Dunagan granted bond after Ga. Supreme Court overturns decision
By Jeff Gable, Rome News-Tribune
Wednesday May 21, 2008 10:11:42am


Judge J. Bryant Durham granted a $25,000 appeal bond to Aaron Matthew Dunagan in Floyd County Superior Court Wednesday morning.

Dunagan has been in the Wilcox State Prison in Abbeville since May 2006. A Floyd County jury found him guilty of reckless driving, serious injury by reckless driving and failure to obey a traffic control device for his role in a 2004 wreck that left Candice Bendek of Rome severely disabled.

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled on Monday that evidence in the design flaws at the intersection of Georgia 53 and Burlington Drive, where the crash occurred, should not have been excluded during the Floyd County trial.

Steve Lanier, Dunagan’s attorney, said his client could be released as early as this weekend. He will be on bond until the state decides to either retry the case or dismiss the charges.


[permalink]
Post a comment: You must be logged in order to comment.

 
Bird Dog
Comments: 288
Joined: 09/06/2006
06/04/2008 03:47:05 PM
Well said MSLA.

I still linger around and see whats happening on here. I don't post unless something really strikes me!
 
msla
Comments: 570
Joined: 12/29/2005
06/04/2008 06:40:37 AM
I love you, Bird Dog!! Where have you been?

To find a person guilty based on the past is simply wrong. To punish a person because of their past - that's fine. That's responsible.

If we found folks guilty because of their pasts, a prostitute could never say she was raped; a thief could never say he was robed; an abuser could never say they were abused; and etc. We would not allow a person to be the victim of a crime they had committed because we wouldn't believe them. You and I know that's not realistic.

However, this is a good reason WHY people should clean up their acts after bad behavior! They would be more believable!

Progressive, demanding punishment based on a person's bad behavior is terrific! That's beyond fair! That person earned the jail time - or whatever the punishment - because he/she wouldn't take prior chances to straighten up seriously. Society shouldn't have to keep paying heavy prices for bad choices.
 
Bird Dog
Comments: 288
Joined: 09/06/2006
06/03/2008 06:58:21 PM
Same argument as before.He's out on appeal. Hopefully they will try him again so he can be found GUILTY AGAIN. Matt wasted more than one precious life in this situation and none of the time wasted was his. How long before he gets another DUI???????????? Anyone heard of habitual offender?????? Three strikes and your out, but he manipulated the system and has gotten to this point. Hopefully, he will get to serve the rest of his time. He should have been GUILTY on all charges, not just recless driving
 
msla
Comments: 570
Joined: 12/29/2005
06/03/2008 01:14:43 PM
Ask Candice why she turned on a red light into an on-coming vehicle...

Or, ask her if the light was green, why did she turn into an on-coming vehicle? Why didn't she pay attention to the road instead of the cell phone? Why didn't she slow down? And since she can answer all that, will she tell the court the light was green for her and Matt?
 
Vocalwhennecessary
Comments: 453
Joined: 04/10/2008
06/03/2008 09:38:49 AM
Ask Candice Bendek if justice prevailed..........................


VWN
 
SWEETGAPEACH
Comments: 1
Joined: 05/31/2008
06/03/2008 07:49:17 AM
Justice prevailed!!! Too bad 2 years of Mr. Dunagan's life has been wasted by the biased court system. However, even if there is another trial, evidence will be allowed that will vendicate him. Free at last, Free at last, thank God Almighty, Free at last. God Bless you Matt!
 
failedbelle
Comments: 393
Joined: 01/11/2006
05/30/2008 04:36:29 PM
Yes He Does Maggie. LOL
 
maggie
Comments: 1542
Joined: 01/08/2006
05/30/2008 03:50:43 PM
FB, I was rather amazed that he didn't post much sooner!!!!!!LOL He does make things interesting though doesn't he??
 
failedbelle
Comments: 393
Joined: 01/11/2006
05/30/2008 02:30:05 PM
You just couldn't remain silent one more minute could ya BD. I'm with msla. Great to have you back. Things have been kinda boring around here lately
 
msla
Comments: 570
Joined: 12/29/2005
05/30/2008 12:05:34 PM
Bird Dog, Should we try Candice in absentia since she ran the same red light?

