Area Soldier Killed In Fort Hood Rampage
Stroger Makes Hollywood Play
Put Down Your Nanowrimo And Leave The House
Sox Shuffle Continues
We admit, we're a bit behind on this story. But after the News-Gazette article was passed around the Chicagoist offices and set off a heated conversation, we knew we had to put this in a public forum.
Jennifer Stark, a 19-year-old resident of Urbana, struck and killed Matthew Wilhelm, age 25, while he was riding his bike down Highway 130. How? She was DOWNLOADING A RINGTONE while driving and hit him with her car. He died six days later as a result of head injuries from the accident. Stark was in court for the incident last week and was given the maximum sentence for her crime. Manslaughter you say? No. Reckless driving? Think again. State's Attorney Julia Rietz decided that these crimes did not define Stark's actions, so she made the call to charge the teen with improper lane change. The maximum sentence for improper lange change in the state of Illinois is six months of conditional discharge (probation without reporting to an officer), a $1,000 fine and traffic safety school.
Yes, folks. Apparently in the state of Illinois, downloading a ringtone while driving is not considered reckless, even if it results in death. And even if you do happen to kill a pesky biker, you just have to scrape together a G, and you're OK.
Rietz said that the driver had "no reasonable expectation of a bike on the side of the road." We were under the impression that drivers were responsible for taking caution for all types of vehicles on the road, whether they are expected to be there or not, but the state is putting the smack down on that theory.
Despite having three traffic violations prior to the crash with Wilhelm, Ms. Stark gets to keep her license.
Angry bloggers were originally linking to her MySpace page after the verdict, but she deleted it — probably after receiving irate messages about a message she posted regarding the incident that made her come across as a completely insensitive, selfish and spoiled young woman.
Please pray for the family of Matt as they go through the Holidays and please pray for me because I am having a really hard time with this right now.
You poor thing.
Wilhelm was wearing a helmet, just as the Chicagoland Bicycle Federation recommends, but it wasn't enough to protect his head from the impact of the crash. As a result, his parents have decided that bike safety advocacy isn't enough. Illinois needs a new law to properly punish distracted drivers and an education program to prevent distraction while driving. They've formed Matt's Law Coalition, which "is working to introduce new legislation to provide more serious consequences to distracted drivers who kill people due to careless or negligent use of interactive technology, including cell phones."
Our heart goes out to the Wilhelms, and we genuinely hope the law is modified to properly punish drivers such as Stark. And while we're at it, let's get Rietz out of office, huh?
Photo via Old Sarge.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
So, wait. Chicagoist wants "Matt's Law" to pass, because it defines a crime that is currently undefined, which is a good thing.
But Chicagoist also wants the DA ousted for not applying this law that hasn't been passed yet?
If the DA deserves to be fired, we don't need the law. If we need the law, the DA doesn't deserve to be fired.
Which is it, Chicagoist?
I pick option 3: Chicagoist doesn't understand the law, but wants to sound righteous in every possible situation, so is happy with being inconsistent.
rq, i don't think you quite understand the law, either. The DA has discretion of which law to apply. The reason Rietz charged that little spoiled shit with improper lane usage is because she (Rietz) decided by her own standards that Stark couldn't have had the expectation of a bike there, and therefore her actions could not be deemed "negligent," which is a requirement to be charged with a higher crime. That was Rietz's decision, not the rules of the court. Had Rietz felt that Stark had reason to expect a bike there (considering the presence of bikes and walkers every day), she had it within her discretion to charge Stark with negligent homicide or manslaughter or something to that extent. The law being proposed *should* make the law more concrete so it cannot be so loosely interpreted by the DA. At least that's my understanding of it all. I hope she gets sued all to hell by the family. She should have her license revoked permanently, at the very least.
rq: Everything m said is completely correct.
m: One of the Chicagoist writers suggested yesterday Stark be forced to ride a bike. Although it may have been said in jest, I really think this would be more of an eye opener than a punishment. You don't realize how inconsiderate drivers can be until you're on two wheels without any metal surrounding you, attempting to share the road with vehicles that weigh 100 times more than yours.
you know, i wouldnt say that was an angry blog. i would say it was more of a "what the hell?" blog. we all have to deal with motorists using cell phones when driving in chicago, even if you arent on a bike. the problem with this whole situation is the lack true punishment on this case.
clearly the girl was at fault, but 6 months probation? that is just absurd and sends a clear message that killing someone won't hurt you in any way.
