vehicle code (running a red light), which is an infraction. The jail term, if convicted ranges from 1 year in the county jail to 2 to 6 years in the state prison. If convicted, I believe she will only get probation for this and see no jail time.
  2. Timothy Myers SRFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:26 pm
    Thomas, My internet source shows this as vehicular manslaughter without gross negligence and intoxication with up to one year in county jail. I agree with probably probation, community service going around and talking to school kids about driving carefully, and then expungement of the felony after successful completion. Right charge and satisfactory outcome.
  3. ThomasFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:34 pm
    193(c)PC – Vehicular manslaughter is punishable as follows: (1) A violation of paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 192 is punishable either by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, four, or six years. Just getting it from the penal code itself.
  4. ThomasFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:35 pm
    But then I realized I was reading the wrong section. My bad, you are right. My eyesight really is going. :>).
  5. navigatorFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:26 pm
    Perhaps so, but I wouldn’t want to be in her shoes.
  6. NateFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:25 pm
    The District Attorney is making a complete ass of himself. Let the open and shut Johnny Pride case go and then try to convict a person of being human. I would like to see them prove negligent driving.
  7. Timothy Myers SRFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:27 pm
    Nate: Running a red light is per se negligence. (Failure of a duty to act in stopping at a red light.)
  8. NateFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:40 pm
    By that definition any accident could be consider negligence. Which means if someone dies on the road as result of an accident that is someone elses fault that person has to go to jail. No drugs, No Alcohol, No texting, No negligence.
  9. MikeFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:43 pm
    Like Tim said, running a red light *is* negligence, on its face.
  10. NateFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:54 pm
    Then they are charging her twice for the same crime. If running a red light is always felony negligence then we should be arresting people instead of giving out tickets.
  11. drive66February 7, 2011 at 3:22 pm
    It’s a felony only when you kill people.
  12. NateFebruary 7, 2011 at 4:02 pm
    That isn’t how the law reads, spirit of otherwise.
  13. drive66February 7, 2011 at 4:50 pm
    Apparently you know more about the law than the District Attorney.
  14. ThomasFebruary 7, 2011 at 6:32 pm
    I work around D.A.s and some people do know more than them.
  15. TylerFebruary 7, 2011 at 6:28 pm
    What law are you reading?
  16. JeffFebruary 7, 2011 at 3:39 pm
    There are no auto accidents. Only auto collisions with one or more parties being negligent. Calling an auto collision an “accident” is an exercise in dodging responsibility. It’s BS.
  17. navigatorFebruary 7, 2011 at 3:44 pm
    A tad cynical today?
  18. JeffFebruary 7, 2011 at 3:52 pm
    What’s cynical about that? You get behind the wheel of a 4,000lb vehicle, you assume responsibility for its operation and safety. From the US Department of Transportation: “accident WSDOT style is collision or crash, not accident. An accident is defined as anything that happens by chance without an apparent cause, or a mishap, especially one causing injury or death. Highway collisions usually have an underlying cause. As a result, words such as collision and crash are more accurate.” This is an old debate and I resent it when newspapers use the word “accident” in place of “collision.” The AP style book addresses it if I remember correctly.
  19. NateFebruary 7, 2011 at 4:01 pm
    Apparently Jeff wants an example made of this young girl.
  20. NateFebruary 7, 2011 at 3:59 pm
    Gotta blames someone huh… Dozens of accidents happen in this city and people die but because it happened around soo many people that some how changes everything. We had an off duty officer die last year because of an illegal lane change. Leaving a pregnant wife to bury her 27 year old husband. Why weren’t any of you calling for charges then? Not a fan of law enforcement? I think that is BS.
  21. JeffFebruary 7, 2011 at 4:02 pm
    Who would be charged in a case like that? Thankfully no one else was injured thanks to his negligence. When Joe Novotny was killed while riding his bike after a 20 year old drunk driver plowed into him, was that a collision or an “accident?”
  22. NateFebruary 7, 2011 at 4:09 pm
    http://www.the-signal.com/archives/27991/ Who would be charged? Are you kidding me? The lady that caused the “Collision” which flung this officera hundred feet into a damn street sign near granery square. Maybe you should do your homework before assigning blame…
  23. JeffFebruary 7, 2011 at 4:15 pm
    Where does it say in that article that the woman was responsible for the collision? If she is partially or fully to blame, charges should follow.
  24. NateFebruary 7, 2011 at 4:21 pm
    So Jeff wants jail time for anyone who makes a mistake on the road which causes a death. That will teach people to perfect.
  25. Mr PerezFebruary 7, 2011 at 4:50 pm
    A vehicle, when misused, can be no different then a hand gun. The negligence aspect had to do with running a red light and subsequent result of killing one person and injuring many others, both physically(temporary) and mentally(potentially permanent). I will say that intersection is confusing with the blinking yellow light going off at the same time as the red light being on. The prosecutor is going to have to be ultra ready. I guess the other question, is can the family file a civil suit against her and if so, would she be liable for any damages awarded or would insurance cover?
  26. ThomasFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:38 pm
    They don’t have to prove negligent driving. That is why they filed that particular section. 192(c)(2) PC reads….. Driving a vehicle in the commission of an unlawful act, not amounting to felony, but without gross negligence; or driving a vehicle in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death, in an unlawful manner, but without gross negligence.
  27. ThomasFebruary 7, 2011 at 2:39 pm
    But Nate, this case is ridiculous. It is being tried for what amounts to a misdemeanor. If anything, jail time is limited to the county jail, and IF given any time, she will only be required to do about 10% of the sentence given to her so about 36 days. AND on top of that, with good time credit, you take half of that off and you are looking at 18 days.
  28. ToddFebruary 7, 2011 at 6:24 pm
    And when they take the plea deal, they’ll just suspend the sentence and do a 18 month probation. As I stated earlier, there is probably little to no evidence in this case, and conflicting stories as to what color the light was. If any charges are to be filed, vehicular manslaughter is appropriate given what we know. The article states that the SD had said they have “lots of witnesses” and some video to sort through… well if all the witnesses said the same thing, don’t you think that they’d have filed charges by now? The only thing going against the driver is apparently her past history of running red lights (at red-light cameras maybe?). Which is why I see a plea deal happening and no legal battle ensuing.
  29. TylerFebruary 7, 2011 at 6:31 pm
    This case won’t even make it past the preliminary hearing. A deal will be given after the arraignment of no jail time and summary probation most likely.
  30. ReaderMamaFebruary 7, 2011 at 6:39 pm
    I dispute that there is no such thing as an “accident” when it comes to vehicles. Tires do blow out, brakes can fail, electrical systems do die suddenly, animals and children do dart out in front of drivers, sudden gusts of wind do blow cars out of their lanes, debris is spilled or blown onto the roadway, and people can and do have heart attacks or other health problems which result in collisions causing death. And I’m betting that every single person here has at one time or another miscalculated the timing of a light or the speed of their vehicle to the degree that had a death resulted, they too would be charged with manslaughter. There but for the grace of God go most of us.
  31. JeffFebruary 7, 2011 at 8:40 pm
    Read the definition of an accident again: “An accident is defined as anything that happens by chance without an apparent cause, or a mishap, especially one causing injury or death. ” You listed a whole bunch of causes preceding a collision. In those cases, it is an accident. A blown-out tire leading to a collision is accidental. Running a red light? Negligence.
  32. ReaderMamaFebruary 7, 2011 at 9:21 pm
    Your definition of “accident” is suspiciously narrow. Nowhere do I find a definition that insists an accident be entirely without cause. This is what I found online: a : an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance b : lack of intention or necessity : chance 2a : an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance b : an unexpected and medically important bodily event especially when injurious c : an unexpected happening causing loss or injury which is not due to any fault or misconduct on the part of the person injured but for which legal relief may be sought But regardless of how you choose to define it, I was responding to the following statement of yours: There are no auto accidents. Only auto collisions with one or more parties being negligent. And you even appear to contradict yourself here: A blown-out tire leading to a collision is accidental. I am not arguing that the young woman in this case is not at fault. I do think, though, that as human beings we all are at times “negligent” and fortunate that those negligent moments do not always result in fatalities.
  33. ScottEFebruary 7, 2011 at 7:29 pm
    I accidently read all of the posts in this thread.
  34. ReaderMamaFebruary 7, 2011 at 8:29 pm
    You were an accident waiting to happen . . .
  35. KLBFebruary 7, 2011 at 10:00 pm
    Collision or accident – if this girl’s negligence killed someone I loved, I’d want her to fry.
  36. Gang FangFebruary 7, 2011 at 10:51 pm
    Mmmmmm….fries.
  37. PetzFebruary 8, 2011 at 5:58 am
    In this instance-the running of the red light was contributory, but it was the impact with the Dodge that sent the vehicle over the curb causing the death and injury. As with most things in life it is not black and white, neither a pure crash or accident, it is a “crashident.” Sometimes even Petz is amazed with his own brilliance and unique insight. This is one of those mornings.
  38. David GaunyFebruary 8, 2011 at 10:16 am
    Lots of heated views on this issue. The one thing I don’t see considered here is the girl’s driving record. Combined with the fact that a death occurred, this would be another consideration in the DA’s decision to prosecute.
  39. BrookFebruary 8, 2011 at 10:26 am
    It baffles me some of you actually think the case should be thrown out. IF it is proven she ran the red light then she should have to face the legal consequences as well. You shouldn’t get off legally because you didn’t mean to do something (but if that is what you guys are saying – if I ever get pulled over that is going to be my first defense). I am sure there are tons of cases out there where running a red light resulted in a death and the person responsible was held legally responsible – this is no different. I can’t imagine the emotional trama she has to face every single day, I wouldnt wish that on anyone – but that doesn’t free you of other responsiblity for the harm you cause.
  40. PetzFebruary 8, 2011 at 11:51 am
    No one has mentioned that she may well be found to be civilly liable and the monetary damages could be substantial. That is where the family will be compensated for their loss-not through legal liability.
  41. Mr PerezFebruary 12, 2011 at 9:28 am
    I believe I mentioned it on February 7th(scroll above), hooooah!
  42. PetzFebruary 8, 2011 at 12:17 pm
    Anyone else find satisfaction with the guy killed by a cock with a knife attached to it’s leg?
  43. navigatorFebruary 8, 2011 at 12:22 pm
    YOU READ MY MIND!!
  44. PetzFebruary 8, 2011 at 12:40 pm
    Sorry, Petz posted in the wrong thread. Did not mean to mess this one up-thought it flowed in the Tesxas thread a bit better.
  45. PetzFebruary 8, 2011 at 12:42 pm
    Navigator-give me a call and let’s get some coffee together soon. Maybe at Chick-fil A

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support