By the way, good to see ya!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Bird Dog
Comments: 288
Joined: 09/06/2006
05/29/2008 11:19:06 PM
Out on bond does not mean "not guilty" ! Dunagan ran the red light and that FACT will still stand! That intersection is no more dangerous than the one before it where you come over the hill. the speed limit is the same and it is just as "blind". The difference is "the scenario" with his brother waiting at the light. Good luck, but the outcome will remain the same. GUILTY! And it should have been on ALL COUNTS!
 
maggie
Comments: 1542
Joined: 01/08/2006
05/29/2008 10:15:29 PM
You know what is really sad, these are highly paid engineers who design roads and intersections. My grandchildren could do a better job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
OLDDUDE
Comments: 8
Joined: 04/03/2008
05/29/2008 07:58:42 PM
MSLA;HAVE TO PUT ON MY GLASSES TODAY, JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW I WAS NOT TAKING WHAT
YOU WERE SAYING AS MEAN-SPIRITED OR AS SARCASM, AND YOU ARE RIGHT WHOM EVER THOUGHT
UP THE WAY THAT INTERSECTION WAS NOT THANKING TO CLEARLY, I HAVE TO GO THROUGH IT A
COUPLE OF TIMES A DAY, AND I JUST HOLD MY BREATH AND PRAY FOR THE BEST? AND YOU ARE ALSO CORRECT ABOUT THE 65MPH. THE TRACTOR-TRAILORS THAT ARE JUST DOING THE65MPH.
HAS NO-WAY TO STOP, AND THE ONES THAT OVER THE SPEED LIMIT HAS TO RUN THE LIGHT,TO
KEEP FROM JACK-KNIFEING, AND KILLING SOMEONE IN THE NEXT LANE. I JUST THANK LOCAL AND
STATE ATHORITIES COULD AND SHOULD PATROL AND ISSUE MORE AND MORE TICKET'S,TO
ANY DRIVER GOING OVER THE SPEED LIMIT,AND AS EVERYONE KNOWS, HOW I FEEL ABOUT
"TALIKING ON A CELL-PHONE"AT THAT INTERSECTION
 
msla
Comments: 570
Joined: 12/29/2005
05/29/2008 12:38:55 PM
Olddude, I agree with you completely. That's why I had put the word "deserved" in parentheses. It was a kind-of sarcasm without trying to be too mean. Nobody deserves these things. But some people seem to think so. Not you nor I.

I don't know any of these folks either but I've lived with that light for decades. When the commissioner's mother was killed, I believe back in 1997 or 98, I was down there and saw her face. She was so peaceful. We didn't think she ever saw a thing - that's also what the EMT's said. She was broadsided; she didn't look and the accident was ruled her own fault. After that, the light was put in. But accidents and death continued.

A lot of the problem is the 65MPH speed limit. But more than that, if a person is traveling north on 53 and wants to turn west, they face on-coming traffic that is traveling out of a curve. So that traffic is partially blocked by traffic on the opposite side, facing you, sitting at the light trying to turn to their left. Behind them, traffic is speeding at 65MPH and you can't see them. Even if there is no traffic in that turn lane, the curve still hinders the area of sight - especially because of that speed limit.

After the light was 'fixed,' the turn lanes were separated with a broad distance between them and the main highway. I suppose that idea was to increase the sight distance. But, I have to turn there all the time in order to go to the pharmacy, post office, and etc. Whoever designed that ADDED to the sight problem. Now I have MORE area to try and see around instead of the original amount. That's exactly why even today anyone being the slightest bit careless might find themselves in an accident at that intersection. I know a person can be in an accident anywhere anytime anyway, but it's bad to have intersections like this that are traps to innocent travelers.

 
OLDDUDE
Comments: 8
Joined: 04/03/2008
05/28/2008 10:41:11 PM
msla;all i am really trying to say and get my point across is not if a person has any type of prior record
no one not MATT NOR CANDICE "deserved it" I would just like for some one, any one to explain to me
the diffrence between talking on a cell-phone while driving a vechile, and injuring someone and talking
on a cell-phone, and shooting someone with a gun? and IREALLY DO FEEL SORRY FOR ALL THE PEOPLE
INVOLVED IN THIS INCIDENT.if a teenage driver had been involved with or with out prior records,
will you at least agree with me that the public out cry to ban cell-phone use while driving a motor vechile would be overwhelming both from the public and the politictions.when a person is driving they
have not only their safty but that of other drivers in their hands, as well as any inniconet people who may be just out for a walk.i just personally do not see why we can not enact a law to only use cell-phones in an emergency. prior records has nothing to do with the way i feel about any of this as i stated
i do not personally know anyone involved.
 
footsie
Comments: 8
Joined: 04/25/2006
05/28/2008 08:29:01 PM
I would like to know why the man who had an accident at the same place and kill another person went free, this man made a left hand turn and hit a car coming straight. What is wrong with this picture.
 
msla
Comments: 570
Joined: 12/29/2005
05/28/2008 01:49:07 PM
Olddude, you do bring up one point pretty clearly. What if Matt had been killed or permanently injured to the same level as Candice is now? And, Candice walked away? Wouldn't we all have assumed Matt "deserved it" because he'd had something to drink - even if he wasn't at the legal limit? I mean, don't we assume people who have priors finally get caught sooner or later? So wouldn't a 'regular lay person' think completely opposite if it were Matt instead of Candice who was in the wheelchair now? And wouldn't we think differently of Candice on a cell phone compared to Matt and his prior record? I mean, we do that already.

That said, isn't that why we have to step outside of this and realize our prejudices?
 