For a site that has cried in the past about how stupid the cellphone-driving ban ordinance is, I find this comically hypocritical.
Let's work to remove a DA of a (relatively) distant land?
What, there aren't enough dipsh*ts here in Cook County?
Why not pressure cops here to actually enforce the cell phone driving ban? (Or join with alderman to demand more traffic patrols?) Why not work to better educate Chicago-area drivers about the rights of bikers (and teach bikers to obey the rules as well)? Sounds like a more efficient and worthwhile goal for Chicagoist than some dumb Urbana crusade. It may not make you feel as righteous, but it would do more for the area Chicagoist serves.
I absolutely agree that she should have to ride a bike, and as a new bike rider myself, I was amazed at how differently you feel about driving after sharing the road as a cyclist. (Although I have always been a considerate driver, I am extra considerate to cyclists now.)
You know, it wouldn't be quite so horrible if she hadn't already had 3 serious traffic violations under her belt already. That should have factored into it, too, but clearly Rietz is a moron.
Dave: It would be hypocrticial if said ordinance didn't allow you to talk all you want so long as you have a headset. Which is what the Chicago ordinance does and what we were railing against.
vice 77, I read posts like yours all the time, and it always makes me wonder, why can't people be fighting for numerous causes at the same time? Why do I have to choose between working towards a safer, more protective government here but not elsewhere? The Chicagoland Bike Federation does all of those things, and pretty well at that, and yet, still, bikers are getting crushed left and right. We need a combination of eduation as well as fair punishment.
And dave, there is a difference between completely outlawing an action and punishing those who cannot perform said action without killing people.
I'd really like to know what her parents might be doing to punish her. Even though she is legally of age, I believe she lives at home. Would they be willing to take away her license, refuse to insure her, make her pay the fine herself, force her to do community service, or apologize face-to-face to the family of her victim?
vise77, thank you for perpetuating the belief that people in Chicago don't care about anything that happens outside of Chicago.
The so-called "crusade" involves passing a STATE LAW that would effect drivers across Illinois. Outsting Rietz would be an added bonus but is really not the point at all.
I would like to say that this dave (who likes to think he's the original dave) does not approve of what the impostor dave said above ...
As for this story, it's heartbreaking when someone gets away with negligent murder; with a MySpace comment like that, you can tell she has no clue what she's really done. I hope it hits her like an anvil in a couple of years.
i'd sue her ass in civil court for wrongful death. booya.
How about her having to listen to that ringtone constantly ring for eternity?
M: Great point, People can fight numerous causes.
Except, most don't have the energy to do so. I would think a Chicagoist-type effort directed toward reforms here would have a greater shot at doing something than an effort directed at Urbana.
Sarah: Perhaps you are not aware that many people outside Chicago react unfavorably--that's a backlash--when people from the city appear to meddle in local affairs, no matter how noble the cause. How do I know? Well, I've lived in just about every region of this state, as well as in Chicago. Such a backlash is not for certain, of course, but that's as much as a danger as the one you highlight. All I'm saying is sharpen your focus when it comes to crusades. (And perhaps you failed to realize I was addressing the Chicagoist desire to get rid of the Urbana-area prosecutor, not the state law. In case you didn't read it, here is the passage, which seemed pretty strong and clear: "And while we're at it, let's get Rietz out of office, huh?")
I think Reitz would have pressed for stronger charges if this dead fellow was her BROTHER, FATHER, or parish PRIEST.
But, alas, he's NOTHING to her.
Shameful.
