Stavinski Kills One, Injures three in Drunk driving accident | Page 8 | Golden Skate

Stavinski Kills One, Injures three in Drunk driving accident

SolarisFyre said:
.... at the end of the day, we have a person who has died, people seriously injured, a written-off hummer and the driver of said hummer over the legal limit.
They are the facts. Regardless of blame.
Click to expand...

Except that that last (that he was over the legal limit) is not yet a legally established fact (the fact is the police claim he was over the limit). Realistically speaking, it's unfortunately the most probable case, but let's not make any final decisions before the legal system does.
 
Zanzibar said:
What I do find unexplainable is that so many people almost ready to already sentence Max, still are active supporters and fans of the skaters that have done this very thing: knowingly, in some instances after histories of alcohol problems, have gotten into vehicles drunk and taken off down the road....

There is some piece of this that is strange to me - this mass anger at Max - yet the crowds still happily cheer for Baiul and all other others convicted of DUI's. There seems a small bit of hypocrisy in it. I guess all of the others were much, much luckier than Max...

In no way am I defending Max's actions. But I would like to reserve full judgement until all of the facts are presented in a trial.
Click to expand...

It's not hypocrisy, IMO - it's that moral judgments are complex and nuanced. That's why there are many different legal categories for the act of causing another's death. I wasn't reading this forum at the time of Alexei's or Oksana's arrests, but it's hard to believe they didn't occasion a great deal of debate among fans at the time.

With Maxim, his mature age (30), the fact that he had just been warned by the cops, the fact of his hypocrisy (driving drunk while being a public face for not doing that), the fact that he was driving around in a huge car that he received as a gift (both of which connote his privileged status) ... and of course death and grave injury make a difference!

Yes, the others were very lucky. Yes, we should all be saying "there but for the grace of God go I." But it's also fair to expect and even hope that justice will be done.

I say "hope" because justice systems don't always work the way they're supposed to. Maxim is a VIP in Bulgaria, the victims are little people. You never know. That's the problem with the idea of waiting for the legal verdict before rendering any judgment.

Overall this discussion seems pretty balanced and compassionate to me. I'm quite sure that if somehow new facts emerged that showed Max to be innocent, or less guilty, people on the forum would alter their judgments accordingly. I'd be a lot more worried if we were inclined to let Maxim off the hook for killing someone because he's a great skater.
 
Spun Silver said:
I'd be a lot more worried if we were inclined to let Maxim off the hook for killing someone because he's a great skater.
Click to expand...

With all of the publicity this case is receiving, it's looking more like Maxim might be made an example of with a stiff sentence. Initially, because he was a non-criminal, with no priors (that I'm aware of), and he stopped and cooperated fully with the police, and his blood alcohol limit was under 1.2, I thought they might show more leniency with him.

But this case is certain to garner increasingly huge amounts of news, and the tone of the headlines - even in his "hometown" Sophia newspaper seem fairly harsh. I think the pendulum may swing to make him pay the strictest penalty the Bulgarian courts can give him, depending on the court of public opinion. Who knows...a lot can happen between now and the trial, and of course throughout the trial.
 
Last edited:
well it's good to hear that the girl is improving... still... she has a long way to go before she's recovered...
 
Mafke said:
Except that that last (that he was over the legal limit) is not yet a legally established fact (the fact is the police claim he was over the limit). Realistically speaking, it's unfortunately the most probable case, but let's not make any final decisions before the legal system does.
Click to expand...

You say 'police claim' as though it's something that's been splashed around liberally in a tabloid newspaper ... This is the police we're talking about and not a random source. Sorry, but a police claim is good enough, surely. What on earth would they achieve out of lying?! After all, they were the ones who were actually there afterwards, and not a judge and jury.
 
Last edited:
According to a recent report, the investigation will take at least two months. Maybe I'm a cynic, but I think that might mean Maxim gets off with lesser charges. Time and distance will dim public outrage.

In the US, it is rare for an investigation to go on for more than a week or two at the outside, and within that time the alleged person at fault is arrested, arraigned and bail is set. It is the trial that is delayed.
 
SolarisFyre said:
You say 'police claim' as though it's something that's been splashed around liberally in a tabloid newspaper ... This is the police we're talking about and not a random source. Sorry, but a police claim is good enough, surely. What on earth would they achieve out of lying?! After all, they were the ones who were actually there afterwards, and not a judge and jury.
Click to expand...

In the link in the first post in this thread it states:
"...Maxim, part of the ice duo Denkova-Staviiski, who defended their world title in Tokyo in March, tested positive for alcohol with 1.1 permilles in his blood. The legal driving limit in Bulgaria is 0.5..." Here, once again, is the entire link which describes the accident, the blood alcohol level, etc.:
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=83867

Since it states the Maxim "tested positive," I would assume that he was indeed driving under the influence, and not merely that the police claimed he was. However, since this is such a serious matter, perhaps I should not assume anything.
 
SolarisFyre said:
You say 'police claim' as though it's something that's been splashed around liberally in a tabloid newspaper ... This is the police we're talking about and not a random source. Sorry, but a police claim is good enough, surely. What on earth would they achieve out of lying?! After all, they were the ones who were actually there afterwards, and not a judge and jury.
Click to expand...

How much do you know about Eastern Europe? Police claims in former Soviet block countries should not necessarily be given immediate, total faith (for a variety of different reasons). I've heard enough stories that I can imagine several scenarios where the information from the police (now or in the future) might not be entirely on the up and up (severe understatement).

That's not to say that's what's happening here. For all I know the police in this case are absolutely, scrupulously honest. But, I've followed enough stories in this part of the world with sudden and unexpected changes in stories given by the police that I try to withhold judgement.
 
chuckm said:
According to a recent report, the investigation will take at least two months. Maybe I'm a cynic, but I think that might mean Maxim gets off with lesser charges. Time and distance will dim public outrage.

In the US, it is rare for an investigation to go on for more than a week or two at the outside, and within that time the alleged person at fault is arrested, arraigned and bail is set. It is the trial that is delayed.
Click to expand...

What part of the US are you from? In Southern California, near Los Angeles, the investigation could easily take two months -- for example, they have to find the witnesses who describe Staviski's driving because what they (allegedly) told the police is hearsay and can't be used; this alone could take quite a while. There is a break, in that the other victim is (apparently) out of danger; if this hadn't developed now, there would be a delay until her fate is known (to know if a second count of causing death would be warranted). They will also want to investigate their own witnesses, to see what (if anything) will be used to impeach them. If they don't want to be left looking like idiots, they need to make sure their case can't be shot down by good lawyers who are concentrating on the one case, with the money to do detailed investigations -- not the public defenders (who, in my experience, are equally good, but often don't have the resources to do the investigations)
 
attyfan said:
What part of the US are you from? In Southern California, near Los Angeles, the investigation could easily take two months -- (excellent description of californian legal process snipped)
Click to expand...

I'm not 100% sure, but I assume that Bulgaria (like almost all continental Europe) has a civil law tradition (as opposed to the US system based on precedent and adversarial lawyers) which means that the specifics of court procedure would be a lot different; there's probably no jury and the decision is made by a judge or panel of judges and a lot of the process is collecting material for judges to review out of court, the actual court proceedings are mostly the judges presenting their findings. Still, two months does not seem excessive to me for a case of this kind in Eastern Europe.
 
Assisted DUI

By the way, in Japan, people who "passively assisted" drinking are also subject to legal punishment. This means that if you serve someone alcohol or suggest him/her to drink with the knowledge that the other person is going to drive, and if the driver is arrested for drunk driving, you are also going to be subject to some punishment (less severe than the driver him/herself). This includes not only a waiter/waitress or a bartender who knows or is supposed to know that the person came to the restaurant/bar by a car, but also people who have a drink with the person with the knowledge that the person is going to drive (Added to Edit). For the latter example (social drinking), pouring alcohol in the driver's glass (with the knowledge that he/she will drive) is enough to constitute a case (Added to Edit). Getting a ride from a drunk driver is also considered "passive assistance." Basically, letting DUI happens seems to be seen "passive assistance."

If you "actively assisted" the driver to DUI (e.g., direct him/her to drink with the knowledge that he/she will drive, let a drunk to drive your own car), you are considered to be as guilty as the drunk driver and will get the similar level of punishment as the drunk driver.

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/飲酒運転#.....E3.81.AE.E8.80.85.E3.81.AE.E8.B2.AC.E4.BB.BB

I wonder if this kind of law exists in the other countries, including Bulgaria. If so, I feel that the police who did not stop Maxim could be considered "passive assistance," and subject to punishment.
 
Last edited:
hmmmmmmm to my knowledge no one by the one that is actually drunk is held accountable for their actions here in the States.
 
I know that a bartender who continues to serve someone who is obviously drunk may be liable for damages if that person is in an accident. But I think that would be a civil suit rather than something criminal. I haven't heard of anyone but the drunk driver being charged with a crime, unless it was a case of an adult giving an underage driver alcohol.
 
Drunk Driver

euterpe said:
Terrorists, serial killers and convicted murderers kill ON PURPOSE. People who drink and then drive do not set out with the intention to kill others. Drunk drivers are responsible for their bad choices, and they may commit homicide as a result of their bad choices, but they are not intentional murderers.
Click to expand...

I disagree - serial killers may go out and say 'I'm going to kill someone today' - well drunk drivers drink and drive and must certainly know they COULD kill someone today - in both cases there is a definite lack of regard for life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ptichka
In depth Berezhnaya article
2
Replies
34
Views
27K
Hikaru
Hikaru
Back
Top