Rod and Paula Bramblett Killed in Car Accident

[alexava 6,973]

5 hours ago, alexava said:

Why 

I missed something?

 

[ToraGirl 5,498]

On 12/14/2019 at 8:57 PM, alexava said:

I missed something?

 

The accused has connections to J&M. His continued behavior is being seen by many as entitlement and enablement.   I went to high school with his mom. We haven't connected in years. She was super-sweet, and I grieve for her, but this continued behavior and its allowance is inexcusable. My greater concern is for Shelby, Josh, and the Burchams. I would give anything to spare them one further second of grief. Just praying that the Lord will wrap His arms around them tightly, sheltering them and providing love and support from all directions. Christmas, I imagine, will be unspeakably hard. 

[AuMarine 1,372]

So this 16 yr old kid will be tried as an adult in the death of two people that he hit from behind going 90 mph while high.. is still out and about in Auburn doing the same reckless things that killed two innocent people. How many people does this kid have to kill or injure before his parents get a handle on him? You would think after the accident that took the Bramletts lives, that this kid wouldn’t be allowed to drive. Doesn’t matter if his license was suspended or not, his parents should have stepped up and made that decision for him. No way he should have been driving period.  If you go back and dig into his driving record, I bet when he hit the Bramletts it wasn’t the first time he had been cited for reckless driving. The last two incidents are 100% on the parents.. what the hell are they thinking? 

[Barnacle 9,064]

49 minutes ago, ToraGirl said:

The accused has connections to J&M. 

What kind of connection? 

People might want to verify their information before they decide to start boycotting a local business.

[gr82be 14,425]

7 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

What kind of connection? 

People might want to verify their information before they decide to start boycotting a local business.

Several posts in this thread state the connection. Check 2 pages back. 

 

[The Freak 2,528]

19 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

What kind of connection? 

People might want to verify their information before they decide to start boycotting a local business.

Clue: the kids first name is Johnston.

[ToraGirl 5,498]

45 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

What kind of connection? 

People might want to verify their information before they decide to start boycotting a local business.

B...connection. I'm from Auburn. I've said enough, I'll leave it there; people can choose how they will with their support. 

[EagleEye67 1,939]

23 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

One of the problems we have as a nation is we think the government should be more involved in our lives.  Safety should be a person’s responsibility, not the government.  Laws and the police are limited in their authority, so it’s up to us to be aware.  In this case it seems the parents are letting the government guide their actions and not taking the steps necessary to protect the general public.  Their thought process seems to be if the law has not taken the license away, he is allowed to drive.

We need to get back to personal responsibility, sorry too get political, so I’ll stop here.

One of govt's most important functions is to ensure that actual justice is done to perpetrators, IAW the law.....and thus take it out of the hands of "popular justice (aka vigilante),"    which was the prevailing system of "justice" for many, many years.     If the people have no trust in the govt to deliver justice, then the result is the rule of the mob.

 

That's just history, nothing political.

[I_M4_AU 7,837]

2 hours ago, EagleEye67 said:

One of govt's most important functions is to ensure that actual justice is done to perpetrators, IAW the law.....and thus take it out of the hands of "popular justice (aka vigilante),"    which was the prevailing system of "justice" for many, many years.     If the people have no trust in the govt to deliver justice, then the result is the rule of the mob.

 

That's just history, nothing political.

There is a lot on misinterpreting my statement going around.  IAW the law this young man is still driving and has a valid license.  As parents, we sometimes take the easy way out and let government and the law dictated what is right and do not invoke our own moral stance for our children.  The family rule should be at least as restrictive (and sometimes more restrictive) than the rule of law and the punishment should be swift.  The kid is repeating bad habits.  Would you want your kid to continue that behavior and let the law step in, or would you take preemptive steps to correct the behavior before the law is necessary?

No where have I stated anything about vigilante justice.  The family needs to take charge, not because of peer pressure, but because it’s the right thing to do.  He is still a minor (not emancipated) and is under the charge of his parents.  Hope this clears it up.

