‘I understand why you all hate me’: killer teen driver

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 02/04/2015 (3871 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Manitoba justice officials are seeking a five-year adult sentence for a young Winnipeg motorist who killed two women and injured three others after blowing through a red light while texting and speeding with alcohol in her system.

But the accused, who was just 17 at the time of the October 2010 crash, claims she shouldn’t serve a single day behind bars. She is seeking to remain under the Youth Criminal Justice Act and be given just three years of probation after pleading guilty to two counts of criminal negligence causing death and two counts of criminal negligence causing bodily harm.

Queen’s Bench Justice Karen Simonsen has reserved her verdict after a two-day sentencing hearing ended Thursday. No date for decision has been set.

“I understand why you all hate me, why you want the worst to happen to me and why you think I’m a monster,” the now 21-year-old woman told a courtroom packed with family members and friends of the deceased. Her name can only be published if she is given an adult sentence.

The Crown has painted her as an “entitled” young woman who isn’t truly remorseful, as documented by a string of questionable comments, actions and decisions she’s made since the tragedy. But she told court not a day goes by she doesn’t regret her deadly mistakes.

“It pains me to know my actions have caused a lifetime of pain for all of you. I made the choice to make poor decisions that day,” she said Thursday. “The damage I’ve done is permanent and it hurts me to know there’s nothing I can do to undo it.”

Her mother then got up to address the court – only to be met by a mass exodus of the victim’s family and friends who clearly didn’t want to hear what she had to say. The mother began by describing her daughter as a kind, compassionate person but admitted she will “never understand why my daughter exercised such poor judgment.”

It is that poor judgment the Crown says cries out for a much stiffer adult sentence. The maximum allowed by law under the YCJA is just three years of custody and supervision.

“The sentence has to fit the crime,” Crown attorney Susan Baragar said Thursday.

Friends tried to take away keys

Senhit Mehari, 19, and Amutha Subramaniam, 17, suffered fatal injuries as they drove home from a Halloween party. Both were graduates of Dakota Collegiate and were studying business administration at the University of Manitoba.

The women, along with three friends, were heading south in a Pontiac Sunfire on St. Mary’s Road when a westbound Chevrolet Cavalier ran a red light and slammed into the driver’s side of the Sunfire at the intersection of Bishop Grandin Boulevard.

The teen driver was on probation, which meant she wasn’t allowed to have any alcohol in her system when behind the wheel. She had been drinking at a house party that night and was going about 20 km/h over the speed limit at the moment of impact.

An examination of the accused’s phone shows she was texting on her cellphone with friends at the time of the crash. She also had alcohol in her system — in the range of between .07 and .12 based on an extrapolation. The Crown originally laid impaired-driving charges but stayed those on the grounds there was doubt as to whether she would have been over the legal limit of .08 at the time of impact, because blood wasn’t taken until some time after the crash.

Court heard Thursday how the deadly driver admits she had driven after drinking alcohol on “three or four” prior occasions and routinely texted while driving despite admittedly having some “close calls.”

“She indicated she would often text and drive because she felt she was able to multi-task,” said Baragar.

On the night of the tragedy, friends tried to stop her from getting into her car after consuming a large quantity of rum at a house party.

“Friends actually tried to take her keys away from her but she got mad at them and wouldn’t let them,” said Baragar.

As well, court heard about a series of text messages the girl had exchanged with friends – both on the night of the incident and several days earlier – where they pleaded with her not to drink and drive.

“This is not a one-off,” said Baragar. “The bad choice was made while sober. And that is an aggravating factor.”

Genuinely sorry: defence

Following the crash, the girl admitted to police she knew it was a poor choice but did it anyway.

“People had to die for me to know it was wrong,” she said.

The Crown is relying on these types of comments as part of their argument that the YCJA penalties just aren’t sufficient. They said the girl has a “high sense of entitlement” as proven by the fact she quizzed police immediately after the crash about how long she may lose the ability to drive.

“My driver’s licence is very precious to me,” she explained to an officer. Later that night, when informed she would be released on bail, the driver bristled when told her conditions would include abstaining from alcohol.

“Does that mean I can’t drink on my 18th birthday?” she asked.

Baragar said Thursday the girl did, in fact, hold her 18th birthday at a bar. It’s not clear if she consumed alcohol. But an ex-boyfriend told police she regularly drank with him after the incident. As well, she posted numerous “selfies” on Facebook which showed her partying with friends, often in the presence of alcohol, in the months after the incident.

“To coin a phrase, talk is cheap,” Baragar said of the young woman’s claim she is deeply remorseful for what happened. “It’s disrespectful in these circumstances. It shows a lack of victim empathy.”

Baragar also said the fact the woman dragged this case out as long as possible before entering a guilty plea just as the trial was set to begin shows a lack of respect for the families of the victims.

Defence lawyer Todd Bourcier told court Thursday his client has “grown as a person” in the four-and-a-half years since the incident and insisted her remorse is legitimate.

“She’s not putting on a show. She is genuinely sorry for what happened,” he said. He described her as a low risk to re-offend whose interests wouldn’t be served by going to a federal prison.

“She did not set out that night to kill people. She did not want to hurt people,” said Bourcier. “There can be meaningful consequences short of jail.”

‘Deserves justice’

The victims were minutes from home when they were hit. Family and friends of the deceased, along with survivors of the crash, filled the courtroom over the past two days and presented nearly two hours of powerful victim impact statements.

“I was robbed of my sister, my mentor, my best friend,” Yonatan Mehari told court Wednesday. His statement, read on behalf of the family, described Senhit as a “rising star” who was going to make a huge impact on the world.

“She was an amazing and beautiful person inside and out. Senhit was humble, selfless, motivated, intelligent and one of the hardest working people I know. It’s hard to meet another person like her,” he said.

Heidi Subramaniam, sister of Amutha, lashed out at the young driver for causing so much pain.

“I was her big sister. I failed to protect her from someone who had no regard for human life,” she told court. “She was sweet, loving, caring, honest. She deserves justice. Her dreams were taken away without her consent. Her future was taken away without her consent. One person’s reckless, preventable behaviour ruined her life and now ours as well.”

Court also heard Wednesday from the other occupants of the vehicle who were injured. They described how fortunate they were to survive the crash that killed their two friends.

“It was a bad dream that I woke up to every day,” said Lysbeth Arthur, who suffered a broken clavicle and traumatic brain injury that required extensive rehabilitation.

“We lost two great people who were going to make a positive contribution to society,” she said.

www.mikeoncrime.com