Hey, there! Log in / Register

Wrong-way driver on 95 and 93 only causes one crash, State Police say

State Police report arresting a Norwell man on a variety of charges, including operating under the influence of both alcohol and drugs, after he allegedly careened the wrong way down both I-95 and I-93 last night.

The driver of a vehicle going the right way on I-95 was forced into a guardrail to avoid Ahmed Ziad, 24, but was not injured, State Police say.

State Police say motorists began calling them around 11:30 p.m. to report somebody driving north on the southbound side of I-95 in the Walpole/Norwood area.

A short time later a caller reported a wrong way driver with a matching description on Route 93, going north in the southbound lane. The driver at some point corrected his direction and began heading south on the southbound side of Route 93, heading toward Route 95/128 north.

Moments after midnight a trooper located a car matching the description of the suspect vehicle – a silver 2009 Toyota Corolla – and conducted a stop on the off-ramp at Exit 20B in Wellesley.

Ziad was charged with OUI, operating under the influence of drugs, negligent operation, driving the wrong way on a state highway, marked-lanes violation, making an illegal U-turn, leaving the scene of a crash and a motor-vehicle violation, State Police say. He was scheduled for arraignment in Dedham District Court today.

Innocent, etc.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Free tagging: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

charged with both wrong way operation AND making an illegal U-turn to correct his error. What was he supposed to do to turn around, exit via an entrance ramp? Sometimes this "let's pile on as many charges as we can" mentality can get out of hand.

up
Voting closed 0

The marathon bomber was charged and found guilty of 30 crimes. One of those charges made no sense: interfering with interstate commerce. Supposedly when he carjacked the guy in Cambridge and made him withdraw cash from the ATM, that was "interstate commerce" because the bank's headquarters were out of state. Of course he's guilty of carjacking and robbery and theft, but interstate commerce? C'mon.

The jury should have tossed that one out. It makes me wonder if they were really paying attention.

up
Voting closed 0

The defense attorney should have challenged that charge PRIOR to the trial even getting underway. Unless they were of the "if found guilty of the charge, we'll challenge it on appeal" mentality that seems to be increasingly prevalent among attorneys these days.

up
Voting closed 0

that has been effectively used for years. Sort of like charging Al Capone with tax law violations - it gets the defendant into the arena of being subjected to federal law.

State law regarding conspiracy is difficult to prove under a strict constructionist view of what constitutes conspiracy.

Whereas under federal terrorism conspiracy statue it is a violation of federal law for anyone to take an action that: is in violation of U.S. or state law, kills, maims, or injures another within the U.S., and is committed by using interstate mail or interferes with interstate commerce.

(18 U.S.C. §2332b.) Interstate commerce is very broadly defined and covers almost any kind of commercial venture that goes on in America. Shortly after the Boston Marathon bombing, federal aviation authorities halted flights into and out of Logan International Airport in Massachusetts. The government could use this and many other effects of the bombing to show that it interfered with interstate commerce.

Any person who conspired with anyone who committed at least one of the acts in violation of this terrorism statute can also be tried under the statute.

Convicting the principal in this case allowed the feds to effectively go after his college room-mates.

up
Voting closed 0

I also think it just means he isn't charged with 2 crimes (Armed robbery and interstate commerce). This shouldn't be a big deal.

Gun crimes are prosecuted this way as well at the federal level. Unless you are using Smith and Wesson products in your illegal firearm activity, you are pretty much always going to be subject to federal laws as well. Gangbangers who are on the radar are often charged federally for simple gun possession crimes found by local police departments.

up
Voting closed 0

The appropriate action if one finds oneself driving the wrong way on a highway is to PULL OVER AND STOP.

Bangin a youie in fronna cahs doing 70 mph is an additional what-the-fahk that deserves another chahge, bro.

up
Voting closed 0

yes i have a cousin that's a cop, several actually. i recently received this from steve who is a town cop on the south shore. he said this was going around amongst the police and their families.

Take this information for what it is worth. Some of you may be aware of the fatal M.V accident recently in Middleboro.

A trooper recently remarked that people should not drive in the high speed lane on a highway after 11pm. It would make sense that this would be the slow lane for an operator who is under the influence that is traveling in the wrong direction.

This has changed my way of thinking.

up
Voting closed 0

drive in the high speed lane unless they're passing others, that is very good advice. My father (who was NOT a LEO) actually taught me that (about wrong way drivers) when I was first learning to drive in 1978.

up
Voting closed 0

I too was taught to stay to the right. (I think you are also less likely to get a speeding ticket there as well.) My wife on the other hand thinks the devil lives in the slow lane and will only drive there when approaching her exit. It drives me crazy (no pun intended!)

up
Voting closed 0

Take a long road trip, and you will discover that there are times/reasons to take the left lane for longer stretches. Those reasons are:
1. Right lane pavement mostly destroyed by trucks. It makes no sense to risk flats/damage/being stuck in the the far flung outback of the middle of the continent due to anal retentive rule following when there is a perfectly good travel lane next to you.
2. Shitloads of on/off ramps in a short run. Why put yourself at risk of constant too short merge lanes and people cutting you off to make an exit when you can cruise along without conflict.
3. Areas of wildlife. There are stretches of the Trans Canada where you are advised to not stay in the right lanes at night because of the risk of Moose and Deer bolting into the road. This is only where they don't closely crop the trees and grass next to the highway. Being in the left lane gives you a chance to see wildlife entering the roadway.

up
Voting closed 0

You should never drive in the left lane of a highway unless you are passing a vehicle. This is state law. it doesn't matter if the lane is too bumpy for you. This is a matter of public safety.

up
Voting closed 0

Notice that I was talking about travelling long distances? MA does not have those.

Not driving for 14 hours straight long distances, my dear. MA also has these things called cities and towns. Cross the continent and there will be times that you are hundreds of miles from one of those. Not a place you want to be changing to a 40mph donut.

In any case, you are allowed to change lanes to avoid road hazards. You might read that part, darling. If they want people to use the right lane, they need to maintain it.

You should try driving somewhere a long way away or even in another country sometime. You might find that other places are different and don't always have these antiquated rules. Leave the little parochial nest and who knows what you might discover - even signs TELLING you to drive in the left lane!

up
Voting closed 0

You did notice we were talking about driving in Massachusetts.

But anyway, having driven I-5 between Olympia and Bellingham enough times, let me go on about how bad West Coast drivers are. They insist on driving in the left lane, needlessly causing congestion. That's why you keep left unless passing- they'll always be another driver going faster than you. It's simple. An easy rule. But sure, keep on driving 54 in the left lane, just so you won't hit a moose.

up
Voting closed 0

but you are required to change back after the hazard is passed. This does not allow for left lane travel in "long stretches".

I have driven long distances all over the United States. Everywhere that I've been encourages (if not requires) drivers to stay to the right unless passing. And guess what? In some places, people actually do it! And somehow, when people follow that "antiquated rule", traffic flows much more smoothly!

up
Voting closed 0

a "Keep Right Except To Pass" law on their controlled-access highways. And, in the 37+ years of having a driver's license, I have driven nearly 500k miles on long distance trips, including two cross-country drives. Not once have I ever seen any signs REQUIRING through traffic to stay in the left lane.

up
Voting closed 0

I realize that you are fundamentally unable to deal with complicated realities, but in many states, you are only operating illegally in the left lane if you are impeding traffic. You are NOT required to travel in the right lane and ONLY pass in the left. You are required to move over if you are not passing someone when Johnny Arsehole flashes his lights.

http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/right.html

In Roadman's Screwyland Alternate Universe, an entire four lane highway is empty except for the permanent traffic jam in the right lane because its just so. Like that's going to work.

up
Voting closed 0

unless you are passing someone. That's state law. To me, that's a better reason to stay to the right than the fear of a highly-unlikely wrong-way driver (who could hypothetically be in any lane, at any time).

up
Voting closed 0

You should drive in such a way to allow for an "escape route" if you need to quickly merge into an adjacent lane. Since many MA roads have no left shoulder, staying out of the left lane leave it open to quickly marge into should the need arise.

up
Voting closed 0

I learned a bit of this in driver's ed way back but I've taught myself much more. I always give myself room to go around a car and try very hard not to get boxed in.
I've been rear ended enough that l leave space in front of me to move up when a douche is coming up too quick from behind.

Situational awareness is critical for traffic safety and to respond to criminal behavior.

up
Voting closed 0