 |
| Jason Ravnsborg, South Dakota AG |
The tragic bulletin comes from the state that gave us Bill Janklow. It's a dubious thought. Perhaps the wide-open spaces of South Dakota - translate "dull" - tempt people at the wheel to be inadequately attentive. Any particular stretch of road matches the others. I have heard people describe the drive from Glenwood to Sauk Centre in Minnesota as being like this. Maybe we can paint South Dakota with the broad brush.
In Janklow's case it tempted him to speed. The former governor and congressman is no longer with us. He could not escape the shadow or stigma of an accident that took a person's life. Even after the tragedy, I heard him speak like he still felt an impulse to question speed restrictions.
Rural highways after dark call for maximum attention to safety. Watch what's behind you. This has always been true but it's more so today due to distracted driving. Was distracted driving involved with Ravnsborg? And BTW I wish he'd adjust his last name so it's easier to type - insert a vowel or something.
If he isn't losing sleep now over what happened, he's not a normal human being. This isn't to say he has no chance of avoiding legal punishment. He's the South Dakota attorney general, and a person with those kind of legal creds is going to make a strong case for non-culpability. An "accident?" The word itself implies non-culpability. The word might be discouraged in connection with what happened.
Impact had to be intense
The incident took the life of Joseph Boever, age 55. Is it a stretch to suggest "it strains credulity" that Ravnsborg would explain that he thought he hit a deer? Well, I think not.
Let's step back and consider: it is not easy to kill a human being. The entertainment industry with war movies and westerns can make killing seem routine sometimes. You shoot at someone and that person drops over "dead." I think military veterans, to the extent they'd even want to talk about it, would take exception. Death is often a prolonged affair because I'll repeat: it is not easy to kill an (adult) human being.
Consider further: Mr. Ravnsborg was not able to just drive off, albeit with a dented or somewhat damaged car. Hyde County Sheriff Mike Volek offered the attorney general his personal vehicle. Might strike some as an odd gesture but not by the standards of rural America.
The sheriff was not pursuing the matter earnestly because of the explanation that the collision was with a deer. Again, a typical thing to occur across the rural Upper Midwest.
Volek assisted Ravnsborg with the appropriate "paperwork" because I suppose there'd be an insurance claim. We must prioritize the financial aspect of such things, right? Had the law learned immediately that a person was dead, well I think matters would have been disposed most differently.
Ravnsborg had a cellphone flashlight at his disposal. That's more than I would have. And yet, after a collision so intense that it killed an adult and rendered the car immobile, the driver claimed not being able to locate whatever it was he struck.
He could not claim to have seen the image of a deer because it was not a deer. How could his vehicle have ended up so far from the recipient of the collision? "Recipient" is a grope for terminology because we have Ravnsborg's story of the deer juxtaposed with the quite different truth. (Darn: I can't type the guy's last name without checking my reference every time.)
Did Mr. Boever suffer before dying? Could he have been helped at the time the sheriff first arrived?
Ravnsborg is totally entitled to tell his story. And given his legal creds, he'll have the maximum opportunity to make his case. Still, how can we not think the incident is constantly haunting him now? And that's even if he sticks to his recounting. Even if we were to sincerely believe it, does it not show him in a bad light? You kill a human being, fail to see the body and then later you thought it was a deer? I would not want to take a story like this through the rest of my life.
Why was Ravnsborg out on the desolate stretch of South Dakota highway after dark? Did he have a family commitment or some sort of professional obligation in line with his virtuous government position? Well, no. It was partisan politics. Yuck. He was driving home from a Republican fundraiser on Saturday night.
He said he did call 911 immediately, but the Department of Public Safety would not confirm this on Monday.
Poor Joseph Boever had crashed his truck in the area earlier, and was walking toward it near the road when he was hit. What's with these South Dakota drivers, eh? Maybe it's the "wild west." The fatal collision - let's not call it "accident" - happened along U.S. Highway 14 about a mile west of Highmore SD. The attorney general was traveling west in his Ford Taurus. He reported looking around his vehicle in the aftermath, and seeing only "pieces of his vehicle." He said he didn't realize he hit a man until he returned to the scene the next morning. He returned with the idea of finding "the animal" he thought he'd hit, he said.
Well, consider: does it not strain credulity, based on what we can assume was the intensity of the impact, that the motorist could not see the cause of the crash? The "recipient" of the collision? To discover nothing would leave me flummoxed with confusion. And maybe downright fear as I'd wonder: what the heck just happened? Was it a UFO that departed in a streak? Something paranormal?
