USC Hit-And-Run Victim Had High Alcohol Level
TrackBacks (0)
Comments (17)
Carmen Bachan worries "pigs" defending the accused couple of felony hit-and-run
charges in her daughter's death this spring will exploit evidence she had been
drinking. (Neon Tommy photo illustration)
The 18-year-old USC freshman killed last spring in a hit-and-run accident near campus had high levels of alcohol in her system when she died, according to the autopsy report obtained by Neon Tommy.
With trial six weeks away, an independent legal expert said the newly obtained information could alter the defense strategy. The driver's attorney refused to rule out bringing up Adrianna Bachan's alcohol test results as part of his defense against the charge of misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter.
The fact that Bachan was intoxicated at the time of the accident also highlights longstanding concerns about the responsibility of the University of Southern California in overseeing Greek activities.
Fluids drawn from Bachan's eye showed alcohol levels of .17, said Dan Anderson, the supervising criminalist who conducted the toxicology tests on the victim at the Los Angeles County Coroner's Office.
Asked to describe Bachan's level of intoxication, he referred to the state law for drivers: "Double drunk. Not much to it other than that -- .08 is the legal limit."
The couple charged in the case, Claudia Cabrera and Josue Luna, appeared in court Tuesday morning for their arraignment. Cabrera, the driver, pleaded not guilty to vehicular manslaughter as well as to the felony hit-and-run charge. Luna, the passenger, pleaded not guilty to felony hit-and-run. Their trial date was set for Nov. 4.
Rudolph Loewenstein, a former prosecutor in the Orange County District Attorney's Office and now a criminal defense attorney, said the toxicology report could be relevant in the trial and help the defendant fight the vehicular manslaughter charge. The defense could use the victim's state of inebriation, Loewenstein said, to dispute that the students were in the crosswalk, or that they, in fact, had the green light.
"They could put it out there, in a sense, and quietly blame her for stepping out," he said. This strategy would only help Cabrera because she alone faces the manslaughter charge.
Loewenstein said that the defense could also run the risk of alienating the jury if it introduces the issue of alcohol and appears to be attacking or blaming the victim.
Both Bachan and her friend, Marcus Garfinkle, also a minor, were walking back from an after-party at Lambda Chi Alpha, a USC-sanctioned fraternity, when they were struck at 2:55 a.m. on March 29 at the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard and Hoover Street. The police report states that the victims were in the crosswalk and had a green light when the accident happened.
At Tuesday's arraignment of the defendants, Adrianna Bachan's mother, Carmen, sat on the front-left side of the courtroom, shaking. When the defendants walked in, she got up and moved away, taking a seat in the second row. As their attorneys entered their pleas, she cried.
In a telephone interview after the hearing, Bachan said the toxicology test results underscore the need for the university to crack down on underage drinking, particularly at fraternities and sororities.
"I'm not happy that there's no control," she said. "Somebody should be looking into this."
As for the news of her daughter's level of inebriation, Bachan said she was not surprised. "It happens. Kids do stupid things like that. It has nothing to do with what happened."
Beth Saul, USC's director of fraternity and sorority leadership development in the Office of Student Affairs, defended the university's policies on governing Greek activities where alcohol and minors might be present. "No school is more hands-on in terms of reviewing [the planning of parties]," she said. "All of us mourned this death with the family [and] with all the students on campus."
Cabrera is accused of running a red light on Jefferson Boulevard and striking Bachan and Garfinkle. Upon impact, Garfinkle went through the windshield and became lodged on the dashboard. A short distance later, the Infiniti sedan stopped and the passenger, Luna, removed him from the hood of the car, according to court documents.
The defendants rejected a plea bargain last week that would have sent Luna to prison for six years and Cabrera to prison for four. If convicted, Luna now faces a maximum sentence of seven years; Cabrera, eight.
Bachan said she was glad the couple turned down the plea offer. "My heart was set on the trial," she said.
She said she fears that when the case goes to trial the defense will raise the issue of her daughter's intoxication to justify their clients' actions.
"They're pigs. I expect them to use it," she said.
Outside the courtroom Tuesday, defense attorney Aresh Hashemi, who is representing Cabrera, said he was unsure whether he would bring up the toxicologist's report at trial. On Wednesday morning, Hashemi said he is still trying to work out a plea deal. "At this point, it looks like we're going to go to trial, but I'm hoping it can be resolved before that." Jeffery Becine, Luna's attorney, declined to comment.
Darrell Clardy, a toxicology expert who formerly worked at the Orange County coroner's office, said that the 5-foot-4-inch Bachan, at 120 pounds, would probably have had six to seven drinks in her system at the time of death and would likely have been stumbling and slurring her speech, although it would have depended on her tolerance.
