Police say they know who caused a three-car crash on the Tobin before running away and will hunt him down

State Police say they've identified a Chelsea man as the person who caused a crash that injured five people on the Tobin Bridge around 11:30 a.m. and that once they find him will charge him with a variety of offenses, including speeding and leaving the scene of an accident.

State Police say the Corolla driver, 38, ran down the ramp from the lower deck into Chelsea, leaving his passenger, a 38-year-old woman from Roxbury, to fend for herself.

A Melrose woman in a Honda CRV was taken to Mass. General with minor injuries. A man, a woman and two children in a Sentra were also taken to Mass. General with possible minor injuries.



Free tagging: 


Bleeping GENIUS! This is

By on

Bleeping GENIUS! This is exactly why we pay for accident's caused by uninsured drivers.(or maybe this scum has a warrant)

So if a driver hits a car and

By on

So if a driver hits a car and flees the scene they chase them down and charge them, but if a driver hits a cyclist or pedestrian and flees the scene, the police say the driver probably just didnt know they hit anyone dangit and give them an atteboy.

Not that I believe they were

By on

Not that I believe they were able to flee the scene, but does anyone know what happened to the driver (and the passenger) of the BMW who struck and killed 2 people on Beacon St. a few weeks ago?


The media forgot about it already.

Seriously though, from what it seems, they didn't have to flee the scene because they just walked away free anyway. Last I heard, the police can't figure out who was actually driving, and somehow when 2 people that were in a car give conflicting information about which one blew a red light and killed 2 people, all hands are tied.

You missed a few things in the story

By on

I'm just going to concentrate on the biggest one.

He physically ran from the accident, leaving his damaged automobile and injured passenger behind. He literally hit and ran. Not hit and drove off, hit and ran.

Trust me, if a motorist his a pedestrian or bicyclist and ran off, leaving his/her vehicle behind, they would be charged with hit and run.


The great thing about hitting bicyclists is it doesn't hurt your car.

Oh, I get it

He was a pedestrian on the Tobin. That means they bother to track him down?


You've got me wrong

By on

He was driving. He caused an accident, injuring amongst others the passenger in his car. He left the damaged car and ran off the bridge.

This was not a good example for the anti-car crowd. Again, if he drove and hit a bicyclist or pedestrian, obviously someplace where one can ride a bike and/or walk, then left his damaged car behind, yes, that would be proof that he knew that he hit someone and didn't stay behind. I would imagine in a case like my theoretical, and there have been cases like this in the area in the past year, law enforcement would track the driver down and charge him with hit and run. I really don't want this to turn in to a discussion of other cases, but it seems others do. I was simply noting that in this case the driver gave ample physical evidence that in fact he knew he caused an accident, yet left the scene.

Yes, drivers hit people and things, then drive off. And yes, they often drive off with damage to their vehicle. This guy literally ran away.

Noted. Next time I hit a car

By on

Noted. Next time I hit a car I will make sure to drive away in my vehicle and not stop the car and get out, thereby acknowledging my guilt apparently, instead of verifying my innocence by driving away without stopping.

You can even stop and get out!

Remember the retired cop who hit a pedestrian/cyclist (can't remember) somewhere around Back Bay? I believe it was last year. He got out, looked around, claims he didn't see anything that he may have hit (despite witnesses claiming he looked right at the victim), and drove away.

Anyone remember the result of that? Were his charges dropped?

Were the charges dropped?

By on

That's a hefty assumption on your part.

Though not as bad as the assumptions based on the Beacon Street case. The commenter on that seems to want to skip the whole criminal process altogether.

Now you're assuming

Now you're assuming that you're guilty of assuming too much. You haven't been tried in the Court of Assumption yet; for now we can only press charges of 3rd degree assumption.


By on

You could be a good person and admit that you did wrong and accept the consequences.

By your logic, it would be better to rob and kill someone rather than just rob them. Also, what do you do if there are witnesses?

Look, I'm not trying to school an anon on what to do to get away with crimes. I'm just noting that there are things that you can do that would seem to indicate guilt. I'm pretty sure the hit and run statute is based on this idea that a guilty person doesn't run, while someone who sees that they did something wrong will stay and face the consequences.

I'm also not trying to get in the head of someone who hits a bird, a dog, a pedestrian, a cyclist, or anything or anyone else. However, wrecking your car, injuring your passenger, then running off is pretty bad.

Feel free to battle your battle. This isn't the example you should use.

Seriously people?

By on

You can't figure this one out? He's not here legally.
That begs the question: why did he run if he knows nothing will happen to him?


By on

This RAISES the question.

Not here legally

If he's not here legally, how were they able to identify him so easily? Honest question here, I don't know. If they have him documented as much as it sounds like they do, wouldn't he have already been nabbed? Or are they really that lax on tracking down the known illegal immigrants?

EDIT: or he could have overstayed a temporary visa, I suppose.

Or the injured passenger he

By on

Or the injured passenger he abandoned in the car could have pointed the cops right at him. "Undocumented" doesn't mean "unidentifiable."