Topic: AL man 24 kills two in traffic accident
started by: Tiger
Posted by Tiger on Oct. 01 2003,12:16 pm
Danny Madrigal of Albert Lea was driving the wrong way on I-94 in the Twin Cities and struck a van killing two 21 year olds. Danny was attending Law School. Article in the Star Tribune. Remeber you can read one article a day on the Star Tribune without registering.
Posted by 1adam12 on Oct. 01 2003,1:59 pm
2 die in wrong-way crash on I-94 in north MinneapolisRobert Franklin and Howie Padilla, Star Tribune
Published October 1, 2003 CRAS01
A car may have sped the wrong way for nearly 4 miles on Interstate Hwy. 94 before it crashed into a van, killing two people Tuesday in Minneapolis, authorities said.
The car was exceeding the 55-mile-per-hour speed limit, according to investigators, and "it's safe to say that alcohol is suspected to be a contributing factor in this crash," said Kevin Smith, spokesman for the state Department of Public Safety.
The crash happened at 1:40 a.m. on I-94 just north of 42nd Av. N.
The driver of the van, Ngoc Thuy Le, 21, of Apple Valley, and her passenger, Nguyen Hoang Vu Nguyen, 21, of Crystal, died at the scene, according to the Hennepin County medical examiner.
DeYoung Lehoang, Le's older brother, said that his sister had just begun classes at Normandale Community College and had left home about 10:30 p.m. to study with Nguyen.
The driver of the car was identified as Daniel Ernesto Madrigal, 24, of Albert Lea, Minn. He was hospitalized at North Memorial Medical Center in Robbinsdale with minor injuries.
Smith said that Madrigal was driving north in the southbound lane of I-94 and that preliminary reports indicate that "he got on the wrong way somewhere near downtown Minneapolis."
Le's family members, who gathered at their home in Apple Valley on Tuesday night, said they wished they had known sooner about the crash.
Police arrived at their home hours after the crash to notify relatives. Despite the medical examiner's report, which said Le and Nguyen died at the scene, Lehoang said officials told the family that Le died later at the hospital.
"We could have been there by her side for her last moments," said Doai Hoang, Le's uncle.
"She could have heard us tell her that we loved her and that we wanted her to stay with us," her sister added.
Tuesday afternoon, as they dealt with Le's death, about 60 friends and relatives prayed for her, Lehoang said. It was just two days after an 18th-birthday celebration for the youngest boy in the family.
"She brought light to everyone she met," Phuong said.
Head-on crashes, where one car is in the wrong lane, are fairly common in Minnesota, numbering several hundred annually and resulting in eight to 22 deaths each year from 1991 to 1999.
But it's a rare type of accident on freeways, divided highways or one-way roads, according to a 2000 analysis by the Public Safety Department.
Freeway entrances commonly are marked with red "wrong way" signs, and "it's pretty darn hard to get going the wrong way on a major freeway," Smith said.
In the earlier study, age was a predominant factor, state officials said. Seven of the 11 drivers who entered a one-way road the wrong way were 75 or older. Alcohol was a factor in one crash.
In Tuesday's crash, blood-alcohol tests were done but results were not available yet, Smith said.
"Everybody was wearing their seat belts. Air bags deployed," Smith said. "That still wasn't enough to save the two people in the van."
Posted by cpu_slave on Oct. 01 2003,3:44 pm
| Quote |
| Head-on crashes, where one car is in the wrong lane, are fairly common in Minnesota, numbering several hundred annually and resulting in eight to 22 deaths each year from 1991 to 1999. |
I think it's time to try something different. Has anyone given any thought to putting something like those 'severe tire damage' things on the end of ramps to keep people from getting on them the wrong way?
This is something that is all too common, as I have even seen people enter the wrong way onto interstate 90 by the mall. Obviously all the signage is not enough for some.
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 01 2003,4:21 pm
If you've been following the "rumble strip" debate at the County level--the County Engineer insists that we put them on EVERY intersection or NONE. Using that logic (illogic?), we would have to have them at every off ramp.She also wants "more driver education and signage"--as you say--these do not work.
The Plaza street/I-90 exits ARE confusing.
Posted by cpu_slave on Oct. 01 2003,6:02 pm
Jim- the County Engineer needs to come back to a place commonly known as 'reality' and exercise something we like to call 'common sense'. ALL or NONE is not the answer when it comes to 'rumble strips', as the county should simply put them where they are needed. Most all rural intersections would be nice, and no one is asking that they all be done 'right now' but there are plenty of intersections known to have more than their fair share of accidents that something like this could be used on to reduce the number of crashes. More signage may work, but let's be honest - what are you going to notice more, a bigger stop sign on the side of the road or hitting a rumble strip which vibrates your entire ride?The same principle would apply to my 'tire damage' idea, you could start putting them where the problems seem more likely to occur and over time add them until either (a) the number of 'wrong way' drivers drops to almost none (b) every onramp has them. Honestly, if it makes some morons realize that unless they start paying more attention they could end up spending quite a bit of cash on tires then it would be a more affective deterrent than another 'wrong way' sign. (and an even better way to keep idiots off the roads while the tire service businesses notice a business boom
)As far as education, I think that EVERY driver should be re-tested every 5 years or so. I have seen driving habits of some 40 year olds that make most 16 year old drivers look perfect, and don't get me started on the elderly who are in no shape physically or mentally to be controlling anything above a television remote. (no offence Jim
)
Posted by minnow on Oct. 01 2003,6:30 pm
Maybe I'll get that Hummer afterall...
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 01 2003,7:05 pm
I get confused by the television remotes--I have one each for the TV, VCR, and Dish--I don't even WANT to think about a DVD! If you guys are going to keep making "OLD" jokes, how about a "smilie" with gray and thinning hair? 
Pilots have to have recurrent training and checks--2 years for private and commercial pilots, 6 months for Airline Transport pilots. Personally, I like the system the Russians use--an hour before the flight, each commercial pilot sits in a testing chair, and a random sequence of lights goes on--at a faster and faster pace. You've probably played the same game in a bar, and not known the origin. If the pilot can't perform for ANY reason, he is replaced on that flight. It tests cognitive skills, motor skills, and reaction time. It doesn't matter what the source of the pilot's problem is--it could be lack of sleep, inattention, preoccupation with other matters, psychological problems, alcohol, or drugs--but he has to perform in order to fly the flight. Compare that with the U.S.--we have RANDOM drug and alcohol testing, and a MANDATORY age 60 retirement rule (there's that AGE thing again!)
We rarely find anybody that is alcohol or drug impaired (an infinitely small amount), we don't screen for other psychological problems, and we retire our airline pilots at an arbitrary age when most of them are at the top of their "game" (Capt. Al Haynes was 3 weeks from mandatory retirement when he successfully put the DC-10 down in Sioux City WITH NO FLIGHT CONTROLS)Maybe it wouldn't be so hard to do the same thing with an ignition interlock for cars--I know they already have a "breathalyzer" interlock that can be installed for people with multiple DWI offenses).
Posted by old friend on Oct. 01 2003,9:56 pm
i understand that driving in the metro area can be confusing but it is my understanding that danny has lived in that area for 4-5 years. it appears that we can add 2 more to the tally for innocent people killed by drunk drivers.
Posted by Ole1kanobe on Oct. 01 2003,10:32 pm
I am not sure that they could put the tire damage strips on on/off ramps, think it's a legal/liability issue, but I also do not know what it would take to fix things of this nature.
Posted by ted on Oct. 01 2003,10:42 pm
Ole, kinds of scares me, but I'm with you on this one. Everytime something tragic happens there is a knee jerk response to do something. Life is risky..
Posted by 1adam12 on Oct. 02 2003,11:26 am
The world's a risky place, it isn't possible to foresee and prevent every hazard. Some people are just plain stupid, reckless or careless. The rest of us just need to watch out for them.I think the tire-damage devices would cost a lot for installation, and they would freeze in the winter, causing snowplows to rip them up. That's why you rarely see them in Minnesota. And this only addresses what the DPS analysis calls a "rare type of accident".
More signage is only going to further confuse people (there was a recent article in Reader's Digest about over-signage).
Jim - I have thought for years that all drivers should be retested. That way you avoid the "age-discrimination" debate. You take your driver's test over every 4-5 years when you renew your license. And, no, it's not a knee-jerk reaction to one or two collisions.
There are a lot of older drivers who seem to have forgotten the "rules of the road". Retesting, although it would be a time-consuming hassle for some, would at least force people to focus on their driving. Problem drivers could be identified early on and action taken.
Minnow - skip the hummer, or we'll see you on this page
-- < www.ci.stpaul.mn.us/depts/police/prostitution_photos_current.html >
Posted by cpu_slave on Oct. 02 2003,11:45 am
nevermind 
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 02 2003,12:54 pm
| Quote |
| Maybe it wouldn't be so hard to do the same thing with an ignition interlock for cars--I know they already have a "breathalyzer" interlock that can be installed for people with multiple DWI offenses). |
I like the interlock idea because it is not subjective, reasonably quick, and tests for all kinds of impairment. It would weed out the truly impaired, instead of people meeting an artificial standard. For example, we all know people that are impaired after one drink--while others seem to function OK beyond the .10 standard (soon to be reduced to .08).
I suppose it could be defeated by having someone else do the test to start the vehicle--and it is unlikely to be instituted--but I would certainly like to get away from arbitrary definitions of impairment. U.S. law makes it illegal to discriminate against a certain age group in nearly every other aspect of our lives--a performance-based testing system would meet that test. It would also weed out drug, sleep, or emotional impairment. It would provide a benchmark for elderly drivers and their families as to when to stop driving, and I would think it would make it easier for police officers to make their judgement call following a stop.
Just another option to consider. Can someone tell me how to get back to the home, now--I seem to have lost my way!
Posted by Mamma on Oct. 02 2003,5:18 pm
I'd help you out Jim, but I am in the boat next to you....I think "I've fallen and I can't get up".
Posted by 1adam12 on Oct. 02 2003,5:37 pm
Maybe for drunk drivers, but do you want to sit through this test everytime you want to drive?Driving examiners have a checklist on their tests. Either you violate a driving rule, or you do it correctly. There's not much room for subjectivity.
Both measures are pretty cost prohibitive, though. The state can't afford to hire all of the examiners needed, so it's moot at this time.
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 03 2003,11:31 am
I agree--it isn't going to happen--but I would gladly put up with a 15-second tests if it would keep "all those other drunks" off the road--not to metion being able to PROVE non-impairment. Of any of us that imbibe, who among us hasn't worried that even though we watch our drinking, that we might be pulled over (perhaps in one of the "safety checks" and charged?As a police pro, I'm sure you have seen many other factors other than age and alcohol in poor driving--distractions, hurry, anger, drugs, poor health, or just having an "off day"--all contribute to unsafe driving. That's what I like about the Russian system--it does a good job of screening for all of the above.
Pro pilots can refuse to take a flight for any of the reasons above(they better not make a common practice of it, however) in the interest of safety--if only more drivers held themselves to a higher standard.