Anderson, who prepared the toxicology report for L.A. County, said he tested Bachan's vitreous fluid, found in the eyeball between the retina and lens, because sufficient blood could not be found in her system at the time of her autopsy, two days after the accident. The method used by Anderson differs from the standard California law enforcement measurement of blood alcohol levels, but is considered the gold standard by experts.
"When someone drinks alcohol, it is first absorbed by the small intestine before it moves into the blood stream. From there it flows to the eye," Anderson said. "The eye is the last compartment for alcohol to get to, and it's the last place it leaves."
Garfinkle, who survived the accident with two broken legs, is still recovering. He said he did not know Bachan well, but was asked to escort her back to campus from the party at his fraternity, Lambda Alpha Chi. Garfinkle, who was 19 at the time of the accident, said that he was not drunk. "I'm a pretty good drinker," he said. "So I know I was not very drunk at all."
Garfinkle also said Bachan did not appear drunk. "She was not anywhere near inebriated. We had a full conversation," said Garfinkle. He remembers that they were talking about her hometown of Santa Barbara.
He said he looked both ways before crossing Jefferson Boulevard.
Cameron Kay, president of Lambda Chi Alpha, said the fraternity has strict rules that forbid underage drinking.
Kay said neither Garfinkle nor Bachan were drinking at the fraternity. "We take all the precautions we possibly can.We don't ever encourage underage drinking."
Beth Saul, in the student affairs office, explained that any Greek chapter that wants to throw a party must go through a rigorous review process. Saul is referring to sanctioned parties and not after-parties like the one at Lambda Chi.
Representatives of the chapters organizing the event must attend a planning meeting with Ray Carlos from student affairs, USC Department of Public Safety officials, and a member of Student Judicial Affairs and Community Standards.
The meeting must take place at least 10 days ahead of the event, and the students are required to submit very specific details about the party.
Saul said the necessary details include the location of the event, transportation arrangements if the party is off-campus, what food will be served, the procedure for checking IDs, a guarantee that non-alcoholic beverages will be available, and the number of people attending the event.
"There has to be some personal responsibility on the part of the students, too," she said. "We're not policemen, you know."
USC's Department of Public Safety said that its response to the hit-and-run had focused on working with the city to make the intersection safer and had not examined drinking at fraternities. DPS Capt. David Carlisle said that the department had made an enforcement push against underage drinking at fraternities during the semester before the incident, but since then had relied on fraternities to police themselves.
"We don't know if it reduced consumption of alcohol, but it reduced the number of complaints," he said, referring to the fall 2008 enforcement efforts.
Garfinkle insists that drinking should not be a factor in reviewing the accident and Adrianna Bachan's death: "If she was dead sober, we would still have gotten into that accident. If she was blackout, we would still have gotten into that accident. If the light was purple, we would still have gotten into the accident."
Andrew Khouri and John Guenther contributed reporting to this story.
I missed the editorial that ran with this piece urging the university to take a shot glass of responsibility here. Please post again. You did write an editorial about this, didn't you? If not, I know a few alums who would like to start a letter-writing, check-canceling campaign.
I'm a Boston alum and just catching up with this piece. Can't quite figure out the university's distinction between sanctioned frat parties and after-parties. It sounds like a legal distinction alone. The university is drawing lines in the sand again. Ethically and morally, the university must take more responsibility.
It's been a week since this story came out. No reaction from the administration? Let's not be content with the university's bury-its-head-in-the-sand mentality. This problem of irresponsible drinking will not go away, and Neon Tommy should demand answers. This story makes me sad about my alma mater.
So, like is this good journalism or gossip? Or is my aunt right when she says there isn't a difference?
This story makes me really sick. I completely agree that her blood alcohol content should not be considered a factor in this crime. The bottom line is that these two people were FULLY aware of the fact that they clearly either seriously injured two people or killed them and did not care. There is obviously a lot of debate over underage drinking and the responsibility that comes with kids choosing to drink and I know that people want to send the message that underage drinking is not okay. But what's NOT OKAY is hitting someone with your car and leaving them to die. Not just that, but actually picking them up off your car and throwing them on the ground to die. That is NOT OKAY. What kind of message would it be sending to say that what they did is okay. It shows a complete lack of responsibility, morality, and humanity in these two ADULTS.
Actually it is illegal to "drunk walk". It is called "public intoxication".
And she was a minor and it is illegal for minors to consume alcohol even though it is as common as speeding on the 405.
And who is blaming Adrianna for the accident? The guy wasn't drinking? And who is saying Cabrera and Luna aren't at fault?
The drinking is part of the story of the night especially if there are questions about who had the right of way. But no matter the answer to the question of right of way, the despicable actions of the driver and passenger were answered when they drove off.
So, why didn't the driver stop? Could she tell she hit a drunk student? And why not photo of Cabrera in MSM?