[jAUSon 2,836]

If it's true this kid has had 3 (basically) reckless driving tickets while waiting to stand trial fir double manslaughter, he'll lose his license at a minimum. Question remains though, about a family allowing a kid to have a set of wheels and continue to rack up offenses. Has a real sh*tty feel to it. 

[bigbird 60,525]

Just for my clarification, He tested positive for THC, correct? 

If so, that in no way means he was high when the accident occurred. If he was, it would make sense for him to have been charged with DUI. He wasn't was he?

[Tiger Refuge 6,664]

I wanna know wth he’s driving a damn turbocharged car.

[ToraGirl 5,498]

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

Just for my clarification, He tested positive for THC, correct? 

If so, that in no way means he was high when the accident occurred. If he was, it would make sense for him to have been charged with DUI. He wasn't was he?

Just for review so that we can all have the facts as revealed to date straight. 

From July 17, the latest at that time. OA News, Opelika-Auburn local. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.oanow.com/news/local/auburn-teen-driver-s-case-in-fatal-bramblett-crash-headed/article_4b1ffbe4-a8d0-11e9-bc36-7789f37bbd6f.amp.html

From December 13, same source: 

https://www.oanow.com/news/crime_courts/teen-charged-in-fatal-bramblett-crash-could-get-bond-revoked/article_581511da-a256-5505-a5a2-d5bb80c95df3.html

If you can bear the Al.com versions, THAT'S where you hear some details that some locals know and randomly choose to repeat.

The rest that I know I've researched, remembered, and has been shared with me via family and friends in Auburn both prior to and after news releases. 😢 I've shared all I feel I can in wise discretion. It's the justice that matters from here...plus the prayers for the ones bearing up in a way we pray never to have to. 

[auburn4ever 1,266]

Sounds like the judge is going to continue to let this young man out of jail until he kills more people. He's already killed Rod and Paula Ramblett.

[3rdgeneration 6,469]

Quoted from the al.com article. This is very telling if the kid's own attorney would say this to the press. I pray that God intervenes in this kid's life so that he would come to the realization of what he has done and begin to face it and change. In the meantime, his parents need to take control.

Taylor’s attorney, Tommy Spina, said he is saddened and disappointed in his client’s behavior that led to Hughes’  request. "I was unaware of the driving violations until today when I saw the state’s filing,'' Spina said. “There are no excuses or blame shifting that would condone this behavior.”

"I believe the DA is doing exactly what he should do under the circumstances,'' Spina said. “I obviously represent a very troubled young man who desperately needs help navigating his journey through life.”

[AU-24 3,093]

23 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

The government, for whatever reason, has not revoked his driver’s license. This is where the parents have to take personal responsibility and not rely on the government to raise their kid.  They can not wait on the government to act, they need to take action now.  The parents need to stop the kid from driving, get him in a program and take responsibility here.

As drivers, we can only be a defensive driver to keep us safe.  The situation with the Bramblett’s was an accident, not even the best defensive driver could have prevented it.  That is not what I am talking about.  If your kid is exhibiting bad tendencies would you wait until the government has to step in or do something before hand to stop those tendencies?

In other words raise your kid, do not rely on the government to do it for you.  Your rules should be more restrictive than the government’s rules.

And my/our point: since the parents will not take responsibility for him, it is the courts, the judges, the governments responsibility to take action for the common sense safety of society.

[Butthead 525]

Could someone just create a fake account and give us all the inside info?  I am tired of searching and asking people I know. 

That said I wound understand if the kid was skipping school and smoking weed to get through his grief over what he did  I don’t understand how his parents are allowing him behind the wheel of a car.  They and the kid need an immediate intervention.

 

[AURealist 2,185]

Cue the Affluenza Defense Strategy in ... 3... 2... 1...  

http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/12/12/the-affluenza-defense-judge-rules-rich-kids-rich-kid-ness-makes-him-not-liable-for-deadly-drunk-driving-accident/

[EagleEye67 1,939]

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

There is a lot on misinterpreting my statement going around.  IAW the law this young man is still driving and has a valid license.  As parents, we sometimes take the easy way out and let government and the law dictated what is right and do not invoke our own moral stance for our children.  The family rule should be at least as restrictive (and sometimes more restrictive) than the rule of law and the punishment should be swift.  The kid is repeating bad habits.  Would you want your kid to continue that behavior and let the law step in, or would you take preemptive steps to correct the behavior before the law is necessary?

No where have I stated anything about vigilante justice.  The family needs to take charge, not because of peer pressure, but because it’s the right thing to do.  He is still a minor (not emancipated) and is under the charge of his parents.  Hope this clears it up.

You totally missed my point, but thats ok.     No worries, friend.  

[I_M4_AU 7,837]

3 minutes ago, EagleEye67 said:

You totally missed my point, but thats ok.   No worries, friend.  

I must have.

[EagleEye67 1,939]

Just now, I_M4_AU said:

I must have.

I never said you advocated anything about vigilante justice.  Stop putting text in my mouth.  I just said what I said.    Its all good.

[alexava 6,973]

10 hours ago, 3rdgeneration said:

Quoted from the al.com article. This is very telling if the kid's own attorney would say this to the press. I pray that God intervenes in this kid's life so that he would come to the realization of what he has done and begin to face it and change. In the meantime, his parents need to take control.

Taylor’s attorney, Tommy Spina, said he is saddened and disappointed in his client’s behavior that led to Hughes’  request. "I was unaware of the driving violations until today when I saw the state’s filing,'' Spina said. “There are no excuses or blame shifting that would condone this behavior.”

"I believe the DA is doing exactly what he should do under the circumstances,'' Spina said. “I obviously represent a very troubled young man who desperately needs help navigating his journey through life.”

I totally appreciate and respect this lawyer for saying that. I don’t think anyone can disagree with it. I don’t think it’s in the best interest of his case though. He’s probably going to be fired and it sounds like he doesn’t care. 

[keesler 5,924]

On 12/14/2019 at 8:13 AM, AU64 said:

How does this guy still have a license and access to a car?      He's a danger to society and just noting a couple of his recent transgressions, it's fortunate that he has not killed someone else.   

He should be in jail or a minimum on house arrest until his trial.  If his parents refuse to discipline and restrict his activities then the judge needs to be the parent.

[AU-24 3,093]

On 12/15/2019 at 1:56 PM, I_M4_AU said:

There is a lot on misinterpreting my statement going around.  IAW the law this young man is still driving and has a valid license.  As parents, we sometimes take the easy way out and let government and the law dictated what is right and do not invoke our own moral stance for our children.  The family rule should be at least as restrictive (and sometimes more restrictive) than the rule of law and the punishment should be swift.  The kid is repeating bad habits.  Would you want your kid to continue that behavior and let the law step in, or would you take preemptive steps to correct the behavior before the law is necessary?

No where have I stated anything about vigilante justice.  The family needs to take charge, not because of peer pressure, but because it’s the right thing to do.  He is still a minor (not emancipated) and is under the charge of his parents.  Hope this clears it up.

His family has not stepped up and taken charge... Sooooo the law has to!

Should we let teenage murderers off the hook because, after all, their family should take charge? Should we let teenage rapists off the hook, because their family should take charge. What about teenage child molesters?

This isn’t a libertarian issue where we went less government in our lives. This is a common sense issue regarding public safety!

[I_M4_AU 7,837]

26 minutes ago, AU-24 said:

His family has not stepped up and taken charge... Sooooo the law has to!

Should we let teenage murderers off the hook because, after all, their family should take charge? Should we let teenage rapists off the hook, because their family should take charge. What about teenage child molesters?

This isn’t a libertarian issue where we went less government in our lives. This is a common sense issue regarding public safety!

The priority, as I see it, is the family takes care of it’s issue and failing that, the law is the last resort.  I don’t think we are at odds in this debate.