ILNews

Letter to the editor: Distracted driving results in tragedy

April 28, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Letters to the Editor

Distracted driving results in tragedy

To the editor:

The other day as I was reading through the March 17-30, 2010 issue of Indiana Lawyer, my attention was called to David Temple’s article “Be smart: Don’t use cell phone while driving!”

On March 18, 2010, a very close friend was stopped at a stoplight near his family home in Minnesota. Carefully strapped into his car seat and soundly sleeping was his 14-month-old son, Grayson Paul Earl Jett. A woman reached to the passenger floor for her fallen cell phone and slammed into their stopped car. Grayson sustained head injuries and later died at the hospital. The police reported that Grayson’s death was completely preventable.


Grayson is – was – just 22 days younger than my own daughter. Daughters, sons, moms, dads, brothers, sisters, and others are dying needlessly every day due to distracted driving. I myself am guilty of cell phone use including texting, checking on Facebook, and making calls in the car. But not anymore.  


It should not take a personal loss to change our habits so innocent people are not impacted by our bad choices, but, it so often does. There is nothing more important than the lives in our vehicle and those around us. Grayson’s mom recently posted on Facebook that “if anything positive can come from this tragedy, it is that we are smarter and safer drivers, and the consequences of distracted driving have real bite.”


Thank you for bringing attention to this important issue. May your readers remember Grayson and others who have senselessly died and keep their eyes on the road while behind the wheel.

Safe travels,

Aimee R. Eller
Fishers
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

  2. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  3. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  4. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  5. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

ADVERTISEMENT