Manslaughter?

[Arkady]

Put aside the question of whether Christie knew about what his staff was doing and whether he was involved in a coverup. Even put aside the question of whether the tone he set and his staffing decisions were partly at fault. Put Christie aside entirely, for the moment. Just for those who are actually known to have been responsible for intentionally snarling traffic in order to exact political revenge, what would be an appropriate penalty?

With traffic like that, the monetary damages alone can be huge. If you cause several thousand people to waste several hours of their time, the collective costs, expressed in terms of their normal hourly wage, for example, could be in the millions of dollars. In the case of everyone caught up in that traffic, you picked their pocket directly for the extra cost of fuel and wear and tear on the car, and for a portion you picked their pockets in terms of lost wages, lost business, and consequential costs (e.g., having to pay extra for the daycare when you arrive an hour late to pick up your kid). It seems that, at minimum, there should be a class action civil suit against everyone in the Christie administration who was involved.

But it gets worse. The snarled traffic also delayed an emergency response to a woman who wound up dying. Would she still be a live if the Christie administration hadn't been playing political games with the bridge? I don't know. But if I were the family, I'd strongly be considering a wrongful death claim against them.... and possibly against the state itself. And prosecutors should be looking into whether some sort of manslaughter charge is appropriate. The idea that someone might be delayed in getting emergency care and die because of that is not such a far-fetched consequence of the decision to cause a huge traffic jam that it's unfair to hold someone accountable when it happens.

 

[GordonGecko]

The Obama Haters have come up with impeachment fodder on MUCH less.

But if this thing spools out entirely for Christie, it's simply going to mean his career in politics is over. He's getting hammered from BOTH sides and even the GOP Partisans don't like him (after Sandy) enough to rally to his defense.

And unfortunately for them? The polls show he's the ONLY Repub with a real shot at defeating Hillary if she runs in '16.

 

[PhilFish]

Put aside the question of whether Christie knew about what his staff was doing and whether he was involved in a coverup. Even put aside the question of whether the tone he set and his staffing decisions were partly at fault. Put Christie aside entirely, for the moment. Just for those who are actually known to have been responsible for intentionally snarling traffic in order to exact political revenge, what would be an appropriate penalty?

With traffic like that, the monetary damages alone can be huge. If you cause several thousand people to waste several hours of their time, the collective costs, expressed in terms of their normal hourly wage, for example, could be in the millions of dollars. In the case of everyone caught up in that traffic, you picked their pocket directly for the extra cost of fuel and wear and tear on the car, and for a portion you picked their pockets in terms of lost wages, lost business, and consequential costs (e.g., having to pay extra for the daycare when you arrive an hour late to pick up your kid). It seems that, at minimum, there should be a class action civil suit against everyone in the Christie administration who was involved.

But it gets worse. The snarled traffic also delayed an emergency response to a woman who wound up dying. Would she still be a live if the Christie administration hadn't been playing political games with the bridge? I don't know. But if I were the family, I'd strongly be considering a wrongful death claim against them.... and possibly against the state itself. And prosecutors should be looking into whether some sort of manslaughter charge is appropriate. The idea that someone might be delayed in getting emergency care and die because of that is not such a far-fetched consequence of the decision to cause a huge traffic jam that it's unfair to hold someone accountable when it happens.

so, does the idea hold for every mis timed action on a highway? like say construction poorly planned for during rush hour, and so forth...

lotta class actions...

 

[Cerulean Mutt]

I don't know (playing devil's advocate here) but manslaughter requires the lack of expressed or implied malice resulting in the death of a human being.

The closing of the bridge was a malicious act IMHO, so I'd say based solely on the definition of manslaughter that they might be able to stretch it to a more serious charge in this case.

You're right about the civil lawsuits - the State of New Jersey is going to take a substantial finanacial hit for all this nonsense.

 

[NightSwimmer]

You're right. This story isn't going away anytime soon.

 

[NightSwimmer]

so, does the idea hold for every mis timed action on a highway? like say construction poorly planned for during rush hour, and so forth...

lotta class actions...

You are correct, in that the same hazards would be faced for a normal, required bridge or highway shutdown. In this case, however, the shutdown was not necessary. The appropriate state, county and city officials were not forewarned of the closure (which is what originally tipped the city off to the fact that something improper was amiss) and there was malicious intent motivating the closure.

