8 Die in Crash on Taconic State Parkway #2

[sharkeyes]

...I have have delt with top county employees before, once, many years ago, nothing confrontational, but it taught me that if a situation needed to be resolved stat a simple form could be produced with the decimal points in the right place and fluid samples could just as easly be munipulated for outside testing

Do you believe the toxicology report was "produced with the decimal points in the right place" and that Diane had not been drunk?

...because of her being handicapped by the injuries she sustained to her head.<modsnip>

Please help me to understand what head injuries Diane sustained to her head other than those noted in her autopsy, maybe I'm misunderstanding your post, but, there is nothing noting any "head injuries" prior to the crash...at least according to the documentary "Something's Wrong With Aunt Diane," wherein Daniel mentions nothing about Diane having any pre-existing head injuries.

http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/schuler, diane_report.pdf

 

[Davereid]

I guess he might have been under the influence of his lawyer. However, most lawyers are supposed to "spin" the story to show your client in a favorable light. Any actions and statements Daniel has made following the accident have done anything but show him in a favorable light. I do not know why the lawyer could have just spoke and said "we are terribly sorry for the victims of this tragedy and do not understand how this could have happened. However, the family would appreciate time to grieve for their family". The press conferences where he spoke actually created more speculation.
His denial about her drinking was the first stage of grief. He should have just done it in private. As for those suing him and him suing the Hances and NY state; I think it should have been left well enough alone. That is what you pay insurance for. Why sue anyone directly? The person at fault is dead. Those killed should have gotten a big insurance payout and NY state should add more wrong way signs on the exits.
No one will ever know what went on in her head that day. It is interesting to create theories. That is why we are all still discussing it years later. In any case it was a truly horrible wreck.

 

[zippitydoda]

Dear Zippiy, Fantastic post.
I also aganized over the seemingly lackidaisical attitude that creped in as I was
watching the documtery, and media coverage bits.
I believe Danial was under the influence of his dirtbag lawyer.
This does not dismiss Danial's behavier in that he was probably given a set of rules to follow by his council which he stuck to.
I believe he regrets this and at a time when he needed help from someone
no one was there.

I would say the footage from the funerals that I have seen shows an outpouring of support for him, and the Hance family. His one SIL was by his side and making the same bizarre statements he was throughout the documentary.
Daniel hired DB, and that's on Daniel.

Diane caused an overwhelming amount of misery, and I see no need for Daniel to carry it forward. Daniel can stop this very easily by no longer making nonsensical statements, and dropping his lawsuits against Diane's victims. Those two simple acts might bring him and the victims families some peace

 

[pdxmama]

Dear SuzieQ, When you say "she loaded the kids up in her van then proceded
to kill them and the men in the other car" indicates you were present at the time
Is that true?

foilsman, I think it is a big stretch to say that we can only believe things that we have witnessed ourselves. I also think it is a stretch to say that LE and the coroners office falsified reports because they felt pressure by the media. I would like to see some evidence of this before we make such terrible claims against LE, evidence stronger than your one negative experience with some county officials. I don't want to pick on you and am very interested in what you have to say but it gets me a bit riled when LE is accused of despicable conduct without solid evidence.

I am happy to read any links to info that you can provide to back up this claim.

 

[Nova]

Dear Nova, You are on the right track by answering your own question..you can't keep it down.
You are also right about the "circumstantial evidence". This is the blinding infuence that has enveloped this thread. Almost without a wimper the toxicology and autopsy reports have trumped all reason and sanity here..
and no I do not accept them as true because I was not there when fluid samples were taken from Diane then follow them to their lab and witness their processing and I doubt anyone who has trashed Diane and kicked Danial around here was either. I have have delt with top county employees before, once, many years ago, nothing confrontational, but it taught me that if a situation needed to be resolved stat a simple form could be produced with the decimal points in the right place and fluid samples could just as easly be munipulated for outside testing...why? because reporters were camping out in the hallways at the court house and Danial was lawyering up. This was national news and every out of work lawyer was about to decend on this court house and potentionaly expose politicians and others who were buying and selling real estate, etc., so I believe the whoever govenor's assistant made a phone call.

How would Danial know about Diane's plite unless he was there when it started to take effect or she called him?..and or why would he keep such knowledge, if he had it, to himself? I think Diane put it on her shoulders and the weight was too much because of her being handicapped by the injuries she sustained to her head.
<modsnip>

Foilsman, I am really confused now, but still genuinely interested in your views. (I don't know what was modsnipped, but, to my knowledge, you and I are not adversaries here.)

I have defended Dan and his sister-in-law in the early pages of this thread, even if they are acting out of denial.

I don't know of any evidence that absolves Diane of moral responsibility. You are welcome to enlighten me, but short of a full psychotic break, I don't know of any circumstance that would absolve someone who drinks and gets high while driving a van-load of children. (It wouldn't occur to me to have a single cocktail while I'm babysitting my grandchildren, even though I'm NOT driving! But I realize everyone isn't as strict.)

Diane was able to keep alcohol down long enough to achieve a BAL over the legal limit PLUS retain a significant quantity of vodka in her stomach. This is all in addition to whatever she vomited beside the road. The retention of vodka in the stomach is not consistent with MY experience of food poisoning. (To be clear, I'm just a layperson and have no medical training. I only have my individual experience as evidence and that's admittedly inadequate.)

Isn't your "food poisoning" theory just as speculative as anyone else's theory? This isn't an attack, just a suggestion that we are all left to speculate here.

And what injury to Diane's head do you mean? Perhaps I've forgotten something...

 

[noZme]

I recall there was a bar where Diane was a regular customer. Is that correct?

Schuler, a manager in Cablevision's accounting department, would suck down screwdrivers at a Long Island saloon, where she was a regular the past few years and usually came by herself, her pal said, adding:

"I wouldn't say she was an alcoholic, but she liked her drinks.

"She liked her vodka."


Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/item_Mr6vxWRqeoQ7jj0oHM4T5L#ixzz22gQ0gYa0

Thank you bondobbs.

My recoletion of this piece of trash is that it was debunked about a year ago.

foilsman, could you provide a link please?

 

[twinkiesmom]

Also, if Diane had food poisoning, why didn't her husband know and say so?

More importantly, why didn't the autopsy say so?

 

[Nova]

More importantly, why didn't the autopsy say so?

Good question! I don't know enough about autopsies to say for sure what they can tell and what they can't.

 

[Davereid]

I agree he should stop the lawsuits. I still believe some of it has to do with the stages of grief but he has also taken a very offensive approach. It would be okay to say he believed she was a good woman but she made a horrible mistake and he does not understand why. I can probably understand what Diane did more than I understand why he is suing the Hances. They lost every one of their children. Every one of their kids they nurtured as infants and watched them as they grew and changed. I cannot imagine how truly horrible that must be. I have three children and I would probably fall apart. If someone tried to sue us on top of that I am pretty sure my husband would beat the **** out of him.

 

[nosysw]

Your husband must be more even tempered than mine, Davereid!

 

[bondobbs]

More importantly, why didn't the autopsy say so?

The autopsy didn't say so because it is not true. There is not evidence of anything besides the alcohol and pot. While it is possible that she had tooth pain or a headache and turned to the alcohol and pot to quell that, the fact still remains that she had consumed too much alcohol. I suspect she drank to quell her emotional pain and to deal with the fact she had 5 kids in the car for what she thought would be a short(ish) drive back to long island. The traffic was more than she expected and the drive took her much longer than she expected. I've driven that drive on a Sunday, coming back from my daughter's college, which is not quite as far as the camp ground and on the other side of the river. I was surprised to find that traffic on a Sunday morning was heavier than expected on the thruway. I suppose it is due to people returning to the upper suburbs and to the city from their weekends away. This happened in the summer (July 26th), just over 3 years ago. I've noted that the interchange at the Tappan Zee bridge is a bit difficult to navigate, but not so much so that you'd get on the Saw Mill going north (which she must have done) unless you're mightily confused. If she was impaired, she would have never been able to navigate the Saw Mill south, because it comes to a complete stop and you have to merge with on coming traffic from under a bridge in two lanes. It's a tricky merge even if you're stone cold sober.

What surprises me about it is that no 911 calls were made when she was on the Saw Mill north or the Taconic north, before she went the wrong way. She was reportedly driving aggressively before that when she was going south on the thruway. You can't actually get directly on the Taconic (north or south) from where she put the phone down. She had to have made a decision (or a mistake) and went north to the Taconic instead of continuing south on the thruway toward long island. The combination of a few things - the phone call from Warren Hance, the "something's wrong with Aunt Diane" comment from the Hance daughter, the phone being abandoned and the fairly long distance in the wrong direction (north) and then the wrong direction (south in north lane) seems to point to a confluence of events in Diane's mind. Perhaps she was just really confused, or perhaps she was in a rage.

We'll never know unless Hance and/or Danny comes out with more of the truth.

 

[Davereid]

Yeah, I do not think we will ever know the reason or the truth; if they even know.

 

[bondobbs]

What surprises me about it is that no 911 calls were made when she was on the Saw Mill north or the Taconic north, before she went the wrong way.

Apparently, I was wrong about that. There were 2 911 calls before she got on the Taconic going the wrong way and 4 while she was going the wrong way. If I am reading the report properly, those 2 calls came in when she was getting on the Taconic to go north and she was aggressively going onto the ramp.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Good question! I don't know enough about autopsies to say for sure what they can tell and what they can't.

Her GI tract was normal:
http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/schuler, diane_report.pdf

They would have seen inflammation if she had an acute infection like food poisoning. Any lesions would have undergone microscopic examination...There were no lesions.

This is debunked.

 

[Nova]

Her GI tract was normal:
http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/schuler, diane_report.pdf

They would have seen inflammation if she had an acute infection like food poisoning. Any lesions would have undergone microscopic examination...There were no lesions.

This is debunked.

What a strange series of posts! Food poisoning! Pre-crash head injury!

And now the poster in question seems to have disappeared. Huh?

 

[foilsman]

I would like to apologize to Arielilane, NOVA, Fairy1, SuziQ, and bondobbs for
being pompous, rude, and vague..and to the entire group. Also to the Westchester County toxicology and medical examiners offices and associate employees for my slanderous and unsubstantiated charges and Zippitydoda for mis-abbreviating (her?) handle.
I was sidelined by the Moderators, and rightly so.


As little or much as I have learned about Diane I can not bring myself to believe she would have consciously or willfully endanger those kids. I believe something altered her thinking process, she lost control and began to drink,
in that order.
I think that as Diane was throwing up along the highway she broke a blood vessel in her head. I have read the autopsy report..it is only my opinion and I don't know how or why but I think this was missed.
One cause of Diane's throwing up may have been, as said, food poisoning. Another would be if Diane had over-exerted herself in some way that caused similar damage to her head which then lead to nausea and vomiting. I don't know if either is true but something was causing her to throw up initialy and later on and in combination with this it is assumed to be vodka.
I believe Diane's driving MO was true to form that day and twofold. I think she was looking for discreet venues in which to throw up while at the same time trying to make up for time lost on her stops. I don't know why those who witnessed Diane's agressive driving early on didn't call the State Troopers.

 

[zippitydoda]

Foilsman, we are just a group of folks here who like to discuss situations, and why they may occur. We seek answers and respecfully write our thoughts here to continue that discussion -even though our thoughts on what happened and why may differ.

If you just came back from a short, moderator provided, posting "vacation" - welcome back.

 

[Davereid]

Well I do not think anyone who drinks and drives consciously intends to hurt anyone. I think they all think they can handle it when in fact they cannot. If she had food poisoning or a stomach bug she must take those illnesses better than myself. There is no way I could even consider drinking alcohol if I was puking. Puking usually puts an end to my drinking anyway. But then again not everyone is me. I guess that is the mystery. Someone knows something and has kept it quiet. Or she was very good at hiding the real person she was behind a mask.

Thank you for sparking up the conversation about this again. It is a true mystery like the Ramsey case.

 

[Nova]

I guess he might have been under the influence of his lawyer. However, most lawyers are supposed to "spin" the story to show your client in a favorable light. Any actions and statements Daniel has made following the accident have done anything but show him in a favorable light. I do not know why the lawyer could have just spoke and said "we are terribly sorry for the victims of this tragedy and do not understand how this could have happened. However, the family would appreciate time to grieve for their family". The press conferences where he spoke actually created more speculation.
His denial about her drinking was the first stage of grief. He should have just done it in private. As for those suing him and him suing the Hances and NY state; I think it should have been left well enough alone. That is what you pay insurance for. Why sue anyone directly? The person at fault is dead. Those killed should have gotten a big insurance payout and NY state should add more wrong way signs on the exits.
No one will ever know what went on in her head that day. It is interesting to create theories. That is why we are all still discussing it years later. In any case it was a truly horrible wreck.

Dave,

In my experience (20+ years in legal support), you don't sue an insurance company directly unless you are alleging misconduct (ETA i.e., breach of contract) on the part of the insurance company. If you are alleging negligence on the part of the insured, then you sue the insured.

What is happening in this case IS what you propose: everyone is going after everybody else's insurance company; but to do that, they have to name the individual insureds as defendants.

And this bothers members of the public who don't like to see family members suing one another or the parents of dead children being named as defendants. But it is how the system works.

 

[Nova]

I would say the footage from the funerals that I have seen shows an outpouring of support for him, and the Hance family. His one SIL was by his side and making the same bizarre statements he was throughout the documentary.
Daniel hired DB, and that's on Daniel.

Diane caused an overwhelming amount of misery, and I see no need for Daniel to carry it forward. Daniel can stop this very easily by no longer making nonsensical statements, and dropping his lawsuits against Diane's victims. Those two simple acts might bring him and the victims families some peace

We've argued this before, zip; I don't understand your lack of compassion for Dan. I don't know that Dan will win his suits, given his wife's negligence, but he has every right to sue. He is also a victim here. And he is not a trained media spokesperson, so I'm reluctant to judge him so harshly. I try to remember I have never been in his shoes.