• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Breaking: South Dakota attorney general reported hitting a deer in his car, left the scene, cops found body of a man afterwards

Lightning Count

Lightning Count

Member
Jan 27, 2019
16,083
Fuck off
www.thedailybeast.com

South Dakota AG Involved in Fatal Car Accident Thought He Hit Deer: Cops

Documents obtained by a local newspaper showed state AG Jason Ravnsborg had been caught speeding in the past.
www.thedailybeast.com

South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg reported hitting a deer Saturday night, but was in fact involved in a fatal car crash whose victim was discovered the following morning, the Sioux Falls Argus-Leaderreports. Joe Boever, 55, has been identified as the person killed, and his cousin Victor Nemec told the paper, "The attorney general hit my cousin as he was walking down the side of the road and killed him."

The State Highway Patrol was taking the lead on the investigation, with additional help from North Dakota due to conflict of interest concerns, as Ravnsborg oversees the South Dakota Division of Criminal Investigation. According to Ravnsborg's chief of staff, he called 911 from the accident, and was uninjured.

Meanwhile, the Argus Leader reported Monday on documents showing the AG has been charged with speeding and other traffic offenses in the past.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is blowing up on social media as the attorney general has had 6 driving related offences between 2014 to 2018. Also ND are taking control of parts of the investigation to make sure there is no conflict of interest.
 
Camwi

Camwi

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,375
Dude must've been driving extremely fucked-up. His ass had better see prison time.
 
Hiphopopotamus

Hiphopopotamus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
7,885
The only real question is whether a blood test was done, but if the victim.wasnt found until the next morning there was probably enough time for alcohol to be metabolized.

No normal person would be free if they were involved in a deadly hit and run
 
Jag

Jag

Member
Oct 26, 2017
11,678
He was at a bar before the accident. More here:


The attorney general had been driving home to Pierre after attending the Spink County Lincoln Day Dinner in Redfield, Bormann said. The event was hosted at Rooster's Bar and Grill from 5 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., according to the website of the South Dakota GOP.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The event ended at 8:30. The accident was around 10:30. Was he still at the bar until he left to drive home?
 
JimD

JimD

Member
Aug 17, 2018
3,545
ElectricBlanketFire said:
Why would he bother to call 911 to say he hit a deer and get the attention of the police?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Because he knows the physical evidence would eventually tie the case back to him. If, say, he says nothing after hitting someone and is eventually caught, the "I thought it was a deer" excuse sounds tacked on. He thinks that by preemptively reporting the deer strike he's laid the ground work for a more believable argument in court.

I mean, I certainly don't think any of that is true. But for a guy desperate to cover up his crime it makes sense.
 
Cat Party

Cat Party

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,509
Rocketz said:
I'm going to assume he never even saw what he hit and never found the body if he stopped. It's hard to tell from the article where the body was found so I doubt it was in the road.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's the most logical explanation. Especially if he had been drinking.

JimD said:
Because he knows the physical evidence would eventually tie the case back to him. If, say, he says nothing after hitting someone and is eventually caught, the "I thought it was a deer" excuse sounds tacked on. He thinks that by preemptively reporting the deer strike he's laid the ground work for a more believable argument in court.

I mean, I certainly don't think any of that is true. But for a guy desperate to cover up his crime it makes sense.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That doesn't make any sense. "I thought I hit a deer" is not an excuse either way.
 
PrivateWHudson

PrivateWHudson

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,215
JimD said:
Because he knows the physical evidence would eventually tie the case back to him. If, say, he says nothing after hitting someone and is eventually caught, the "I thought it was a deer" excuse sounds tacked on. He thinks that by preemptively reporting the deer strike he's laid the ground work for a more believable argument in court.

I mean, I certainly don't think any of that is true. But for a guy desperate to cover up his crime it makes sense.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah, but it feels more like an actual cover up that way. Anyone who actually hit a deer would just call their insurance company the next morning, not the police. I've hit deer twice before, and never called the cops. Would only bother if the deer was in the road and a hazard.
 
ElectricBlanketFire

ElectricBlanketFire

What year is this?
Member
Oct 25, 2017
31,939
JimD said:
Because he knows the physical evidence would eventually tie the case back to him. If, say, he says nothing after hitting someone and is eventually caught, the "I thought it was a deer" excuse sounds tacked on. He thinks that by preemptively reporting the deer strike he's laid the ground work for a more believable argument in court.

I mean, I certainly don't think any of that is true. But for a guy desperate to cover up his crime it makes sense.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

What would stop him from parking the car in his garage for a month or two and use another vehicle or car service?

Not that I'm trying to help this guy cover up a murder, just seems like a pretty shoddy idea of a plan.
 
krazen

krazen

Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,323
Gentrified Brooklyn
ElectricBlanketFire said:
What would stop him from parking the car in his garage for a month or two and use another vehicle or car service?

Not that I'm trying to help this guy cover up a murder, just seems like a pretty shoddy idea of a plan.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

if you're playing the odds...getting it out of the way by dealing with the crime 'now' with a plausible excuse is much easier than going down the hiding evidence route.

Particularly since you're the AG, you know how to play the system like a fiddle in the former. The later, that's alot of covering up to do (report the car stolen? take it to a repair shop with blood? etc) which isn't his expertise.

Sadly, I don't see how he gets in real trouble here.
 
CrankyJay

CrankyJay

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,318
Squarehard said:
He's an AG, he knows how to play the game.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This.

This guy escaped the more serious of his charges because hit and run apparently only works if the prosecution can prove you knew you hit a person or property. If he says it was a deer, I don't think it extends to wildlife.

www.uticaod.com

Woman seriously injured when home struck by car

To say a St. James couple living near the 195 mile marker of Interstate 44 had a rude awakening Thursday morning would be an understatement. A car travelled off the highway and crashed into …
www.uticaod.com
 
Watchtower

Watchtower

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,739
source.gif
 
Saucycarpdog

Saucycarpdog

Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,517
This looks like an open and shut case of at least manslaughter.

But he'll probably get away with it cause laws that apply to citizens never seem to apply to politicians.
 
JimD

JimD

Member
Aug 17, 2018
3,545
Cat Party said:
That's the most logical explanation. Especially if he had been drinking.


That doesn't make any sense. "I thought I hit a deer" is not an excuse either way.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It is if you're arguing charges down. If say, he was drunk that elevates the charge, as does leaving the scene. He makes the argument that he thought it was a deer and somehow convinces a prosecutor or a jury, and he might only be convicted of a single count of involuntary manslaughter. So his idea was leave the scene to avoid the DUI and more serious manslaughter charge, and report the deer strike to try and avoid the leaving the scene charge.
 
JimD

JimD

Member
Aug 17, 2018
3,545
ElectricBlanketFire said:
What would stop him from parking the car in his garage for a month or two and use another vehicle or car service?

Not that I'm trying to help this guy cover up a murder, just seems like a pretty shoddy idea of a plan.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

In that situation he has to hope that the body won't be found. AND that no one saw his car in the area. Presumably this was a panic decision and he assumed the worst. He knows the police won't respond at all to a deer strike unless it's a road hazard or his car is disabled, so it really only draws attention if the body is found.
 
Squirrel Killer

Squirrel Killer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,150
Dr. Feel Good said:
In the Midwest you are taught in driving school to call the police.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I can second this. I also have heard of a case where a semi truck driver hit a guy on an interstate and thought it was a deer, but you know... it was a semi at interstate speeds not a passenger vehicle at 2-lane highway at night speeds.

I hope the 911 call and eyewitnesses can shed more light on his state at the time of the crash.
 
Achtung

Achtung

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,042
Woah.. what a crazy story.. obviously RIP to the poor person who lost their life and I hope they throw the book at this guy. Glad another state has taken over.
 
Cat Party

Cat Party

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,509
JimD said:
In that situation he has to hope that the body won't be found. AND that no one saw his car in the area. Presumably this was a panic decision and he assumed the worst. He knows the police won't respond at all to a deer strike unless it's a road hazard or his car is disabled, so it really only draws attention if the body is found.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This still doesn't make any sense. By calling in the deer strike, he places himself at the exact time and place of the accident. If he never calls in the crash, and just lays low for a little while, there would be nothing tying him to the accident. His actions are far more consistent with someone who didn't know he hit a person than someone who did, especially if alcohol was involved.
 
JimD

JimD

Member
Aug 17, 2018
3,545
Cat Party said:
This still doesn't make any sense. By calling in the deer strike, he places himself at the exact time and place of the accident. If he never calls in the crash, and just lays low for a little while, there would be nothing tying him to the accident. His actions are far more consistent with someone who didn't know he hit a person than someone who did, especially if alcohol was involved.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Nothing? What about physical evidence? You hit a person with a car, there's evidence on their body. If, say, he knows that people saw him in the area, then he knows that if a body is found it can be tied back to his car.
 
Jag

Jag

Member
Oct 26, 2017
11,678
Cat Party said:
This still doesn't make any sense. By calling in the deer strike, he places himself at the exact time and place of the accident. If he never calls in the crash, and just lays low for a little while, there would be nothing tying him to the accident. His actions are far more consistent with someone who didn't know he hit a person than someone who did, especially if alcohol was involved.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think police forensics are really good and really motivated for a hit and run murder. He may have been worried about evidence left at the scene that could identify his car. Paint, tire tracks, cameras on local houses, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.