 

[marvin martian]

I don't know (playing devil's advocate here) but manslaughter requires the lack of expressed or implied malice resulting in the death of a human being.

The closing of the bridge was a malicious act IMHO, so I'd say based solely on the definition of manslaughter that they might be able to stretch it to a more serious charge in this case.

You're right about the civil lawsuits - the State of New Jersey is going to take a substantial finanacial hit for all this nonsense.

They should go for second degree murder, just like the Zimmerman prosecutors. It should work out the same way...

 

[trapdoor]

Gore's team apparently did the same sort of thing during the primaries: http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2...in_an_election_or_why_christie_s_scandal.html

 

[Arkady]

so, does the idea hold for every mis timed action on a highway? like say construction poorly planned for during rush hour, and so forth...

lotta class actions...

No. Within the normal range of behavior, there wouldn't be liability. We couldn't staff the government if people were going to be personally responsible every time they screw up in a way that harms people. We allow for negligence, with no consequences for the individual beyond getting fired. But this wasn't mere stupidity or negligence. It was willful misconduct. It was the abuse of power in order to carry out political revenge. It's like the difference between a cop accidentally killing someone during an arguably over-aggressive high-speed chase, and a cop accidentally killing someone when he rams his cruiser into his ex-wife's house to take revenge on her. Poor judgment and maliciousness are very different.

 

[Arkady]

Gore's team apparently did the same sort of thing during the primaries: http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2...in_an_election_or_why_christie_s_scandal.html

If true, that's horrible, too. However, in that case it is a little different, in that we're not talking about days of delay, we're talking about a short delay while a motorcade passes through. It's still reprehensible, if true, though.

 

[PhilFish]

You are correct, in that the same hazards would be faced for a normal, required bridge or highway shutdown. In this case, however, the shutdown was not necessary. The appropriate state, county and city officials were not forewarned of the closure (which is what originally tipped the city off to the fact that something improper was amiss) and there was malicious intent motivating the closure.

ok, bad example...

how about occupy wall streeters blocking roadways..brookly bridge. does that work?

No. Within the normal range of behavior, there wouldn't be liability. We couldn't staff the government if people were going to be personally responsible every time they screw up in a way that harms people. We allow for negligence, with no consequences for the individual beyond getting fired. But this wasn't mere stupidity or negligence. It was willful misconduct. It was the abuse of power in order to carry out political revenge. It's like the difference between a cop accidentally killing someone during an arguably over-aggressive high-speed chase, and a cop accidentally killing someone when he rams his cruiser into his ex-wife's house to take revenge on her. Poor judgment and maliciousness are very different.

 

[Alinvegas]

Put aside the question of whether Christie knew about what his staff was doing and whether he was involved in a coverup. Even put aside the question of whether the tone he set and his staffing decisions were partly at fault. Put Christie aside entirely, for the moment. Just for those who are actually known to have been responsible for intentionally snarling traffic in order to exact political revenge, what would be an appropriate penalty?

With traffic like that, the monetary damages alone can be huge. If you cause several thousand people to waste several hours of their time, the collective costs, expressed in terms of their normal hourly wage, for example, could be in the millions of dollars. In the case of everyone caught up in that traffic, you picked their pocket directly for the extra cost of fuel and wear and tear on the car, and for a portion you picked their pockets in terms of lost wages, lost business, and consequential costs (e.g., having to pay extra for the daycare when you arrive an hour late to pick up your kid). It seems that, at minimum, there should be a class action civil suit against everyone in the Christie administration who was involved.

But it gets worse. The snarled traffic also delayed an emergency response to a woman who wound up dying. Would she still be a live if the Christie administration hadn't been playing political games with the bridge? I don't know. But if I were the family, I'd strongly be considering a wrongful death claim against them.... and possibly against the state itself. And prosecutors should be looking into whether some sort of manslaughter charge is appropriate. The idea that someone might be delayed in getting emergency care and die because of that is not such a far-fetched consequence of the decision to cause a huge traffic jam that it's unfair to hold someone accountable when it happens.

OK. How much time has been wasted by citizens trying to sign up for Idontnobamacare?

 

[NightSwimmer]

ok, bad example...

how about occupy wall streeters blocking roadways..brookly bridge. does that work?

Who elected these protesters to public office? If they caused you any inconvenience, then you'll most likely have to sue them individually.

 

[PhilFish]

Who elected these protesters to public office? If they caused you any inconvenience, then you'll most likely have to sue them individually.

hey, i'm just throwin stuff out there...seeng what sticks... so these staffers of Christies were elected to office? or do we sue them individually for their actions, absent the connection...

 

[Arkady]

OK. How much time has been wasted by citizens trying to sign up for Idontnobamacare?

If the goal of Obamacare had been to force people to waste a lot of time, we'd have a useful analogy. Since it wasn't, we have a distraction. Get back on topic.

 

[justoffal]

Put aside the question of whether Christie knew about what his staff was doing and whether he was involved in a coverup. Even put aside the question of whether the tone he set and his staffing decisions were partly at fault. Put Christie aside entirely, for the moment. Just for those who are actually known to have been responsible for intentionally snarling traffic in order to exact political revenge, what would be an appropriate penalty?

With traffic like that, the monetary damages alone can be huge. If you cause several thousand people to waste several hours of their time, the collective costs, expressed in terms of their normal hourly wage, for example, could be in the millions of dollars. In the case of everyone caught up in that traffic, you picked their pocket directly for the extra cost of fuel and wear and tear on the car, and for a portion you picked their pockets in terms of lost wages, lost business, and consequential costs (e.g., having to pay extra for the daycare when you arrive an hour late to pick up your kid). It seems that, at minimum, there should be a class action civil suit against everyone in the Christie administration who was involved.

But it gets worse. The snarled traffic also delayed an emergency response to a woman who wound up dying. Would she still be a live if the Christie administration hadn't been playing political games with the bridge? I don't know. But if I were the family, I'd strongly be considering a wrongful death claim against them.... and possibly against the state itself. And prosecutors should be looking into whether some sort of manslaughter charge is appropriate. The idea that someone might be delayed in getting emergency care and die because of that is not such a far-fetched consequence of the decision to cause a huge traffic jam that it's unfair to hold someone accountable when it happens.

Christie is a POS blowhard moron with his head so far up his ass he can see out his own mouth.

From day one he struck me as totally obtuse...a one trick pony....the kind of prosecutor who would take any shortcut to a conviction he could get away with.

Chistie is a true product of Tony Soprano's New Jersey.....and he's never been anything more than that.

JO

 

[Arkady]

ok, bad example...

how about occupy wall streeters blocking roadways..brookly bridge. does that work?

That wasn't an abuse of a power they were entrusted with, though. Nor was it an act of revenge... instead it was an attempt to get attention. Those differences don't necessarily change the legal dynamics, I suppose, but they do point to the extraordinary betrayal and maliciousness of the Christie-administration actions.

 

[justoffal]

hey, i'm just throwin stuff out there...seeng what sticks... so these staffers of Christies were elected to office? or do we sue them individually for their actions, absent the connection...

I see some venue for criminal liability here but you are correct in pointing out that public office affords a certain measure of legal shielding that simply would not be available to lower echelon citizenry.

I was never too impressed with Christie even when most conservatives were....never trusted him.....something about his demeanor seem detached and unconcerned.
But hey that's How Obama comes across too.

JO

 

[justoffal]

The Obama Haters have come up with impeachment fodder on MUCH less.

But if this thing spools out entirely for Christie, it's simply going to mean his career in politics is over. He's getting hammered from BOTH sides and even the GOP Partisans don't like him (after Sandy) enough to rally to his defense.

And unfortunately for them? The polls show he's the ONLY Repub with a real shot at defeating Hillary if she runs in '16.

His is the career that should nver have been.....

He's a flash in the pan.... China shop bull wearing high heels frankly.
He works for the NJ mentality but on the national stage he doesn't have a chance with the conservatie vote IMO.

JO

 

[PhilFish]

That wasn't an abuse of a power they were entrusted with, though. Nor was it an act of revenge... instead it was an attempt to get attention. Those differences don't necessarily change the legal dynamics, I suppose, but they do point to the extraordinary betrayal and maliciousness of the Christie-administration actions.

I guess so. I'd say more of a disruption (the OWSers.. but to each their perspective..)

anyway.. 'extraordinary betrayal and maliciousness'... yikes... of the administration...

the maliciousness and stupidity of specific persons in the administration...perhaps.. but I may be splitting hairs...over the all consuming need to embroil the whole.