The 17-year-old driver of the SUV that on Treat Boulevard, has been released from juvenile hall.
The results of a police investigation into the circumstances of the accident which resulted in the death of Solaiman Nuri and his daughter, Hadessa Nuri, are expected to take close to two weeks, Concord Police Lt. Bill Roche said Monday, but in the meantime, the law requires the juvenile to be released.
The unidentified 17-year-old was arrested at the scene of the accident for vehicular manslaughter, but authorities can't keep him in jail unless formal charges are filed within 48 hours. That deadline was Tuesday at 4:30 p.m.
of an emotional Sunday evening candle-light vigil held in honor of the Nuris at the scene of the fatal accident.
The district attorney's office will not file charges until it receives a complete report on the accident from the Concord Police Department, and investigators are still compiling the report, police Lt. Bill Roche said.
"They want the entire packet done before they make the review. We still have a lot of work to do," Roche said.
The following statement was issued by the victims' family:
On behalf on the Karzai/Nuri family we would like to thank the People of Concord and the rest of the community who have reached out to our family and have been a great help in this time of pain. We would also like to thank the Concord police department and the district attorney for all of their hard work.
We understand this will be a long process and have been made aware the driver might be released today. We know this country has a justice system put in place and we respect it, that is why our families moved here over 27 years ago. At this time we are focused on being a family and Laying our loved ones to rest and letting the police do their job. Thank You
Emal Karzai
On behalf of the Karzai/Nuri family
Roche said investigators are poring over physical evidence, witness reports and the mechanical review of the vehicle involved, a white 2002 Cadillac Escalade. They are also looking into whether the teen was texting or talking on the phone and whether drugs or alcohol were involved in the accident, Roche said.
Police say the driver could be arrested again depending on the results of the investigation.
The car was traveling at an "excessive rate of speed" through the intersection when it went out of control, struck a fire hydrant, hit the bicyclists, then careened into a building, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Fire Marshal Lewis Broschard said.
"We believe speed to be a factor, but the sequence of events is still under investigation," Roche said.
Anyone with information on this incident is asked to call Traffic Officer Ken Carlson at (925) 603-5931
Want to help? The family set up a Memorial Fund:
Donations should be made to the "Solaiman and Hadessa Nuri Memorial Fund" at any Wells Fargo branch.
the account number is: 3268148529
- Bay City News contributed to this report.
Stay tuned by "Liking" Concord Patch on Facebook.
Did the driver lose control of the vehicle after swerving to avoid a wild animal (e.g. squirrel)? Did the driver lose control of the vehicle after swerving to avoid a stray domestic animal (e.g. cat, dog)? Did the vehicle malfunction (brakes, steering, accelerator, etc)? Was the driver temporarily blinded by a reflection or other visual impairment? Did the driver suffer a seizure? etc. etc. etc. Trayvon Martin DUKE LACROSSE All convicted by the public before all of the facts are known. Worse are the media clowns who exacerbate the hysteria, especially a local website that shamelessly published facebook screenshots that seriously inflamed the hysteria and probably polluted the jury pool.
What happened to sharing the road or the shoulder? I did not know the victims' family but felt obligated to join the funeral procession. I must say, few things bring tears to my eyes, unfortunately, this was one of them. In regards to the driver, he knows where and how he screwed up and I hope he gets what he would want if someone did this to his family the way he did.
http://serve.castfire.com/video/937585/937585_2012-04-12-002625.html
Do you have conclusive evidence that the vehicle did NOT malfunction? No, you don't. Ever heard of SUDDEN ACCELERATION? Educate yourself: http://suddenacceleration.com/ My point is very simple: NONE OF YOU MORONS KNOW ALL OF THE FACTS, BUT ALL OF YOU MORONS HAVE ALREADY CONVICTED THE DRIVER IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC HYSTERIA.
That's absolutely irrelevant to this issue. Put down your "Thesaurus for Political Lunatics" and start reading a book about factual analysis, especially the chapter on unsound conclusions based on incomplete facts. Also, learn the difference between an excuse and an explanation. It's clear that I am the only person capable of "thinking for myself" and performing sound factual analysis.
You tried to use BIG WORDS and don't even know the correct spelling. "most likely" and "usually" do not equal certainty. You are guilty of stupidity beyond a "most likely" / "usually" doubt.
What *do* we know? 1. He exhibit the external trappings of being a loser/thug. 2. He lost control while driving at an unsafe speed. Should we hear his side of the story and get more facts? Of course. But, given what we DO know, it would be irrational to pretend that we don't already know enough to make a reasonable guess as to where this will land. If anyone sincerely believes that a coin toss is as predictive of guilt here as anything we know know, I would offer a substantial even money bet that he will be found culpable. That said, this feels like vehicular manslaughter, not murder.
As for these people's lack of any remorse, they are not under investigation. For them to show even a small amount of remorse for the family thats destroyed does not show any guilt. They werent behind the wheel when it happened and even though it was their offspring it does not indicate guilt for them to show simple remorse without any other statement.
Sometimes, a specific act of a parent (e.g., giving an untrained and erratic kid a loaded gun) can be so reckless as to be a crime, but I think you are suggesting a crime of "criminal parenting" (in general) and/or vicarious strict criminal liability for all acts of kids. I see the appeal in terms of incentives to be better parents, but also kind of a rough rule....