Former LSU safety Chad Jones in critical condition
- Thread starter The Greek.sixpack
- Start date
WWLTV has video from the crash scence..you can see him sitting in the car with the front of the car almost in his lap.
http://www.wwltv.com/home...-car-wreck-97156264.html
http://www.wwltv.com/home...-car-wreck-97156264.html
and was talking during the removal..
Latest twitters flying around is they are trying to save his leg in surgery now... that does not sound good.
How fast do you have to be going to do that kind of damage from smashing into a pole...wow
Latest twitters flying around is they are trying to save his leg in surgery now... that does not sound good.
How fast do you have to be going to do that kind of damage from smashing into a pole...wow
Man i hope he recovers well. That looked rough. He is a tremendous athlete.
He was the guy that cost us (other than Lee's size) the LSU game last year right?
He was the guy that cost us (other than Lee's size) the LSU game last year right?
In Louisiana (and probably other states), you are given a citation if you are involved in a single-car accident (this happened to one of my coworkers a month or so ago). That's kind of silly, don't you think? If people die or property is destroyed then whoever is at fault should be held responsible and punished. Writing him a citation after being involved in a single-car accident is just another way to siphon money into the coffers of the state.
Carrollton is a long straightaway running through Mid-City. When it's that late (or early) it's easy to catch about a solid mile of green lights and several open lanes. That's an awfully wide street to lose control on, but I guess he was intoxicated. Hope he saves his foot, was looking forward to seeing how he did in the pros.
Fahrenheit and the roads were very icy. The speed limit on the stretch of highway was 55. From examining the scene of the accident, the cop in the police report estimated he was driving approximately 35 mph. Again, according to the police report, an appropriate speed for the conditions would be 25 mph. He tried to brake at a light, spun out of control and hit some sort of electrical box.
Obviously, Chad was careless and was injured.
My buddy was not careless and was not injured. It was just a freak accident. But, because the county wants him to pay for the electrical box they have charged him with reckless driving and it is going to trial. Ridiculous.
Obviously, Chad was careless and was injured.
My buddy was not careless and was not injured. It was just a freak accident. But, because the county wants him to pay for the electrical box they have charged him with reckless driving and it is going to trial. Ridiculous.
as someone who has dealt with a lot of bad open tibia fractures with severe soft tissue loss/degloving injuries he will have a very prolonged recovery. With vascular injuries he will likely need a free flap vs vascular repair and a pedicle based flap. If he has a flap placed it is unlikely he will ever be able to play at a professional level in a contact sport due to the risk of flap damage. From the article, it sounds like he is being given a chance to save his foot, but that the injury is severe. The next 3-5 days will be critical for him. Wish him the best. I wonder if it was an LSU or Tulane orthopedics call day at University.<div>
</div><div>As someone who spent the last 7 years in NOLA, he had to have been travelling at least 60 to do that amount of damage to that car. Hard to do on that street. And I have no problem with him being ticketed. The cops bring us single car/drunk driver accident victims all the time and never care to have a legal blood draw. They just ticket them for failure to control the vehicle as opposed to arresting them for DUI. The only time we do legal blood draws is when someone else is injured or there is someone else's personal property damage.<div>
</div><div>
</div></div>
</div><div>As someone who spent the last 7 years in NOLA, he had to have been travelling at least 60 to do that amount of damage to that car. Hard to do on that street. And I have no problem with him being ticketed. The cops bring us single car/drunk driver accident victims all the time and never care to have a legal blood draw. They just ticket them for failure to control the vehicle as opposed to arresting them for DUI. The only time we do legal blood draws is when someone else is injured or there is someone else's personal property damage.<div>
</div><div>
</div></div>
last month I participated in two free fibula grafts to the mandible for cancer reconstruction. they are tough surgeries (about 20 hours). there are tons of potential complications. just last week we tried to save a foot with a two vessel (of 3 - only peroneal intact) injury (with proximal tibia/fibula shaft fx and degloved foot). he had to have it amputated 3 days later due to necrosis despite a 7 hour vein to artery graft and free flap muscle graft to the vein turned artery. our goal is to always give someone a chance to save a limb after a bad injury unless it is life threatening, but they are very tenuous. as for the reports i have heard, i have no idea what vascular/neural structures were injured. i called a buddy orthopod at tulane and another at lsu to see what they knew but havent heard back. wish chad the best. he is in good hands with either of those ortho/plastics departments.
NOLA PD is not willing to create a custodial situation incident to arrest where a suspect is undergoing, or about to undergo, medical procedures that will result in an assload of medical bills that would then potentially be payable by the NOLA PD. Better just to ticket their *** and leave the hospital/surgeon looking to get paid by some other third party.
we are usually in the room by 7:30 doing the trach and the guys will finish anywhere from 5pm to 2am depending on what has to be done...Ghali and crew have it down pretty well...what kills me is that my part in it only takes about 45 minutes and they used to have me stay for the entire surgery- but I explained to them I needed more time to post on Sixpack so they let me come and go as needed
(I've got a great picture of one we did awhile back where we extracted the guy's entire mandible except for the condyles and built him a new one...it's an amazing surgery)
(I've got a great picture of one we did awhile back where we extracted the guy's entire mandible except for the condyles and built him a new one...it's an amazing surgery)
It's pretty clear from your general demeanor and posts that you are a douchebag.
And it's not ridiculous - if you can't control your vehicle, you get a ticket. That's what he did. Reckless driving, failure to control your vehicle, whatever they call it in LA. If you break the law, you get a ticket. I know it can be hard for some people to understand...
And it's not ridiculous - if you can't control your vehicle, you get a ticket. That's what he did. Reckless driving, failure to control your vehicle, whatever they call it in LA. If you break the law, you get a ticket. I know it can be hard for some people to understand...
well...both of these were in patients who had had alot of XRT and prior surgeries and had very friable scar tissue. We weren't going to start harvesting the fibula until ENT had found/exposed suitable target vessels. That takes awhile. Then the microanastomosis under the scope is very tedious. They are amazing surgeries that take incredible skill and stamina...and I never want to do them again. If i am going to do a long *** case I prefer it to be on the spine with alot of instrumentation and minimal sewing.<div>
</div><div>Thankfully for Mr. Jones he can probably get by with an ex-fix, and a pedicle flap (possibly a vascular autograft and free flap if his vessels are too badly injured).</div>
</div><div>Thankfully for Mr. Jones he can probably get by with an ex-fix, and a pedicle flap (possibly a vascular autograft and free flap if his vessels are too badly injured).</div>
and smacked into their house. That was hard wasn't it? Don't tell me...well that's not how things usually work. Damn right it isn't. But that doesn't mean it's not the best way to handle a situation like this.
This isn't about whether or not he broke the law. It's ridiculous for someone to get a ticket in this situation. He shouldn't have to pay a $80-200 fine for a criminal conviction. It's nuts.
This isn't about whether or not he broke the law. It's ridiculous for someone to get a ticket in this situation. He shouldn't have to pay a $80-200 fine for a criminal conviction. It's nuts.
then you have absolutely no idea how the judicial system works. Despite what you may have seen on TV, it takes more than one phone call to get money out of a car wreck.
It is about whether or not he broke the law. He broke the law, he should get a ticket. He endangered not only himself, but anyone who would have been around him. Luckily no one else was hurt, but that doesn't change the fact that he broke the law.
It is about whether or not he broke the law. He broke the law, he should get a ticket. He endangered not only himself, but anyone who would have been around him. Luckily no one else was hurt, but that doesn't change the fact that he broke the law.
I'm pretty sure that's the definition. In fact, I'm sure of it.
Bottom line, he could have killed someone. You don't not press charges because someone got hurt. If you're shooting a gun at people, but get hurt badly, do we waive those charges too? Because what he was doing was probably as dangerous as shooting a gun randomly downtown. Anyone could have been in front of him.
Bottom line, he could have killed someone. You don't not press charges because someone got hurt. If you're shooting a gun at people, but get hurt badly, do we waive those charges too? Because what he was doing was probably as dangerous as shooting a gun randomly downtown. Anyone could have been in front of him.
Though certainly not gospel, wikipedia say:
</p>
I believe the state can sue on behalf of its citizens as a whole, like the tobacco lawsuits. Forfeitures are also civil actions. And surely, the government can sue under a contract. I'm sure there are other examples. It may be limited though, I don't know.</p> /ETA -i completely agree with your logic re: the wreck/gun.
</p>
I believe the state can sue on behalf of its citizens as a whole, like the tobacco lawsuits. Forfeitures are also civil actions. And surely, the government can sue under a contract. I'm sure there are other examples. It may be limited though, I don't know.</p> /ETA -i completely agree with your logic re: the wreck/gun.
on that. But usually, it's not the type of suit i'm advocating. But who cares, that's not really the issue.
Both you and lawdawg have the same view and obviously I'm not changing it....but What's the purpose of the ticket in Chad Jones case? What's the purpose of the ticket in my friends case? I'm obviously more worried about my friend's case and certainly his facts are much more appealing than Chad's.
But the purpose in both incidents, is to prevent someone for speeding/driving recklessly. And of course, if there is someone else involved, you don't drop the charges because someone criminally caused death/injury to ANOTHER. You can still sue in the civil system as well. Here's the thing. The only person harmed was Chad Jones. He will be liable in a civil suit for what he did. The deterrent effect is there, his football career is over, he is injured. He will make the other party whole, the government, for the destruction of the light pole. My problem is that prosecutors and victims abuse the criminal system SOMETIMES for seeking restitutionary amounts that are greater than suffered. I've seen it. The amounts themselves are much easier to defend in a civil suit for a number of reasons, mainly because the injury is at issue, you get all the medical records, etc. For a restitution hearing, at least in Colorado, you get screwed.
Now...when nothing happens as a result from speeding/drunk driving/whatever, you HAVE to give a ticket. Why? Because that's the deterrent effect. We don't have laws just to suck a fine out of someone...we have laws to protect society and make it a better place.
Both you and lawdawg have the same view and obviously I'm not changing it....but What's the purpose of the ticket in Chad Jones case? What's the purpose of the ticket in my friends case? I'm obviously more worried about my friend's case and certainly his facts are much more appealing than Chad's.
But the purpose in both incidents, is to prevent someone for speeding/driving recklessly. And of course, if there is someone else involved, you don't drop the charges because someone criminally caused death/injury to ANOTHER. You can still sue in the civil system as well. Here's the thing. The only person harmed was Chad Jones. He will be liable in a civil suit for what he did. The deterrent effect is there, his football career is over, he is injured. He will make the other party whole, the government, for the destruction of the light pole. My problem is that prosecutors and victims abuse the criminal system SOMETIMES for seeking restitutionary amounts that are greater than suffered. I've seen it. The amounts themselves are much easier to defend in a civil suit for a number of reasons, mainly because the injury is at issue, you get all the medical records, etc. For a restitution hearing, at least in Colorado, you get screwed.
Now...when nothing happens as a result from speeding/drunk driving/whatever, you HAVE to give a ticket. Why? Because that's the deterrent effect. We don't have laws just to suck a fine out of someone...we have laws to protect society and make it a better place.
I assume you believe if a robber gets shot robbing your house they shouldn't go to jail. They got their deterrent.
By your own post your buddy was driving 40% faster than an appropriate speed under the conditions. Barring an unforeseen hazard in the road, it's pretty much by definition that if you're involved in a 1-car accident, you were driving carelessly. And ice in Colorado in the winter isn't exactly an unforseen hazard.
A minor point but an important one. For example, if his brakes were broken as a result of a crappy mechanic "fixing" brakes, he would not be liable. Obviously, the mechanic would be. That's a simple case.
But...say I was driving 15 mph on an icy road. I was taking all the necessary precautions when all the sudden I come upon a LONG ice stretch. There's nothing I could have done to prevent it and there's nothing I can do to prevent it. I cause damage. I'm not liable.
Obviously, completely different from Chad Jones' case. He was speeding and caused damage. Liability.
As to the point about his speed the other poster made, my point was that the officer had no idea what an appropriate speed was. He just guessed as to what my friend's speed was and guessed as to what an appropriate speed was. He judged from the tracks in the snow and ice...are you kidding me? Why did he do that? So that he could charge my friend with careless driving and get the county reimbursed for the electrical box.
But...say I was driving 15 mph on an icy road. I was taking all the necessary precautions when all the sudden I come upon a LONG ice stretch. There's nothing I could have done to prevent it and there's nothing I can do to prevent it. I cause damage. I'm not liable.
Obviously, completely different from Chad Jones' case. He was speeding and caused damage. Liability.
As to the point about his speed the other poster made, my point was that the officer had no idea what an appropriate speed was. He just guessed as to what my friend's speed was and guessed as to what an appropriate speed was. He judged from the tracks in the snow and ice...are you kidding me? Why did he do that? So that he could charge my friend with careless driving and get the county reimbursed for the electrical box.