Sage advice, 'Holic. Sage advice indeed.

(05-11-2016, 10:49 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: Show me another place with roads that narrow and dark.  Show me another road with things filled with headstones that we could have clipped and trees that close to the road.

The driver had under a beer before we got to the cemetery.  He was also speeding back there because there were no cops and no other cars.  Given that and the above sentences, no, we could have not wrecked anywhere.

He also created an atmosphere where this kind of behavior was accepted and even encouraged.

We were also 15, and not all 15-year-olds act like that, but there's a reason of why adults have control until kids are 18.  In fact, the human brain isn't even fully developed until a person is in their 20s (24 I think is the average), meaning that kids don't make good decisions, which is why adults have control.

Sometimes people just don't "get it", this would be one of those instances.

(05-11-2016, 10:54 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: Readign your post you are playing the victim card even  now drinking at 15 is a bad path

i can show you many roads where its dark narrow with a ton of trees near by....

Pitch black with no speeding laws and no chance of being caught by cops?  Also, as windy and curvy?  Also, keep in mind that the roads weren't much wider than the car.  

(05-11-2016, 11:16 AM)michaelsean Wrote: There are tens of thousands of crashes a year involving alcohol that don't happen in cemeteries. 

And you think part of their liability arises from having gravestones?  IN A CEMETERY?

Just saying that the gravestones played a part.  Also, above about no other cars or police, we wouldn't have wrecked if we weren't speeding, and we wouldn't have been speeding if we hadn't been back there, which the gates should have been locked.

There's a reason why the speed limit is only like 5 mph.

The caretaker's son had driven back there and wrecked when he wasn't even drinking and it wasn't even at night, so don't you think that also contributed to the fact that that kind of reckless behavior was tolerated back there, as well proving how dangerous it was to drive back there? 

(05-11-2016, 12:10 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Brad, a lot of years have passed since your accident. You're an adult now and have been for awhile. Maybe it's time you just said "You know what...no one held a gun to my head and made me go drink and party in a cemetery. No one forced me to take part in anything that the caretaker was doing. And, no one made me get in the car that eventually wrecked. Even though I was a teenager and made poor decisions...it was still ME that made those decisions". 

What I'm getting at brother, is that it's probably way past time to just accept your own (and pretty significant) responsibility. While others may have 'promoted an environment' that permitted these things to go on, you kept returning to that environment of your own accord. It's true that teenagers do stupid things and and sometimes make poor decisions. But, when those decisions lead to something bad happening (in a situation that YOU put yourself in)...then eventually you're going to have to own those bad decisions and poor choices.

I'm not condemning you Brad, just trying to offer some advice. Just accept the fact that you are as much to blame as anyone for what happened. If you've been through the courts and ended up with some cash, then I say you did OK. The best thing you can do is quit rehashing the past and just concentrate on much more productive uses of your time and energy...like your public speaking and trying to get other kids to not make those same bad choices.

I'm a public "speaker" with everything that happened and I'm completely over it, but we made poor decisions because he allowed us to.

If he had locked the cemetery, we wouldn't have driven (under a mile from the driver's street to the cemetery), and, if he didn't openly allow people to drink, the driver wouldn't have been able to consume more alcohol there that made him drunk enough to want to speed.

(05-11-2016, 04:29 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I'm a public "speaker" with everything that happened and I'm completely over it, but we made poor decisions because he allowed us to.

God, I hope you don't share this logic with anyone you speak to.

One question, who's decision was it to go to the party? I don't need any further justification or explaining away, just answer this one question.

(05-11-2016, 04:29 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I'm a public "speaker" with everything that happened and I'm completely over it, but we made poor decisions because he allowed us to.

If he had locked the cemetery, we wouldn't have driven (under a mile from the driver's street to the cemetery), and, if he didn't openly allow people to drink, the driver wouldn't have been able to consume more alcohol there that made him drunk enough to want to speed.

No offense brother, but something tells me you're not "completely over it".

You are still trying desperately to divert the blame to everyone and everything...except yourself. It's not enough to say 'I was only 15' or 'if this and that'. I'll say it again...no one made you go there. No one made you drink, party, have bonfires or get in the car. No one made you disrespect the cemetery, the deceased or their families. You did those things of your own free will, and you continued doing them until it ended in an unfortunate way for you. 

Honestly, prior to the accident, how many times did you complain about what was going on or what the caretaker was doing? How many times did you tell your parents about it, or have them notify the cemetery owners? It was only after the accident that you found what was going on there to be wrong. I have a feeling that if the accident hadn't occurred...you would have continued going there, continued drinking and partying...and continued disrespecting that 'resting place'. 

This will be my last post about it. It's your life, but it is troubling to see that you still don't comprehend your own explicit guilt in all of this...15 years old or not. 

Best of luck to ya brother.

(05-11-2016, 05:04 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: No offense brother, but something tells me you're not "completely over it".

You are still trying desperately to divert the blame to everyone and everything...except yourself. It's not enough to say 'I was only 15' or 'if this and that'. I'll say it again...no one made you go there. No one made you drink, party, have bonfires or get in the car. No one made you disrespect the cemetery, the deceased or their families. You did those things of your own free will, and you continued doing them until it ended in an unfortunate way for you. 