Makes me wonder if Reitz was paid-off...
Idiot
vise77, I wrote a total of 8 paragraphs, which focused on anything but getting rid of Rietz. I included the last line because I know that people in other regions of Illinois, and the Midwest for that matter, read this site and may like to know what this particular state attorney is up to. You seem to be missing the point entirely.
I just came back from one of my frequent 200-mile round trips through Chicago and deep into Indiana. I drive the speed limit, stop at yellow lights behind the crosswalk, and signal when I change lanes.
I'm basically the only person who does so, especially among people under 40 years old. I watch people zoom past me, often exceeding the speed limit by as much as 30 miles, and not only on the highway. Some of them have bicycle roof racks.
It's terrible that this bicyclist died, and downloading a ringtone is clearly inappropriate behavior while driving. I'm also in favor of creating more bike lanes, and improving the ones we have with protectors, more space, better enforcement, etc.
But if you want to do something about bicyclist safety, it's easy enough for 99% of people to do so by modeling good driving behavior yourself - stop your car BEFORE the crosswalk, not in it. Don't blow yellow lights. Use your turn signals, and for Christ's sake SLOW DOWN! It's ridiculous to expect other people to be the only safe driver on the road, when you aren't yourself. Your speeding isn't any less illegal than her ringtone download. And yes, I say you, because when I'm driving the speed limit, I'm passed by at least 95% of the drivers on the road, both city and highway. If you're truly in the 5%, well, I apologize.
But you're not - are you?
I am Thomas, and you're apology is accepted. Would the anger be as intense if she were just talking on her phone (still bad) rather than doing something totally needless and careless like downloading a ringtone?
yes this is a tragedy and it looks like justice wasn't served. (Don't get me started on why there's no 'Felonious Reckless Driving' for people who lead cops on horrific chases -- with big old penalties attached.)
But on to something MUCH LESS important. Are posters who insist on refering to "DAs", District Attorneys, simply transplants from another state, or Illinoisans who are more familiar with TV crime drama than local news?
Illinois has States Attorneys. Not DAs. (you don't get your drivers license from the DMV either.)
you can tell she has no clue what she's really done. I hope it hits her like an anvil in a couple of years.
If I were you, I'd invest in a bar with a video poker machine in the corner in Urbana. Because you are going to make a lot of money off of this broad when the anvil hits.
My guess is, you haven't heard the last of Jennifer Stark. People like her don't learn their lesson until they are harmed themselves. She's not laughing about this, but she definitely feels more sorry for her predicament than her actions. I saw an HBO special years ago where a drunk driver was forced to write a $1 check to the victim's family every week for several years. That was part of his penalty. Perhaps her new ringtone should say "Matthew Wilhelm", or she should pay double the amount of her cell phone bill each month, with half of it going to a special fund in the name of the victim.
Her face can go up in the wall of shame next to Jeannette Sliwinski.
The talk show circuit has to be foaming at the mouth right now
yeah jaa, you get it from the much sexier sounding "secretary of state facility". i bet you also constantly remind people to just say "ATM" and not the redundant "ATM machine".
Would the creation of an appropriate negligent vehicular homicide law prevent a moron prosecutor from pursuing a lesser charge? It's a good idea to have the law, I'm not sure it would correct a miscarriage of justice like Jennifer Stark getting off with a fine after killing someone.
strangely, her fine and punishment was much, much less than someone who gets stopped at a random checkpoint after a couple of beers. I know, I know, you guys will jump all over those people, too, but remember: she *killed* a guy because she's a terrible driver, and had proven that even before this awful accident. people who have had a drink too many are just presumed to be terrible drivers, whether true or not, and face worse bullshit than she's going through, even if their driving had nothing to do with being stopped. To throw the book at people because they might have caused an accident, and give her such a ridiculously light punishment after she killed a person is seriously out of whack..
jaa, yeah, sorry, I am an out-of-state transplant, and I definitely still call it the DMV. Navin, I think I would still be furious if she were just talking on the phone, but the fact that she was downloading a ringtone, something that absolutely did not need to be done at that moment, makes it that much more ridiculous and tragic. Cheesus, you are right, STATES ATTORNEYS could still make moronic choices, but if a law is tailored to fit such a crime, I would hope it would be a lot harder for the prosecutor to rationalize not charging that particular crime...
