Jump to content


Lauren Cook Arrested


Recommended Posts


I'm sorry, but there should be no diversion for felony charges. I have a hard time agreeing with this scenerio. I am alittle bias because I had a friend get killed by a driver that hit him while he was walking on the side of the road. The driver was allowed to take diversion and was done with it. It is an injustice to the victims when something like this happens.

 

First, I'm very sorry for what happened to your friend. It's a tragedy and nothing mitigates that.

 

However, if you've ever changed the channel on your radio, if you've ever looked in the back seat, if you've ever dug in your glove box or if you've ever looked at a phone, map, friend in the passenger seat while driving, that's enough to kill someone. It can happen to anyone.

 

The ridiculous thing about driving is that it's the single most dangerous thing most people will do every day, and they never stop and think about how dangerous it really is. You are piloting, often without the requisite skill, a 1.5 ton missile at speeds in excess of 30 mph. The consequences of a moment's distraction are devastating, yet we're often looking at the trees, or a bird, or the girl in the next car, or the sunset, or whatever.

This is what the driver had said happened. I know it's not what it was, but I'm not going to get into details about it. I think there is a fine line when determining on who gets diversion and who doesn't. I would hate to be the one to make that decision, especially if there were other victims involved. I hope this will help her out and she will learn a valuable lesson from it, but it's just to bad that it took this to happen.

Link to comment

How can Lauren be accepted into a pre trial diversion for a felony hit and run, all while driving on a suspended license?? How is this possible. I could understand IF her license wasnt suspended,but not so much since she was already in violation of the law by operating a motor vehicle.

 

Im not trying to bias, but I just dont get it.

Link to comment

Did I read the article correctly, she did call 911, but it was like 10 minutes later? It was a lapse in judgement, if that was the case and not really indicitive of her character.

 

Somewhere between 6 and 10 minutes, yes. She called her mom first, and her mother calmed her down and got her to call 911. I can't claim to know Lauren well, but I would agree that injury hit-and-run is not indicative of her character, at least not as I know it.

 

How can Lauren be accepted into a pre trial diversion for a felony hit and run, all while driving on a suspended license?? How is this possible. I could understand IF her license wasnt suspended,but not so much since she was already in violation of the law by operating a motor vehicle.

 

Im not trying to bias, but I just dont get it.

 

There was a decent interview in both the LJS and OWH articles about this where the officials basically said this wasn't unheard-of. Some felony murder suspects enter pretrial diversion, so if they're eligible, I would presume Lauren would be.

Link to comment

Did I read the article correctly, she did call 911, but it was like 10 minutes later? It was a lapse in judgement, if that was the case and not really indicitive of her character.

 

Somewhere between 6 and 10 minutes, yes. She called her mom first, and her mother calmed her down and got her to call 911. I can't claim to know Lauren well, but I would agree that injury hit-and-run is not indicative of her character, at least not as I know it.

 

How can Lauren be accepted into a pre trial diversion for a felony hit and run, all while driving on a suspended license?? How is this possible. I could understand IF her license wasnt suspended,but not so much since she was already in violation of the law by operating a motor vehicle.

 

Im not trying to bias, but I just dont get it.

 

There was a decent interview in both the LJS and OWH articles about this where the officials basically said this wasn't unheard-of. Some felony murder suspects enter pretrial diversion, so if they're eligible, I would presume Lauren would be.

 

Did she get her license reinstated right before the accident?

Link to comment

Did she get her license reinstated right before the accident?

 

No, I believe it was last Tuesday. But everything she did was legal and available to the general public. She got no special favors.

 

Try telling that to all the people who think otherwise.

No thanks. I couldn't care less what they think. They are welcome to put themselves in that position and see what legal options they have. Some people won't believe until they're there themselves.

Link to comment

The amount of special treatment you get is more about getting a lawyer and working within the system then anything else. If you go to your hearing and simply plead guilty you'll get hammered.

 

Having a lawyer will allow you to do things pre-trial that can affect your sentencing and allow you to plea to lesser charges or enter diversion to not have to go through that. It certainly isn't about who your father is or what school you play for.

Link to comment

After last nights VB win, I took time this morning to read huskers.com, and when I saw this picture I just have to keep asking myself if its right for a student who was involved in a felony incident be allowed to play? I just dont think a two game suspension is enough. An incident which could have resulted in the death of a person should not be taken lightly. There just seems to be something wrong.

post-7483-0-47963900-1321551078.jpg

Link to comment

(OWH) Cook in rare company with program

 

http://www.omaha.com...EWS97/711169904

 

...A review of several thousand Lancaster County pretrial diversion cases since 2009 showed that Cook was the only one accepted into the program on the felony charge of leaving the scene of an injury accident. During the nearly three-year period, however,the 20-year-old starting setter for the highly ranked Huskers also was the only defendant charged with the offense to apply for diversion...

 

If you read on there was another case of an 65 year old woman with a perfect driving record who left the scene of a property damage accident (light damage from a parking lot collision she didn't notice), and her lawyer was told that traffic violations were not eligible for diversion. So, comparing these two cases. Cook, with half a dozen speeding ticket and driving with a license that was probably technically suspended, causes fairly serious bodily harm in an injury accident and gets off with diversion, while in the other case, a woman with a perfect driving record is charged with a felony for backing into a car in a parking lot.

 

I don't see how you could take all this in and not conclude there was preferential treatment. I hope the guy who was hit at least gets what he deserves from the insurance settlement. What a joke.

Link to comment

The guy who was hit agreed with allowing her into pretrial diversion, though.

 

 

Also, key piece of information left out of the above post:

 

The [65-year-old] woman was not under the influence but didn't report herself because she was unaware that she had lightly struck another car while backing up in a parking lot,Reiman said.

 

However, I will say the same thing I said about Lauren - I don't really think society needs to be protected from this 65-year-old woman by putting her through a felony trial.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...