Shock, disgust, and outrage. That was our reaction when reading of the many traffic citations Sean E. Kearney had piled up since he was given his driver's license four years ago.
Kearney, 20, who resides in Carnation, committed yet another infraction on July 18, and it resulted in a fatality: He was passing in a "no passing" zone on U.S. 97 near Toppenish, and that illegal move resulted in a head-on collision that tragically claimed the life of Klickitat County Sheriff's Office Sgt. Peter Garland.
Reviewing Kearney's record shows an obvious lack of interest in paying attention to traffic laws. Given his many citations, it is unbelievable that he was allowed to continue driving. Take a look at this picture. It portrays an out-of-control scofflaw:
Dec. 14, 2004: Kearney, 17, is given a "deferred sentence" for speeding.
Feb. 15, 2006: Kearney, 18, is cited for exceeding the maximum speed limit in a school zone. His attorney (!) gets the citation dismissed.
May 26, 2006: Kearney is cited for driving too fast for conditions. Again, his attorney gets the charge dismissed.
June 20, 2006: Kearney is cited for speeding. His attorney gets the charge dismissed.
Sept. 5, 23006: Kearney, now 19, is cited for speeding -- 35 miles per hour over the speed limit -- and for passing in a no passing zone. He is found guilty of both charges and fined.
Dec. 16, 2006: Kearney is charged with speeding. He doesn't bother to show up for his court hearing, is found guilty and is fined.
Dec. 17, 2006: Kearney is charged with second-degree negligent driving. He fails to appear in court. He is found guilty and is fined.
June 12, 2007: Kearney is cited for speeding and for driving without insurance.
July 6, 2007: Kearney is cited for failing to notify the Department of Licensing of a change of address.
July 18, 2007: Kearney, driving a 2007 Audi, passes another vehicle in a no passing zone on U.S. 97. The infraction results in a head-on collision that takes a man's life.
First of all, how many of us -- especially at age 18 -- bring in an attorney to get a speeding charge dismissed? Most of us would just pay the fine and try to do better in the future. Not Kearney. This is someone who appeared to be getting used to being able to violate the law without consequences.
It seems that Kearney never had to worry about obeying the rules the rest of us are expected to follow. His history proves that. After he gets caught, he doesn't alter his behavior. Worse, even when he gets caught, he knows he'll find a way to get off the hook. His attorney (guessing here, but it's probably more accurate to say "his parents' attorney") has been seeing to that.
Several other points jump out: It's apparent that law enforcement officials were doing their job. Kearney was caught many times, but the system failed the police officers (and all of us) by not providing any real punishment for Kearney.
This case is a stark reminder that our legal system is in disarray. Same old story: If you (or your parents) have a lot of money, you don't necessarily have to trouble yourself worrying about the law. Some people simply find a way around those inconvenient rules. An attorney will exploit the legal system, find a typo on a citation or something else, and a person who is a danger to everyone around him will go free.
Someone with Kearney's record should not have been allowed to drive. End of discussion. His record is stark and disgraceful.
Whether it's the Legislature, the courts, administrators at the Washington Department of Licensing, or a combination of the above, the system failed all of us, and Sgt. Garland was the one who paid the ultimate price. It's too late for Sgt. Garland, but if there is any justice, Kearney will spend many years behind bars instead of behind the wheel.
The Legislature needs to pass better laws to get people like Kearney off the road, and they need to get started right now. Here's just one of the problems, for example: According to Washington state law, a driver can't get his or her driver's license renewed until all driving-related fines are paid. Big deal: Driver's licenses are good for five years, so that means an offender could conceivably go four years or longer before that little hitch would even become relevant.
And it's clear that the courts need to be stricter with sentencing for repeat offenders. What good is a fine when the person doesn't bother paying anyway? There ought to be viable provisions for jail time for second or third offenses -- not simply more fines that go unpaid.
How many more Kearneys are out there right now, driving carelessly, collecting citations, and not having to worry about it even if they get stopped by the police?
Commented