Let's apply the gray matter
A skeptic of the AG's story might say that the "deer" explanation is a crutch, something to pass muster at the time, allowing the motorist to buy time if, perchance, that person had consumed some alcohol. A frivolous occasion like a "Republican fundraiser" is ripe for suspicion that some refreshments were part of the repartee.
Ravnsborg was known not to be averse to alcohol. Naturally he denies he was drinking at the fundraiser. Oh of course that might be true. Or if he did drink, it might be nominal, not causing any concerning impairment. (Law enforcement would say "impairment is impairment," but the rest of us know reality.)
Anyone who would admit to consuming any alcohol before a fatal incident would, as they say, be in a heap of trouble. Here I could seriously opine that fear of DWI punishment is so intense that I'm sure it has cost lives in terms of fleeing. I think this precise scenario happened once around my home of Morris MN, but that's a separate topic now. It gives context for understanding the desperate measures some might take to avoid alcohol detection. When it comes to DWI, are we really trying to protect public safety or send a message about behavior that we disapprove of?
So we wonder if a compromised person might wish to "buy time." Another theory goes a step further in terms of being disturbing, but let's not discard it. I'd be remiss if I do not suggest that someone in Ravnsvborg's position, if the alcohol theory is weighed, might move the body so it would not be found until the next morning.
A question just hovers
How on earth could the body of a person end up so far from the point of collision? Wouldn't it be right there? This is purely opinion/speculation of course but it's mine, in this "true crime" post about a public official. Yes, no "crime" is officially affirmed but the speculation falls under the "true crime" rubric.
The "deer" crutch explanation would seem to absolve a person of any legal consequence. Hey it was an "accident." But such a story must be weighed as a possible "cover." If anyone could cover his tracks, it's an attorney who has risen to the AG's level. And how could we even "prove" that he didn't think he struck a deer? It seems almost an unfair defense on his part.
Let's say the driver strikes a stationary object. The driver could be judged negligent. Or an animal? If the body isn't there, well it must have run off. Give a shrug. (A reminder: animals cannot testify.)
On the morning after the crash, Ravnsborg and his chief of staff Tim Bormann made a trip to return the sheriff's borrowed car. They stopped at the spot of the accident. Ravnsborg said he discovered Boever's body in the grass just off the shoulder. He said he drove to Sheriff Volek's house and reported the dead body. They both returned to the scene. Volek said he'd pursue the investigation and told the attorney general to go back home to Pierre.
Me suspicious? Others are too
Boever's family said Monday they were suspicious about the investigation. They were disturbed having to wait 22 hours for identifying the deceased's body. Boever's cousin Victor Nemec said Boever had crashed his truck into a hay bale near the road Saturday evening. The explanation: reaching for some tobacco. Quite the rustic story for the New York City folks to consume! The crash happened at about 10:30 p.m.
Boever lived alone and he had been separated from his wife.
Nemec was disturbed about the circumstances of the collision: "A human doesn't look like a deer. The whole thing stinks to me."
The Republican fundraiser that was so important for Ravnsborg was hosted by the Spink County Republicans at Rooster's Bar and Grill. The fundraiser was among many under the label "Lincoln Day Dinners" held by the GOP. I wonder how much $ they raised.
An AP News report quoted Bormann saying that Ravnsborg "drinks occasionally but has made it a practice not to drink at the Lincoln Day events." A state senator at the event said "I didn't see him with anything but a Coke." Let's not be Pollyannish. And don't overlook the partisan bonding in light of the worsening schism in America caused by President Trump: blue vs. red.
 |
| The late Bill Janklow |
Partisan politics? South Dakota has a Republican governor, Kristi Noem, and didn't she float the idea - levity or not? - of having Trump added to Mount Rushmore? So I wonder: Might Boever have been a registered Democrat?
Besides the late Janklow, we are reminded of the Amy Senser incident in the Twin Cities. Senser, who had notoriety for being married to onetime Viking star Joe, was convicted of criminal vehicular homicide in the 2011 death of Anousone Phanthavong.
Minnesota once had a governor, Rudy Perpich, who chided South Dakota as "50th in everything." Dead men tell no tales. Neither can deer.
Addendum: I began this post thinking it would be routine, but now my head is swimming with thoughts. So let me add: The sheriff might be questioned in any legal proceedings that ensue. I'd ask him: Did you ask Ravnsborg if he actually saw a deer at the time of impact? Wouldn't you assume the guy would get a fleeting glimpse? And if the answer was "no," he should have felt suspicion. Had Boever been found at the time, might he have been alive and responsive to treatment? Also, will Ravnsborg get a routine insurance settlement for damage to his vehicle? If all else fails, insurance companies are really good at "peeling the banana" and getting the facts out.
- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment