Print 49 comment(s) - last by YashBudini.. on Feb 22 at 7:31 PM

Motorist Araceli Beas struck and killed a pedestrian with her car while allegedly posting a status to her Facebook on her phone

Some Facebook users are catching a lot of heat for the way they manage their accounts. For instance, attorneys in North Carolina have found that Facebook plays a huge role in most of their divorce cases. Now, one Facebook user may be facing serious charges for allegedly killing a pedestrian with her car while posting onto Facebook. 

Raymond Veloz, a 70-year-old Chicago resident, got into a fender-bender last December in South Chicago. According to police, Veloz stepped out of his vehicle to speak to the other motorist when Araceli Beas, who was driving south on Ewing Avenue, hit him with her car. 

Veloz was taken to Advocate Christ Medical Center in Oak Lawn, and was pronounced dead after bleeding to death from his injuries. 

Beas told police that she had struck Veloz because the sun was temporarily in her eyes, obstructing her vision. She was ticketed with failure to avoid striking a pedestrian.  

But Veloz's daughter, Regina Cabrales, filed a wrongful death lawsuit on Monday alleging that Beas was actually on Facebook while driving when she hit Veloz. According to the suit, Beas' Facebook page was updated at 7:54 a.m. by her mobile phone, which was the same time that Veloz had made a 911 call regarding his fender-bender. Also, Cabrales alleges that Beas was driving "without keeping a proper and sufficient outlook," and that the driver has violated an act set in 2009 that prohibits Illinois motorists from driving while using an electronic communication device.  

In response to the allegations, Beas and her mother said that Beas made the status update on Facebook several minutes earlier while parked, waiting for her car to warm up.  

The amount of money Cabrales is seeking in the lawsuit is currently unknown.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Chicago solution
By mdogs444 on 2/18/2011 9:06:53 AM , Rating: 5
This is extremely sad. I do not text/surf the net on my Android phone while I'm driving because its hard to concentrate when you take your eyes off the road for a split second. But short of disabling phones in the car all together, there isn't much you can do about it. And even that would be a bad idea - there are always emergencies that may require the use of a phone even when you're driving.

After living in Chicago for 4 years, I can honestly say its the most a$$-backwards place in the midwest. They have such a high crime rate, that instead of cracking down on criminals they'd rather just ban guns all together. The mayor and city council are blind to the fact that the people who commit these crimes do not care about the law and are just going to carry around illegal firearms that they buy on the streets. All this does is leave honest, law abiding citizens helpless.

With that being said, I can see their solution to this. Ban Facebook!

RE: Chicago solution
By wordsworm on 2/18/2011 9:30:27 AM , Rating: 3
I read a long time ago that the leading cause of accidents was radio fiddling. I don't know if that's still the case, but it struck me as funny that they didn't ban radios from cars. Considering they caused more accidents than alcohol, and alcohol was made illegal in cars (opened or consumed) it would have made sense to ban music in cars altogether.

My solution is a bit different: ban people from driving. That would take care of the problem.

RE: Chicago solution
By Treknologist on 2/18/2011 9:33:44 AM , Rating: 5
My solution is a bit different: ban people from driving. That would take care of the problem.

I'd say, ban idiots from driving. A person who kills someone because they are posting on Facebook while driving doesn't deserve to have a driver's license. She should have her license permanently removed in addition to being criminally charged.

RE: Chicago solution
By aegisofrime on 2/18/2011 10:42:43 AM , Rating: 4
Indeed, but prevention is better than cure. I'm all for banning this idiot from the road but the victim is dead already. :(

RE: Chicago solution
By sp33dklz on 2/18/2011 3:21:31 PM , Rating: 3
I have yet a simpler resolution to texting / surfing while driving. Ban cell-phone use while the vehicle is turned on or in motion. ONLY allow use of 911 services or a designated "emergency" phone call to a specific person in the event of an emergency, while the vehicle is moving.

I'm not the brightest, but it seems pretty simple to me.

Drivers are only going to get worse. I can't even drive home from work one day a week without avoiding some moron on their cell-phone, whether it be texting or talking.

RE: Chicago solution
By AEvangel on 2/18/2011 3:59:41 PM , Rating: 4
Don't we already have laws on the books to handle this like Reckless driving and involuntary vehicular manslaughter.

Not sure why we need anymore laws...the ones we already have seem sufficient.

RE: Chicago solution
By wordsworm on 2/21/2011 7:51:12 PM , Rating: 2
Since most of us are idiots, that would take most, if not all, of us off the road. No, I mean a step further: time for governments to start putting money hand-over-fist into autonomous driving vehicles research so that we can finally leave driving in the hands of a machine. it would never stop... it would never honk its horn or get drunk or be too busy to watch the road. Of all the would be drivers, this machine would be the only one that would measure up. In an insane world, it's the sanest choice.

RE: Chicago solution
By FITCamaro on 2/18/2011 11:56:31 AM , Rating: 3
It's Chicago. The politicians are criminals. Why would they pass laws to harm themselves or their families.

RE: Chicago solution
By Omega215D on 2/18/2011 11:04:13 PM , Rating: 2
SO the show Chicago Code isn't that far fetched huh?

RE: Chicago solution
By YashBudini on 2/22/2011 7:17:59 PM , Rating: 2
Could have just as been easily down south, and even worse.

RE: Chicago solution
By sgtdisturbed47 on 2/18/2011 12:52:36 PM , Rating: 5
I am thoroughly disgusted by the way people use Facebook so effing much that it gets in the way of their daily lives. People posting status updates while driving, while working, while at school, right before and right after sex, etc. It becomes such a huge part of their lives that it seems they cannot live without telling the world every single small insignificant detail of their day, as if anyone really cares. They CRAVE, with every fiber of their being, to be noticed and payed attention to. It's disgusting. What were they doing before facebook and MySpace? They were gossiping with their friends over the phone or through text or in person. Now, it gets plastered on their "walls" for the world to see, as if anyone could possibly give 2 sh!ts about their useless life. Or, they post something that is so vague, so incomplete, that it causes to people to ask questions. Posts like "HMMMMMM!!!!" or "OMG!!!" or "Why me?!?!". So desperate for attention, it makes me sick.

If Facebook went under (wont happen any time soon), I wouldn't miss it.

RE: Chicago solution
By sp33dklz on 2/18/2011 3:23:02 PM , Rating: 1
^^^ Bravo!

RE: Chicago solution
By DominionSeraph on 2/18/2011 4:56:53 PM , Rating: 1

"DominionSeraph is correcting spelling."

I gotta tweet about this one.

RE: Chicago solution
By Deathtwinkie on 2/18/2011 5:49:19 PM , Rating: 2

I'm so tired of seeing pointless status updates, vague nonsense that nobody cares about. Just stuff that I can't even imagine that their friends care about.
At one point, I got so upset at the pointless garbage that I started doing status updates myself every couple mins.

"I'm looking to the north"
"Bananas smile pretty"
"Trees are silly"
"I'm driving north everybody, I'll keep you posted"
"I think that stuff is cool"
"I'm walking into a building"

etc. Annoy everyone back and make a point

RE: Chicago solution
By Omega215D on 2/18/2011 7:40:27 PM , Rating: 2
People are self absorbed, it's nothing too surprising and will only get worse as Americans will get hooked on more reality TV...

RE: Chicago solution
By lolmuly on 2/18/2011 12:56:28 PM , Rating: 3
the only reasonable time to be doing anything on your phone in your vehicle is when you are at a complete stop. Anyone caught texting while driving should have their license permanently revoked.

RE: Chicago solution
By Omega215D on 2/18/2011 7:39:09 PM , Rating: 2
Just like the mayor of NYC and in fact it's because of our mayer Chicago and other cities are doing a ban on guns meanwhile criminals still have ways of getting their hands on one or use other types of weapons instead. Like a butcher knife like last week's incident.

RE: Chicago solution
By Omega215D on 2/18/2011 7:45:26 PM , Rating: 2
wtf? how'd I let that one slip? mayor...

Status Update!
By Rage187 on 2/18/2011 9:42:55 AM , Rating: 5
Status Now: Going to Jail!

