Hey, there! Log in / Register

State Police: Repeat drunk driver flips his car in Hyde Park forest, killing his passenger

A Walpole man now facing his fourth OUI charge was arrested early this morning after flipping his car on Enneking Parkway near the intersection with Turtle Pond and Dedham parkways, killing his passenger, then leaving the scene, State Police report.

Jeffrey Mason, 42, faces charges of OUI, fourth offense, motor-vehicle homicide while intoxicated, speeding, crossing marked lanes, negligent operation and leaving the scene of an accident causing personal injury, State Police say.

State Police say Mason lost control of his 2003 Accord around 2:30 a.m. and the car rolled over.

The female passenger was pronounced dead at the scene. Her identity is being withheld pending family notification.

The road was shut until 5 a.m. for an investigation.

Innocent, etc.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Ad:

Comments

this is absolutely horrible, but i'm not seeing where it says "while his passenger died" - that seems like an assumption no? She could have died instantly

up
Voting closed 0

One of the charges was leaving the scene of an accident, but, yes, she could have died instantly. I've reworded the sentence.

up
Voting closed 0

...looks like he just rain straight off the road at the sharp curve. Tragic.

up
Voting closed 0

yesterday morning...it appears the guys never turned at the curve and went into a tree, or rolled the car. a few tire marks. pretty sad

up
Voting closed 0

Six months jail, six months probation, and he gets his license back after.

Why is it so hard to conceive of driving drunk even once = jail?

up
Voting closed 0

OUI 4th is 1 yr minimum mandatory and a breath test refusal results in a lifetime loss of license. With the homicide and leaving the scene charges, he's looking at plenty more additional jail time.

up
Voting closed 0

This is an OUI 4th with a fatal accident. The OUI carries a 10 year suspension and the fatal will put him in jail for a while.

up
Voting closed 0

First time offense, no aggravating circumstances (ie causing an accident, children in car, etc) should not equal jail for anyone. We lock up too many people in this country as it is. Prison needs to be for those who willfully harm others, or demonstrate a wanton disregard for others. That said, I think a 4-time DUI certainly qualifies as a wanton disregard. Lock the asshole up.

up
Voting closed 0

If you drink to legal intoxication and drive, then you have wanton disregard for others. Make a plan before you drink. Jail time for 1st offenders can be served on weekends so they can still work. Clearly the current system does not discourage repeat offenders.

up
Voting closed 0

Drunk driving is just one of those things that happens, like earthquakes or shark attacks. It's not like we can punish people when they do it, and it's not like we can predict that someone is going to do it again just because they've done it repeatedly. May as well try to legislate the tides.

up
Voting closed 0

....sending people to jail for reckless operation of a motor vehicle resulting in dead or serious injury, where is the effort to PREVENT this type of accident?

After 3 OUIs, nobody saw this coming???

up
Voting closed 0

After 2 OUIs you should be on a serious suspension (probably with an interlock), a third should get you a revocation (and DEFINITELY an interlock of restated) and a 4th rates shipping you off to a country that bans alcohol.

up
Voting closed 0

How the hell did this murderous drunken driver get chewed up and spit right out of the system 4 times like this, especially since he ended up killing somebody (his passenger)? The drunk driver in question should have his license and his car pulled, and he should be carted off to the clink. I hope that happens, in the near future.

up
Voting closed 0

Level 1, level 2, level 3, depending on how likely they are to re-offend? Post photos and information in public about them? Make them register with local PDs? Do something similar with domestic abusers? Current approaches to repeat drunk drivers don't seem to be effective enough.

Definitely, anyone getting into a car with one needs to wear a seat belt.

up
Voting closed 0

This guy was arrested 3 times not convicted all you idiots that go out to dinner with the wife have 1 beer and glass of wine with dinner are over the legal limit

up
Voting closed 0

Don't keep getting arrested. There's kind of a pattern going on here. And are you sure he wasn't convicted the first three times?

up
Voting closed 0

he was i no him the guy Sullivan and mike no him too they shouldn't be blogging about a friend over this i guess they weren't really friends

up
Voting closed 0

Bob I don't think I know him it is a tragedy

up
Voting closed 0

First off, your premise is faulty. A beer and a glass of wine with dinner (2 drinks in 60 minutes) for a 200 lb man is a 0.024% BAC, well under the legal limit not over. But let's for the sake of argument assume that we've all had 3 beers and 2 glasses of wine instead, so we're at 0.085% BAC and legally not allowed to drive.

Guess how many times people have probably driven home after hitting 0.08%, as you say, and been over the legal limit. Let's even say 12 times a year. Once a month, they throw it all back and jump in the car. How many times do you think any of them have ever been pulled over for it, let alone arrested and charged, let alone convicted? None? Is that why they're so cavalier about your friend? Maybe so.

Now, contrast that with your friend. Arrested 3 times and now arrested after killing someone. Odd that he has such a different interaction with police as a result of his drinking and driving than all the other people that you consider to be hypocrites.

So, not only are you wrong about what it takes to blow a 0.08% BAC but you're wrong that they shouldn't be considering your friend to have a real problem that shouldn't have gotten to the point that someone had to die over it.

As I say in another story on UHub, maybe some of that is our fault for expecting him to be able to handle his problem without our help and relying on the courts/penal system to magically transform him just by locking him up and releasing him a few times in a row. But don't think he's just like the rest of us...except he just keeps being the unlucky one who gets caught while the rest of us luckily don't. Because you'd be wrong to think that.

up
Voting closed 0

He wasn't just arrested three times. He was convicted three times.

up
Voting closed 0

Unpopular opinion alert: It seems like we go too hard on first-time offenders (often good people who make an error in judgement) and too easy on repeat offenders (problem drinkers with little regard for the lives of others). Getting pulled over for a busted tail light shouldn't get anyone thrown in jail or subjected to financial ruin.

We happen to live in a country that judges drinking differently than other types of distractions. Tired drivers and distracted drivers have been proven to drive as poorly as someone well over .08 BAC. Yet a tired driver will probably be sent on their way with a warning or a minor traffic citation, and a distracted or texting driver will most often get a moving violation. Driving stoned? There's no easy test to prove impairment there. But drive with a BAC that was legal just a few years ago and you could be thrown in jail, fined into poverty and lose your job due to license suspension?

I think more needs to be done to ensure first-time DUI's don't re-offend.

up
Voting closed 0

I think your facts are wrong. When I worked as a prosecutor in Suffolk County, I handled dozens of OUIs. I can't think of a single instance where a first-time offender did time. That would be extremely rare outside of crashes involving death or serious injury. Absent extenuating circumstances, first-time offenders are almost always offered disposition under G.L. c. 90 § 24D (an alcohol education diversion program). Note that a 24D sentence permits an immediate application for a hardship license.

I also handled some OUIs up to 7th or 8th subsequent offenses, which should have carried hefty mandatory minimums, but invariably they would plead out at much lower sentences (if any jail time was involved at all).

There was a good Globe Spotlight report on this issue three years ago: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/10/30/for_d...

up
Voting closed 0