Honestly, prior to the accident, how many times did you complain about what was going on or what the caretaker was doing? How many times did you tell your parents about it, or have them notify the cemetery owners? It was only after the accident that you found what was going on there to be wrong. I have a feeling that if the accident hadn't occurred...you would have continued going there, continued drinking and partying...and continued disrespecting that 'resting place'. 

This will be my last post about it. It's your life, but it is troubling to see that you still don't comprehend your own explicit guilt in all of this...15 years old or not. 

Best of luck to ya brother.

Well there's some rep.  Good post, good points.

(05-10-2016, 04:44 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: He set the stage for this to happen in the only place that it could have happened

Do teenagers drink and drive and get into accidents in other places?

If the caretaker "set the stage" and "allowed it" to happen then why are the owners of the cemetery responsible?

9 pages of horseshit.

Brad.  Are you honestly saying that if you were not allowed to drink in the cemetery you would not have drank somewhere else?

You were drinking before you went to the cemetery and if you had not been allowed to go to the cemetery you would have gotten drunk someplace else.

It would be different if you could honestly say that you would never have been drinking if not for the cemetery and you had no other source of alcohol, but that just is not true.  You were drinking other places and getting alcohol from other sources.

(05-11-2016, 04:29 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Pitch black with no speeding laws and no chance of being caught by cops?  Also, as windy and curvy?  Also, keep in mind that the roads weren't much wider than the car.  
Just saying that the gravestones played a part.  Also, above about no other cars or police, we wouldn't have wrecked if we weren't speeding, and we wouldn't have been speeding if we hadn't been back there, which the gates should have been locked.

There's a reason why the speed limit is only like 5 mph.

The caretaker's son had driven back there and wrecked when he wasn't even drinking and it wasn't even at night, so don't you think that also contributed to the fact that that kind of reckless behavior was tolerated back there, as well proving how dangerous it was to drive back there? 
I'm a public "speaker" with everything that happened and I'm completely over it, but we made poor decisions because he allowed us to.

If he had locked the cemetery, we wouldn't have driven (under a mile from the driver's street to the cemetery), and, if he didn't openly allow people to drink, the driver wouldn't have been able to consume more alcohol there that made him drunk enough to want to speed.

Pitch black and windy because it's a cemetery not a highway. And they still post a 5 mph sign which you guys chose to ignore while trespassing.

(05-11-2016, 04:29 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Just saying that the gravestones played a part.

Could someone explain to me how gravestones played a part in all of this?  Deceased people's headstones made the car crash?  Were they moving around and in the road?

(05-11-2016, 11:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Brad.  Are you honestly saying that if you were not allowd to drink in the cemetery you would not have drank somewhere else?

You were drinking before you went to the cemetery and if you had not been allowed to go to the cemetery you would have gotten drunk someplace else.

It would be different if you could honestly say that you would never have been drinking if not for the cemetery, but that just is not true

I'm pretty sure that you aren't allowed to drink in any cemetery.

(05-11-2016, 09:09 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I like Brad, but when something like that happens, you really have to get past the victim mentality. I'm sure that's tough when everyone from his lawyer to his family were probably telling him he was the victim... but honestly lawyers are paid to do that and family is probably only going to say that because they don't want to pile on after a traumatic event. 

This is a very good point.  Most 15 year olds who get caught drinking get punished by their parents.  But in this case I doubt anything was ever done to Brad.  And I do not blame his parents.  I certainly would not punish a child who had already been damaged as bad as Brad.  But this lack of punishment left him thinking like any 15 year old who was not punished for his bad behavior.  He feels like he did nothing wrong and was not to blame for his actions.

I applaud all posters who tried to bring reasoning and a degree of objectivity to this traumatic subject.
However since most of us were not directly affected every second of every day as is Brad, it is easy to see why his position is unchangeable.

wow...

Wow.

I've never seen one dude deny liability for his own actions so vehemently, and I've stood witness to people facing down life in prison. Hell one of them flat out plead guilty.

This is ridiculous.

(05-12-2016, 11:57 AM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Wow.

I've never seen one dude deny liability for his own actions so vehemently, and I've stood witness to people facing down life in prison. Hell one of them flat out plead guilty.

This is ridiculous.

I can't remember what show I was watching, or it may have been local, but a dude plead guilty and get the death penalty.  That was some shrewd bargaining.

(05-12-2016, 12:26 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I can't remember what show I was watching, or it may have been local, but a dude plead guilty and get the death penalty.  That was some shrewd bargaining.

Actually in capital murder cases it is not uncommon for the defendant to plead guilty to the charge and then have a full blown trial just on what sentence he should receive.

I can't believe I missed this thread.

(05-12-2016, 12:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually in capital murder cases it is not uncommon for the defendant to plead guilty to the charge and then have a full blown trial just on what sentence he should receive.

Unless they wanted the death penalty, why wouldn't they take a shot at not guilty?