RE: Status Update!
By AnnihilatorX on 2/18/2011 11:37:06 AM , Rating: 2
I think it'd be
"I'm driving :)"

RE: Status Update!
By xsilver on 2/19/2011 6:57:07 AM , Rating: 2
more like:

status: just hit a speedbump - for some reason it groaned at me?

RE: Status Update!
By YashBudini on 2/22/2011 7:20:48 PM , Rating: 2
Status Now: Going to Jail!

Mug shot replaces prior FB photo.

30 years in prison should be a wake-up message
By Beenthere on 2/18/2011 10:26:40 AM , Rating: 2
This is precisely why it shoudl be illegal to use any electronic device, aka TOY, while driving.

By silverblue on 2/18/2011 11:04:36 AM , Rating: 2
I have noticed that the more you tell people not to do something, the more they feel inclined to ignore the advice... sad really. so, it may make more sense to adapt phones so that they go into airplane mode when within a certain distance of, say, a steering wheel. It can't be impossible to accomplish, however, in the light of more and more cars coming with phone connectors, the temptation is becoming too much.

Fiddling with a radio is bad enough; that's why manufacturers put controls on the steering column. I'm dreading the day that some bright spark incorporates a head-up display for the Internet, unless it deactivates when the clutch is depressed when stationary. The driver really shouldn't be distracted.

By Beenthere on 2/18/2011 11:42:08 AM , Rating: 2
Personal responsibility, common sense and good judgment are out of fashion thus more extreme measures are required for the brain dead.

They won't be driving distracted if they are in prison for 30 years.

By FITCamaro on 2/18/2011 12:23:14 PM , Rating: 1
Sweet. Guess electric cars are out then. They're an electronic device. In fact all cars are these days.

Banning devices does nothing. It's impossible to enforce. Laws already exist to prosecute people for bad driving.

By Beenthere on 2/18/2011 1:27:59 PM , Rating: 2
Electric cars are not electronic toys... EV's may be impractical but that's another story.

Yes there are laws and that is precisely why the laws must be enforced and why these people need to go to prison for 30 years.

By ClownPuncher on 2/18/2011 2:35:31 PM , Rating: 2
If they kill someone, sure. 30 years for reckless driving? Maybe in Saudi Arabia.

More charges
By DigitalFreak on 2/18/2011 9:03:46 AM , Rating: 5
She should be charged with vehicular manslaughter at the very least.

RE: More charges
By MrBlastman on 2/18/2011 11:44:53 AM , Rating: 3
You want to know what is messed up? She might not be charged at all with anything other than that initial citation.

My Grandfather was killed about ten years ago by a 21-year old girl driving her car 60 MPH in a 35 mph zone. She was rounding a right-hand turning bend in the road and slammed into the side of his car, broad-siding him while he was making a left-hand turn into a fast-food restaurant. In this right-hand turning bend of the road, there is a blind spot where he could not see anyone coming, and, had she been following the posted speed-limit, she would not have hit and subsequently killed him as a result of it. The damage at the scene of the accident more than supported the speed she was travelling. She was in a much smaller car and he was in an 80's Broham Cadillac (a big, heavy car).

Net result? The police did not file charges against her, she walked away free... and, weeks later her family investigated methods to sue my Grandfather's estate. Thankfully though, the lawsuit never went through.

As of now, all they have is circumstantial evidence. They know she posted on her Facebook account at the same time the victim called 911. That does not tell us what time the impact occured. We also do not know where she came from prior to the impact. Testing will need to be done to substantiate the plausibility of her travelling the distance from her origination point to the impact point giving her enough time beforehand to make the post while parked.

In other words, it will be a very difficult and torturous court battle I bet.

The really sad thing is, Justice doesn't always work out like you think it should. My Grandfather is six feet under to this day and she's lived a normal (though I bet bothered life emotionally if she has any empathy) life.

If they can prove though that she was indeed Facebooking while driving, manslaughter in the first degree at least, second degree murder if they really want to make precident to show others not to do it.