OLDDUDE
Comments: 8
Joined: 04/03/2008
05/26/2008 08:34:15 PM
i have been at the intersection where the accident happened and yes it is a very dangerous place,but
is not all intersections? just my opinion but if the police would just start pulling over drivers who are
not paying attention to what they are doing ( driving ) to talk on a cell-phone when it is not an emergency,an officer can find probale cause for about anything,and maybe just warn the driver that they have not just their well being or life's in their hand's but that of other people that just might be
at the next intersection. to me there is no diffrence than if taking a gun and shooting a person because
you were talking on a stupid cell-phone and forgot it was loaded.it's a life-changing tradgy for everyone
involved, but MRS. CANDICE BENDEK IS THE ONE WHO WILL PAY FOR A STUPID MISTAKE THE REST
OF HER LIFE. NO JUDGE,JURY, D.A.,OR DOCTOR CAN EVER MAKE HER THE WAY SHE WAS BEFORE THE
ACCIDENT. OH BY THE WAY I DO NOT KNOW ANYONE INVOLVED WITH ANY PART OF THIS,I JUST THINK ON THE HOILDAYS IT MUST REALLY BE TOUGH FOR EVERYONE THAT IS INVOLVED,ON BOTH
SIDES,AND ALL OF THEIR FRIENDS,MY PRAYERS REALLY GO OUT TO MRS. BENDEK MAY GOD BE WITH
YOU THE REST OF YOUR DAY'S.
 
msla
Comments: 570
Joined: 12/29/2005
05/25/2008 07:04:07 PM
Romanthinker, I should have qualified my post. I was talking about this as a civil case. In order to get damages, penalties, etc., Matt has to be totally responsible. But it's my understanding that Candice is also to blame for her situation because of her behavior.

I was in the hospital, right down the hall from Candice four years ago, Mother's Day. What a tragedy!!
 
msla
Comments: 570
Joined: 12/29/2005
05/25/2008 06:55:10 PM
Romanthinker, did they not decide that Candice would be found at least as responsible for her condition because she was in a hurry and talking on the cell phone at the same time as she traveled through the same light as Matt? That was my understanding...
 
romanthinker
Comments: 1
Joined: 05/23/2008
05/23/2008 06:48:32 AM
Finally Matthew will get a chance to have a fair trial, most likely though there will not be one. They will choose to drop the case, charges, rather than go back and prove that had Matthew been given a fair trial to start with he would not have gone to prison. And another thought I had was that the family of Candace Bendek should have been able to hold the state responsible for her injuries, things got way too far off track when the omissions in this case were allowed.

 
OLDDUDE
Comments: 8
Joined: 04/03/2008
05/21/2008 10:51:57 PM
AS I POSTED ON WHAT MAKES ME MAD I FLOYD CO. IT JUST SEEMS TO ME THAT ALL OF THE LOCAL JUDGES, FOR WHAT EVER REASON JUST CANNOT GET IT RIGHT! ALMOST EVERY DECISION THEY
GIVE IT GET'S OVERTURNED AT THE STATE LEVEL. AND IF I REMEMBER RIGHT MR. LANIER WAS AT
ONE TIME OUR LOCAL D.A. SEEMS TO ME HE WAS AND IS BETTER PREPAIRED TO HANDLE ANY TYPE
OF CASE THAN OUR CURRENT D.A. WHO IS TO BUSY CHASING COMIC BOOK CROOKS? ANY ONE
REMEMBER THE DIXON CASE, JUST TO NAME ONE SHE ALWAY'S RESPOND'S THAT SHE WAS IN COURT
AND HAS NOT HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW WHATEVER DECISION, BUT FOUR YEARS LATER THE
TRIAL FOR THE ACCOUSED IN THE HARPER- RENAYOLDS TRIAL IS STILL NOT BEEN BEFORE ANY
JUDGE NOR JURY, IF A CAPITAL MURDER TRIAL IS NOT AS IMPORTANT AS HANDING OUT A COMIC
BOOK ON HALLOWEEN, TO NOT JUST THE CURRENT D.A. AND THE LEGAL SYSTEM IN NOT ONLY FLOYD
CO. BUT THE STATE OF G.A. AND REALLY THE WHOLE U.S.A. THING'S ARE MORE MESSED UP THAN I
THOUGHT. JUST MY OPINION BUT IF YOU DO NOT PLEA BARGEN WITH THE LOCAL D.A. JUST ABOUT
ANY ATTORNEY CAN BEAT HER IN A COURT OF LAW.
 
maggie
Comments: 1542
Joined: 01/08/2006
05/21/2008 10:10:54 PM
Wow, it sure took a long time for this to happen. Where is Mountainman???
 
BigShiggy
Comments: 494
Joined: 01/19/2006
05/21/2008 07:25:11 PM
Judge Durham gets a phone call from his superiors?

msla you nailed that one in questioning......

shameful, some of the remarks posted by those at the petition website...

1 Samuel 2:3
Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed.
<< < Prev - Next > >>