Cabrera and Luna knew they did something wrong (he fled to Mexico, remember?) and didn't do anything to help their victims. I'll bet they walk away with probation.
Why all the fuss about Adrianna's alcohol level?
The legal alcohol level is .08 for someone who is DRIVING. Who was driving? Certainly not Adrianna.
As usual let's blame the victim and distract the attention from the real issue. Come on people, Luna ran a red light, KILLED Adrianna, got Marcus caught through the windshield, into the dashboard (I wonder what the speed was), Cabrera PULLED Marcus off with no regards for this boy's safety and then they just took off. NO RESPONSIBILITY TAKEN. And here we are discussing whether these kids had been drinking or not??? Journalism has reached an all time low.
As long as we are pointing fingers, let's not forget, Luna had a suspended license. What? No penalty for this!! From now on I'm not renewing my license or getting insurance. Obviously, it is not against the law!!!!
It's not illegal to "drunk walk." Plus Garfinkle was sober and guided her across the street.
The blood alcohol level of Adrianna should not be factor in the case. It has been stated that the students had a green light to cross the street, and therefore had the right of way. AND the fact that it was a "hit and run" is more important. Adrianna's BAC should not overshadow and of the horrific events that happened that night.
Why is anyone even dealing with the blood alcohol level of someone run down IN a cross walk with a green light?
This is a terrific example of how FACTS and the actual crime becomes distorted through diversion.
Its an example of what happens in politics.
College students have been drinking for 500 years and will continue to do so. If someone dies or kills someone because of it then they need to be punished if they are the one that lives. But this has NOTHING to do with what is clearly an open and shut case where the defendants actions are indefensible.
Not to mention the cold blooded removal of Garfinkle's body off the hood. Eee bloody gads.
Who ARE these people?
Jenna, I just read this piece too and I am also a USC student and a sorority sister. I don't think anybody here is blaming USC. But I think all of us know just HOW much drinking does go on and nobody says boo. That has nothing to do directly with the case of Adrianna, RIP. But the school does very little to keep a lid on things. And if the defense uses her alcohol level they will be "pigs." But the whole thing is sad. None of this should have ever happened.
Garfinkle insists that drinking should not be a factor in reviewing the accident and Adrianna Bachan's death: "If she was dead sober, we would still have gotten into that accident. If she was blackout, we would still have gotten into that accident. If the light was purple, we would still have gotten into the accident.
This is all this article needed to say. As a current USC student I know I speak on behalf of our student body when I say that what happened was a complete tragedy and in no way should Adrianna's alcohol level be a mitigating factor to the irresponsible atrocity committed by Cabrera and Luna. In fact, I hope the defense brings it up during the trial, because it is a cowardly excuse of a defense for such a blatant crime.
As a member of the Greek community I find it unfair to link USC and their 'oversight' into the Greek system with this tragedy. Students cross that intersection after leaving house parties, apartment parties, or Greek parties. USC cannot be held responsible for off campus, after hours social activities and I think it is unfounded to cite a lack of USC involvement in such situations. I look forward to this trial and my thoughts are with Adrianna, Marcus, and their families.
OH FOR GOD'S SAKE. I'm a recent USC alum who was in a fraternity. I dare Neontommy to take a poll of USC students on Kay's quote.
Not that I'm indicating the fraternity should in some way be held responsible; the U.S. drinking age of 21 is so commonly broken as to be an illegitimate law, and furthermore, there MUST be some accountability on the part of the adult drinker, even if they're under 21.
But that's a separate debate. And whatever your feelings on the U.S. drinking age, or the culpability of the fraternity here, we can't allow statements that tens of thousands of current students would howl at with laughter to pass without a critical eye.
A good but sad story. This in no way vindicates the criminals who ran over these kids. But it sure raises some questions about "Greek" life and about USC closing its eyes to what goes on there.
We don't know for sure that the car ran a red light. The driver is charged with MISDEMEANOR manslaughter for a reason. Because PD can't prove that was the case. If they could prove the light was red, it would be gross vehicular. The police have been feeding that line the whole time - very effectively - to draw community sympathy and support. Seemed to work. They caught the folks.
As a friend of Adrianna's, this article once again makes me miss her. Regardless, I think that her blood alcohol level should not be viable evidence to strengthen the case of the defendants. Clearly they did something that was against the law and they should be punished to the full degree. Running a red light, driving without a license, and then removing a body off the hood of their car should not be taken lightly. Although underage drinking is against the law, Adri did not do something that would jeopardize her life to the the extent of death. The university also should not be at fault for this because there is no way they can regulate what their students do on their free time. Whether partying at a fraternity or drinking somewhere else with their friends. Adri's alcohol level is not relevant to the case since she was walking across the crosswalk during a green light. Whether sober or not it could have happened to anyone.