Cool I can drive like as ass and still go to school. I don't give a rats butt if the tire was worn. You DO NOT DRIVE at 117. DUH as you can see it is very dangerous.

"dini79
Aug 20, 2010 at 9:40 p.m.
Suggest removal Recklessly endangering a life doesn't keep them out of nursing? Please."

Good point!

Tj- yes it doesn't matter if something was wrong with the car you don't drive like a race car driver. If something was wrong with the car you DEFINALTY don't drive like this. Maybe the brakes were bad for example. It isn't your car to drive like this either!!! You don't know how it will react or IF anything IS wrong with it to make it hard to control. NOBODY can control a car well at 117 mph if something should happen.

916WI/ The reason McGrath should receive an appropriate punishment is she's 27 years old and knew better than to drive at 117mph. This was not a mechanical problem. She drove crazy and killed somebody. You can't state it any clearer than that.

We are not suggesting that her life be ruined, just that some sort of punishment should be required in this case. I don't know who she is but she must either be involved with someone in the judicial system or she is one hot mama and the judge went all googley eyed on her. That is all I can figure. As for the family, sure they don't want to press charges but the state still should. And to let her leave the state to go to Oklahoma, that is a farce! We have schooling right here in Wisconsin.

If I throw the keys of my sports car--which, by a point made in the article, had maintenance issues and then let the person "have a little fun" with the car and something goes wrong why would that person be expected to do any jail time? It was simply a tragic accident--even the family members of the person killed agree with this. Why should two lives be destroyed by this?

JoeSchmo: I understand your frustration when comparing the two cases, but it is important to remember that the man in the ride tragedy is only charged at this point. There is no way to know at this point if he will be sentenced in the future.

So, this woman is not going to serve any time for her mistake, but the man who made a mistake in the Dells ride accident is facing a 25 year sentence. And his mistake did not cause a death, only a severe injury.

I agree that it was a MISTAKE and she does not deserve to spend her life in prison. But why is her mistake of driving 117 mph less punishable than a man who forgot to look for a signal before he pressed a button on an amusement ride?

Scooter/ You've put many of my thoughts into better words than I could so my hat tips to you also.

Thank you, TJ, you seem to put it into better words than I can.

What the....? Is the light sentence because it was the victims corvette? Is it because the victims family has forgiven her? Is it because she was test driving a car that's meant to go fast? Is it because it was a consentual joy ride? The light sentence does not make sense, and why the special privledge of dropping the felony so she can have a career as a nurse? Unbelievable.

It all comes down to character though....

good question 916...

she took another persons life by driving a car at 117 MPH! She was at a bar, yes she was working, my mom worked as a bartender, and drove home drunk almost every night! does not excuse her killing another human being. I don't think she deserves the chair! But I wouldn't want someone with such POOR decision making skills caring for me or my family!!!!

I don't give a hoot if she is going to school to be a cop, she still deserves punishment just like anyone else would get. That is my opinion.

sttldwnjvl--unless she was driving 117 mph through the middle of Quotes, what has just being there have to do with any lesson she needed to learn?

sassy, driving has nothing to do with a nursing job...it's the CHARGES her record will show that was my point. Will she be a good nurse? Who knows. That's not my point. A person's record is checked when going into a position to care for people. Think about it.
And save your head in the sand and cave snotty comments for someone else.

So, if she is in school out of state and tries to get a job as a nurse down there or anywhere other that Wi/Il, will they do a criminal background check for WI?

scooter47, criminally negligent means she is subject to a criminal penalty, while ordinary negligence means she would only be subject to a civil lawsuit by the victim's family.
.
The point of the education is that she is working at being a responsible, contributing citizen, thus she is an excellent candidate for never having another criminal charge for the rest of her life. Nursing school is not a privilege, here, but something that is hoped will help keep her from returning to the criminal justice system.

ms_sassy_wi: I also agree with your comment. People make mistakes; some mistakes have greater consequences than others. And, yes, even nurses, doctors, pharmacists, teachers, firefighters, etc., make mistakes. When a costly mistake is made outside of a professional role, it does not necessarily mean that that person will be any more likely than their peers to make errors at work. (IMO)

I saw her down at quotes last week...she MUST have learned her lesson.

"genuine issue at trial as to whether the defendant’s conduct was criminally negligent or whether she was guilty of only ordinary negligence,” he said.".....What???? What does this mean? So if I was driving 100mph and hit a bicycle, would they ask me if I was criminally negligent or just plain old negligent? I don't get this sentence, seems way to light to me.

This article brings back memories of the women in Milton who stole money, everyone wanted to hang her out to dry!!! Why not this woman? Is she that much more important? Just asking.

im w you ms_sassy

ok, so the way I read these comments, you would rather have her in prison (at taxpayer expense of $38,000/year) and not attempting to learn from this? She actually may make a very good nurse, and may make other people's lives (perhaps car wreck victims?) better by giving them care that she was unable to give to the victim in this wreckage. I think some people are too harsh and unforgiving with punishment for unintended consequences. It's good that the family is not as unforgiving as some of you. She is cognizant that she caused the wreck by driving too fast. She accepted responsibility.

I agree with prevention, and yes she does not drive to her patients while on her rounds, but the fact that she was charged with a felony and her poor judgment should be a factor in making a hiring decision, if she could screw up this bad in this situation, what bad decision is she apt to make while working as a nurse, I feel safe driving is easier than nursing!!!! and she couldn't do that right.

Good point PREVENTION! You said that quite well.

This woman did luck out and I have a feeling that she realizes that. If she stays out of trouble for one year, then the felony count will be dropped. This was probably part of the deal so that she would be able to obtain a nursing license. In many states, if not all, a felon cannot receive an RN license. I am not sure if I agree with that, but that is the way it is. It sounds like the family of the deceased woman is healing and I am glad to read that.

So, how does she rate that she gets to finish a nursing degree when she knowingly killed someone? Justice served? I think not

It's nice she gets to finish nursing school. Would be even nicer if Mary got to finish living. 5 miles over may be considered ordinary negligence. Twice the limit should definately be criminal.

Recklessly endangering a life doesn't keep them out of nursing? Please.

mamato3, it's highly unlikely she will be driving from room to room while doing rounds on her job.

don't know if you have had your head in the sand or if you live in a cave, but an employer can't use her driving record to eliminate her from the pool of candidates for employment...being able to drive is not an employment requirement for a nursing position.

Who in their right mind is going to hire a nurse with a record like hers will show is what I want to know.

scooter47, every case IS different in court. Most people are commenting on stories that summarize and simplify the proceedings. The sentencing is by law to consider the totality of the circumstances.

I know what you mean. I guess this woman had a clean record, maybe a family of her own, didn't fit the "profile" of a habitual criminal, and a victim's family who is not out for blood.

Weird eh?

Intoxicated? Where is that stated in the article?
"...speed would be the only evidence the prosecution could present to show McGrath was negligent".

she had a "part of a beer"...that's NOT intoxicated driving...it was negligent, and stupid...

everyone's life can be forever changed in a 5 second lapse of judgement. I'm not excusing the behavior, but it doesn't sound like this girl makes bad choices habitually.

Wow, she sure did get off easy on this. She is lucky the family is forgiving her of her wrong doings. Why are all these cases so different in court? Wouldn't you think intoxicated driving and killing someone would be the similar sentence for each case?