Drunk Driver kills 3 kids and a grandfather in York Region

[NHFL]

Lets say the fire was set deliberately, what would be the point of that?? Muzzo already failed the blood alcohol test, so the proof he was drunk has already been established. I dont see how burning down a car would destroy any additional evidence

I'm not an expert, but a few things... First there are "black boxes" in cars that now record speed, direction, etc... that are often used for insurance and court purposes. Second, accident investigators can tell a ton of information about vehicles based on the wreckage. I can only assume that a "defence" for idiot-fuck Muzzo would be something like the victims somehow "contributed" to the crash. Fuster-cluck Muzzo's vehicle could be analyzed to help determine whether or not the victims contributed in any way - so getting rid of the vehicle evidence may indeed help get turd-breath Muzzo off.

Keep in mind that the idiot is facing something like 16 charges (or more) in this, not just "drunk driving". Getting rid of evidence may help reduce a charge of murder to a conviction of manslaughter (which I hope doesn't happen).

 

[bestman007]

Definitely an inside job IMHO. Looks like someone from York Regional Police is on the take. Unless, there's video capturing a cop's wrongdoing nothing ever sticks (i.e., Rodney King, Sammy Yatim, etc)

 

[AK-47]

I'm not an expert, but a few things... First there are "black boxes" in cars that now record speed, direction, etc... that are often used for insurance and court purposes. Second, accident investigators can tell a ton of information about vehicles based on the wreckage. I can only assume that a "defence" for idiot-fuck Muzzo would be something like the victims somehow "contributed" to the crash. Fuster-cluck Muzzo's vehicle could be analyzed to help determine whether or not the victims contributed in any way - so getting rid of the vehicle evidence may indeed help get turd-breath Muzzo off.

Keep in mind that the idiot is facing something like 16 charges (or more) in this, not just "drunk driving". Getting rid of evidence may help reduce a charge of murder to a conviction of manslaughter (which I hope doesn't happen)

Okay, I'll buy that.

I'd like to know if the Muzzo's made that donation after or before the deadly car crash.
If its after there's possibly some fuckery afoot

 

[SkyRider]

Muzzo has elected trial by judge.

 

[saxon]

Muzzo has elected trial by judge.

Not surprising, he won't have to worry about a jury looking at him as a rich spoiled douche who thinks he can do whatever he wants and not have to face the consequences. Plus a judge alone will be easier for his high priced attorney's to manipulate.

 

[exbrower]

The fact that he elected judge alone makes it 90% certain there will be a guilty plea. Remember a jury is irrelevant to sentencing only deciding on guilt or innocence. We may have a plea as early as this afternoon.

 

[K Douglas]

Give the high profile nature of this case my guess is Muzzo will receive significant jail time. And rightly so. 12 years seems about right to me.

 

[AK-47]

His sister is pretty hot though

 

[SchlongConery]

I'm not an expert, but a few things... ... I can only assume that a "defence" for idiot-fuck Muzzo would be something like the victims somehow "contributed" to the crash. Fuster-cluck Muzzo's vehicle could be analyzed to help determine whether or not the victims contributed in any way - so getting rid of the vehicle evidence may indeed help get turd-breath Muzzo off.

Keep in mind that the idiot is facing something like 16 charges (or more) in this, not just "drunk driving". Getting rid of evidence may help reduce a charge of murder to a conviction of manslaughter (which I hope doesn't happen).

Contributory negligence of the victim is not a factor in defending criminal impaired driving cases.

In civil (money) court, contributory negligence can reduce the amount awarded by a percentage.

And finally, not to dampen your enthusiasm but he was not charged with "murder" nor even with manslaughter.

He was charged with

• Four counts of impaired driving causing death.
• Four counts of driving over the legal limit.
• Four counts of dangerous driving causing death.
• Two counts of impaired driving causing bodily harm.and
  
• Two counts of driving above the legal limit causing bodily harm.
• Two counts of dangerous driving causing bodily harm.

 

[SchlongConery]

Give the high profile nature of this case my guess is Muzzo will receive significant jail time. And rightly so. 12 years seems about right to me.

High media profile is not a sentencing criteria.

The most significant factors are previous impaired / dangerous driving convictions and the gravity of the injuries/deaths.

Actually, the dangerous driving conviction generally carries more sentencing gravitas. All in all, the sentencing principles for a case like this without a guilty plea is more like 5 years jail... maybe up to 7 if the guy shows a real bad attitude either before or after the incident.

If he spends a year awaiting trial, that counts 2-1 against his sentence. 5 year sentence means he can apply for parole after 20 months So it is possible that he would be released from jail after the trial based on "time served" in (pre-trial custody).

 

[GameBoy27]

Give the high profile nature of this case my guess is Muzzo will receive significant jail time. And rightly so. 12 years seems about right to me.

And will only serve 1/3 of the sentence less approx. 7 months for pre-trial time served before he's eligible for full parole. I believe he'll be eligible for day passes after serving just 1/6th. So if he gets 9 years, he'll only serve just over 2 years behind bars.

Once convicted, will this prevent him from travelling to the US in the future?

 

[trippingwalker]

His sister is pretty hot though

TRUE, except she charges entirely way too much and her services are sub-par

 

[KBear]

... the sentencing principles for a case like this without a guilty plea is more like 5 years jail... maybe up to 7 if the guy shows a real bad attitude either before or after the incident.

If he spends a year awaiting trial, that counts 2-1 against his sentence. 5 year sentence means he can apply for parole after 20 months So it is possible that he would be released from jail after the trial based on "time served" in (pre-trial custody).

A lawyer on 1010 was saying time served counted as 1 : 1.5. There was no plea, and he expects the defense will ask for 6-7 years, prosecution will ask for 10 years. He could request some parole benefits after serving 1/6 of the sentence, could request parole after serving 1/3 of the sentence.

 

[SchlongConery]

He is going to plead guilty

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/marco-muzzo-trial-1.3391706

 

[AK-47]

And will only serve 1/3 of the sentence less approx. 7 months for pre-trial time served before he's eligible for full parole. I believe he'll be eligible for day passes after serving just 1/6th. So if he gets 9 years, he'll only serve just over 2 years behind bars.

Once convicted, will this prevent him from travelling to the US in the future?

For sure it will. He's not getting in unless he applies for a special waiver, which he's unlikely to get because of the seriousness of the crime.

His best bet is to just drive across the Peace bridge and hope customs waive him through

 

[GameBoy27]

For sure it will. He's not getting in unless he applies for a special waiver, which he's unlikely to get because of the seriousness of the crime.

His best bet is to just drive across the Peace bridge and hope customs waive him through

Not sure if it's possible but I hope they give him a 10 year driving ban, effective the first day of his release from prison.

 

[SchlongConery]

Not sure if it's possible but I hope they give him a 10 year driving ban, effective the first day of his release from prison.

A lifetime driving ban is not uncommon but his age might be a factor in handing down a 10 year ban. It's not as if he can't afford a driver or that he has to go to work.

 

[Titalian]

He was dead drunk, no excuse though, but I believe this is going to be an open and shut case. He will do some time.

Don't think for one second that MADD Canada, will let this pass their fingers. And if you think they have no influence, you better think again,
Double the alcohol level, going through a stop sign at double the speed limit, and many prior past records. If he gets through, this will be a
sad day in our society. I am also awaiting the outcome.

I believe both of you are on the same page concerning this as I am. I'm sure Mr.baby fed Marco is shitting in his pants right now.

But that’s what happens when the accused is a man of means. The fear — as unfair and baseless as it may be — is that the system can be manipulated for the rich.

The message boards are alight with the skeptical who don’t trust what lies ahead.

“Money seems to trump everything these days,” one wrote.

“Money talks,” predicted another.

Personally, I have far more faith in the justice system.

Not sure myself, but life has been good to him on a monitarial perspective. Lets see what transpires. And if he learnt anything from this tragedy.

Contributory negligence of the victim is not a factor in defending criminal impaired driving cases.

In civil (money) court, contributory negligence can reduce the amount awarded by a percentage.

And finally, not to dampen your enthusiasm but he was not charged with "murder" nor even with manslaughter.

He was charged with

• Four counts of impaired driving causing death.
• Four counts of driving over the legal limit.
• Four counts of dangerous driving causing death.
• Two counts of impaired driving causing bodily harm.and
  
• Two counts of driving above the legal limit causing bodily harm.
• Two counts of dangerous driving causing bodily harm.

The four counts might be dropped to one, as it does become redundant. After all this wasn't premeditated. Just pure unlawful negligence. Can't wait for the sentencing. What do you guys think? I figure 3-5.

 

[K Douglas]

High media profile is not a sentencing criteria.

The most significant factors are previous impaired / dangerous driving convictions and the gravity of the injuries/deaths.

Actually, the dangerous driving conviction generally carries more sentencing gravitas. All in all, the sentencing principles for a case like this without a guilty plea is more like 5 years jail... maybe up to 7 if the guy shows a real bad attitude either before or after the incident.

If he spends a year awaiting trial, that counts 2-1 against his sentence. 5 year sentence means he can apply for parole after 20 months So it is possible that he would be released from jail after the trial based on "time served" in (pre-trial custody).

Technically no but they will want to make an example out of him. His behavior was utterly reckless. 2 times the legal limit and driving 2 x the speed limit. 4 counts of impaired and dangerous driving causing death, 2 counts of impaired and dangerous driving causing bodily harm. 3 young kids killled. A family wiped out. The media spotlight on this case.
When I say 12 years that doesn't mean he will spend 12 years in prison. More like 6-7.

 

[SchlongConery]

Technically no but they will want to make an example out of him. .

With due respect to your populist feelings and best intentions, "making an example" of him to satisfy the media frenzy is grounds for an appeal of the sentence if it falls outside case law on sentencing.

12 years is not at all realistic especially when he will have demonstrated contrition and remorse by pleading guilty etc.