Realistically, the Champaign County State's Attorney (Rietz) is one of the people pushing for the new law. She and her office drafted the text of the proposed legislation. It would have been nice if they'd been able to lock Jennifer Stark up long enough to reduce the risk of her ever breeding.
Yep, that girl that killed the guy with a car might maybe possibly spur a bit of political posturing about some sort of new vague law. but, god forbid you drink a beer before driving, you menace...you might kill someone..
I am currently a student at the University of Illinois, and I was a good friend of Matt. As someone who experienced this situation on a very personal level I would like to thank Chicagoist for getting this story out. What happened was extremely sudden and tragic, and could be viewed as simply an accident, but I would support any kind of law that would prevent something like this from happening again.
This was a terrible accident but it was just that- an accident.
Can the person who wrote this article or any of the other angry mob wannabes claim they never had a driving accident or even never used a cell phone while driving?
Put down the torches and say a prayer for the poor girl as well as the bicyclist. I am sure she has and will suffer enough without you fanning the flames by calling for her head.
I want this girl off the streets. She has no business behind the wheel, she hit the dude with the LEFT side of her car. She could have been high on meth with a 40 in her lap snorting cocaine off the dashboard, at least she would have had her eyes UP on the road looking in front of her. The fact she did this sober is the most disturbing part.
I'd kind of like to know more about what's going on, but I think a few things need to be said:
-This is certainly a tragedy, and I by no means intend to disagree with the court is saying that this was her fault.
-I bet she is actually ahving a very hard time. Killing people, I hear, can really mess with your head. Funny thing, guilt. Seems to work regardless of the external punishments involved. (Crime and Punishment, anyone?) Yeah, she'll probably turn into a washed-up alcoholic who hates herself more than you folks hate her. ...Good times?
-Only as a related note: A lot of bicyclists aren't as careful as they should be (not this particular bicyclist, I'm thinking of Chicago bikers going the wrong way on one way streets, blowing lights and stop signs, and non-messangers making dumb moves around the Loop). I, for one, tend to avoid busy streets, especially highways (of any sort) as much as possible when biking.
-There's certainly a strong civil case here, and the conviction should make it even easier. I still feel like there's probably something more criminal to this that wasn't pursued. This was certainly extremely reckless. I don't think driving is usually considered "ultra-hazardous," but that amount of willful negligence might make it so. ...Is there a lawyer in the house?
-I last got my license renewed at the auto show, not any "DMZ." Also, I don't call it an "ATM;" I call it a "Cash Station," or, if I'm feeling friskey, a "Tyme Machine."
-I was one of those jerks in grade school who made fun of kids for wearing bike helmets. I apologize.
Erik,
Please spare us the predictable finger wagging 'reckless bikers' routine. That's like bringing up careless jaywalkers while discussing somebody who was run over while sitting on a bus bench. It seems to me to be the same kind of mentality that contributes to the idea that cyclists don't deserve to be on the road.
I think it's absolutely ridiculous to say that her assumed guilt is enough punishment. Not everyone feels guilty for their actions. Let her remorse be a factor at her parole board hearing. If I killed someone because I caused an "accident" with my negligence, I would accept and expect to be punished. But really, an accident is something that happens that is beyond anyone's control, and this most certainly was within her control. And she may very well become an alcoholic, but guess what, she still has her drivers licence, so she will probably continue killing people by being drunk next time.
And by the way, Chicagoist, what's up with deleting my last post? It was in no way offensive at all!
First, I never use the term "accident" describing this kind of thing. 42,000 Americans die this way every year. It's not 70,000 one year, and 20,000 the next, it's pretty constant. When you lose a game of Russian roulette, no one calls it an accident. I say "he was killed by a car."
Second, I wonder if the Boub decision plays into this at all. In the State of Illinois, bicyclists are not 'inended users' of the road, unless specifically marked. Ilinois is unique in this respect. If he had been an 'intended user,' would they have grounds to contest the states rationale for not pursuing a higher sentence?
Third, the proposed law is good, but not quite a half-measure. It is way too easy to get a driver's license in this country, and way too easy to keep one. This girl should either have been properly trained to operate deadly equipment, or she shouldn't have had a license in the first place.
I agree with Stoner (among others). People don't respect the amount of danger that cars represent--and this seems especially true of the drivers themselves. I remember that my dad pulled me aside when I first started driving and told me, "For the first time in your life, you will have direct responsibility for the lives of others." Not just your passengers, but those around you.
The bike safety rant? That's mostly because I almost got nailed by a bike walking home from work last night. If I hadn't gotten out of the way, he'd have had to veer (back) into traffic. It upset me in a couple ways.
so much to say on this, but i'll start here -- what is one of MANY appalling things about this is that the DA doesn't even go for "reckless driving?" WTF? even the crazy ass lady in the road rage/ambulance story gets charged with reckless driving (among many other things), and she doesn't. kill. anyone!!
this seems so fucking ridiculous on so many levels, it makes me sick.
Apparently tTthis issue. Apparently you can be asleep at the wheel and kill a cyclist in Australia and still get the same dangerous driving charge Stark got. As long as you are not doing it on purpose the law does not recognize you as being reckless
http://www.bv.com.au/change-the-world/10568/
The price of a human life is $1000 in Illinois? Insane. I really hope the Illinois voters remember Matt when it comes re-election time for Julia Rietz. Rietz needs to be kicked out of office for failing to protect the citizens of her county. Matt's family have put up a new website for Matt: www.mattslaw.org - I hope it makes a difference.
Stark should be in jail and have all her driving privileges revoked for life
Does anyone else think that people define "accident" far too broadly? Too many things are written off as "accidents" when they clearly aren't.
In my view, an accident is caused by a unique set of circumstances that cannot be predicted - ie. an act of God, or some multi-layered confluence of events that culminate in an outcome you can't foresee.
Incidents caused by carelessness, recklessness or negligence are not (in my world) "accidents," even though the outcome was not intentional. We just don't have a good word to describe those occurrences, so the fallback term of accident comes in and makes it seem like it was unavoidable so no one is to blame.
"Willful disregard for safety and human life" is just too many words...
This is pathetic. I hope Stark and Rietz rot in Hell for this.
I know Jennie...we've been best friends for a very long time. I know and understand that what she did was horrible. It was an accident that could have and should have been prevented but I can't hate her for a mistake that she didn't intentionaly do...hence the word mistake. I'm not writing this to make anyone angry I just want people to know that yes she is having a hard time dealing with this. Her parents are making her pay for her fine by herself...she gets no help from anyone. As for someone saying that Reitz was paid off....Jennie isn't made of money...there is no way that would have ever happened or could have happened. I'm very proud of Matt's family for standing up and starting Matt's Law...I feel that it is a wonderful thing and I hope that by Jennie's mistake people are more aware of how dumb it is to let things like phones distract you while other people's lives are at stake. And as for Jennie being insensitive, selfish and spoiled she's none of those. If you only knew how terrible she feels...and she's not spoiled. She literally has to work for everything she has. When she posted that blog for people to pray for Matt's family and herself...she was saying that from a Christian viewpoint. I'm not much a churchgoer but to her and her family it is very important to look to God for help and guidance. She's never said one bad thing about Matt and she never will. She got really lucky with what the court gave her as punishment and she is aware of that...I still can't believe she's not in jail for it. Jennie is like a sister to me and I just want people to know that she's a wonderful person who made a really really horrible mistake and now she has to live with it for the rest of her life.
She has to pay the whole $1000 on her own? I wonder how much this kid's funeral was. Hmmmm.