RE: More charges
By Omega215D on 2/18/2011 7:42:41 PM , Rating: 2
maybe there's a time stamp for data usage on the provider's end.

is it just me
By kleinma on 2/18/2011 9:30:43 AM , Rating: 1
Sorry, the editor in me is coming out, but isn't this somewhat redundant?

"pronounced dead after bleeding to death"

RE: is it just me
By Fritzr on 2/18/2011 10:26:37 AM , Rating: 2
Nope. First part is action taken & second part is basis of action,

Similar to "The driver hit a tree after leaving the road"

It could have been worded "pronounced dead after bleeding", but that sounds really, really strange.

RE: is it just me
By Motley on 2/18/2011 10:33:37 AM , Rating: 2
Not really. You can be pronounced dead without bleeding to death, and you can bleed to death without being pronounced dead.

RE: is it just me
By YashBudini on 2/22/2011 7:31:01 PM , Rating: 2
Or you can get 1 for $8 and 1 for $2.
Or you can get 1 for $6 and 1 for $4.
Or you can get 1 for $6 and 2 for $2.
Or you can get 5 for $2.
Or you can get 1 for $4 and 3 for $2.

Did she do it?
By mikable on 2/18/2011 9:39:12 AM , Rating: 2
First if she did txt and drive she should pay. But did she in fact do it? I would like to see the evidence before I vilify her

RE: Did she do it?
By kattanna on 2/18/2011 9:44:09 AM , Rating: 2
aye. comparing time stamps seems to be the only "proof" here. if she was parked down the street and made the update while her car was parked, left and hit the guy, then it could be just a very bad situation.

but.. that doesnt make for sexy page grabbing headlines.

RE: Did she do it?
By retrospooty on 2/18/2011 10:31:25 AM , Rating: 2
"I would like to see the evidence before I vilify her "

That is soooooo last century.


RE: Did she do it?
By roykahn on 2/19/11, Rating: 0
It might be tough to prove...
By MrTeal on 2/18/2011 9:04:28 AM , Rating: 5
But if it turns out the lady was updating her Facebook when she hit the guy, they should file criminal charges. She should spend as much time or more in prison as someone who kills someone with their car while drunk.

By Camikazi on 2/18/2011 11:30:07 AM , Rating: 2
Seems someone needs to check to see if the times do match up, just compare the 911 time to the current time on Facebook, if they are not in sync (with Facebook being off by a few minutes) then she might have actually been parked when update was posted. If the times are the same then it becomes more likely (but not positive) that she was posting at the time of the accident.

RE: Time
By Solandri on 2/18/2011 4:41:34 PM , Rating: 2
Given that a death was involved, they need to subpoena the cell phone tower records so they can get the exact time (down to the second) her phone was transmitting data. If they* are lucky, she also had something using the GPS running in the background and have locations to go with the timestamps.

*"they" being she if she really was parked while updating Facebook. Otherwise, "they" would be the family of the deceased if she was updating Facebook while driving.

First off....
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/18/2011 12:15:30 PM , Rating: 2
Unless this person KNOWS this person, how the hell does she know she posted on FB?

RE: First off....
By kraeper on 2/18/2011 4:57:31 PM , Rating: 2
I dunno, maybe by googling the person who killed your father/grandfather/uncle/whatever? Facebook searches aren't hard, and if you're planning to sue someone, you might as well gather all the free and easy evidence you can.

By Souka on 2/18/2011 6:01:28 PM , Rating: 2
Araceli Beas struck and killed a pedestrian with her car

"with her car" Enough said...

RE: yup
By YashBudini on 2/22/2011 7:27:51 PM , Rating: 2
Got bigotry?

Wrong pictures
By SpaceJumper on 2/18/11, Rating: -1
RE: Wrong pictures
By YashBudini on 2/22/2011 7:23:10 PM , Rating: 1
That's the "Havoc" guy from the Allstate commercials.

All the photos are parodies, where have you been?

RE: Wrong pictures
By YashBudini on 2/22/2011 7:26:28 PM , Rating: 2
I got downrated for explaining something?

Man the pubs are extremely anti-people around here.

But hey, thanks for proving what you are.

"I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For [Paramount] to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks!" -- Movie Director Michael Bay

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki