0

Son suspects bar overserved father before hit-and-run spree

Michael Snider

Michael Snider

SNELLVILLE -- A son of the man police have said caused a string of hit-and-run wrecks on Wednesday night told Gwinnett Police that he believes the father came from a bar that's been warned to not overserve the man.

"He stated that the bar continuously overserves his father and he has warned them to stop doing that," a police report said after an officer had a phone conservation with Michael Snider Jr.

While Gwinnett Police continue to investigate if Michael Owen Snider intentionally caused 10 hit-and-run wrecks along U.S. Highway 78, Cpl. Ed Ritter on Friday afternoon released the locations of the alleged incidents.

The series of incidents ended in a five-car pile-up at U.S. 78 and Walton Court in Snellville that claimed the life of a Loganville woman and left another victim critically injured. Snider was behind the wheel of a 2006 Ford Super Duty truck that crashed into Johnboy's Home Cooking restaurant, Ritter said.

Snider was charged with driving under the influence, vehicular homicide, serious injury by vehicle, following too closely and reckless driving.

Ritter said Dekalb Police believe Snider was involved in five wrecks in Dekalb County before he caused 10 in Gwinnett. The Gwinnett wrecks were along U.S. 78 at or around Bethany Church Road, Hewatt Road, Ross Road, Paxton Lane, Killian Hill Road, East Park Place and Parkwood Road.

Two drivers told police a truck that matched the description of Snider's hit their vehicles each twice, and another driver said her vehicle was hit three times.

Comments

tiredofthebull 1 year, 2 months ago

Really? Because his father doesn't know when to stop and when to not drive he wants to blame the bar?? Our society always wants to blame anybody but themselves!

3

MissDaisyCook 1 year, 2 months ago

That's right sonny boy, try to deflect responsibility from where it truly belongs. I'm sure the bartenders forced the Jack Daniels down his throat; maybe even held a gun on him to guzzel the Wild Turkey. Hey, that would be another argument for gun control! Maybe you should accept some responsibility for allowing papa out in this condition.

3

KKB64 1 year, 2 months ago

How in the world does a 70 year old man not know when HE should stop drinking. Let's stop blaming everyone but the person responsible. Are we going to also blame Ford for selling him a truck and giving him the keys???? Honestly, this world is screwed up. He is to blame - period.

2

John5214 1 year, 2 months ago

There we go. Don't take responsibility for your own actions. Blame it on someone else. Typical ......Now, why don't you sue the bar, the alcohol manufacturer, the company that made the glass he drank out of and don't forget the city for allowing drinking. Wait, what about the furniture manufacturer of the stool he sat on. After all, he was made too comfortable so he was forced to drink!! And why stop there. Let's take the cast of Cheers to court, too. They sure promoted drinking and must be responsible somehow. Right, sonny boy.

3

LilburnLady 1 year, 2 months ago

Yes, the driver had a responsibility not to drive drunk, but bars also have responsibility under State law not to serve a "noticeably inebriated" customer. "Dram Shop" laws have been valid in this state since 1988 and apply not only to bars that serve an inebriated customer but also private individuals who act as hosts of a party in a private home. If you or a bartender continues to serve alcohol to a customer or guest after they are already noticeably inebriated, and they then leave your establishment or home and hurt or kill someone while driving drunk, you are liable and will most certainly be sued.

These "dram shop" lawsuits happen all the time and people have lost their homes and/or businesses because they a) served someone too much alcohol and b) they allowed them to leave knowing they were going to be behind the wheel of a car. The individual has a responsibility to not drive drunk, but if you continue to serve alcohol to someone who is drunk, you share the responsibility as well. The bartender should have taken the guys' keys or at least called the cops when he drove away.

1

kevin 1 year, 2 months ago

Quote:"While Gwinnett Police continue to investigate if Michael Owen Snider intentionally caused 10 hit-and-run wrecks"

Why is it important to know if he "intentionally" caused these wrecks? If you are that drunk, would you really be awake enough to think that you "wanted to" or planned to hit all these cars? Kind if stupid if you ask me. If he proves the bar was warned, they could bear some responsibility here. That is why there is a law on the books to prevent stuff like this from happening.

0

Coolray 1 year, 2 months ago

Its important because the charges and punishment could be more severe if it can be shown that he acted with "intent."

1

John5214 1 year, 2 months ago

C'mom, LilburnLady. Get off you Liberal high horse. This guy looks a little overweight, too. Should we blame the cashier at Kroger for allowing him to buy Snickers?

1

LilburnLady 1 year, 2 months ago

Well, I'm just about as far from liberal as you can get John5214. It was a mostly Republican legislature that passed the Dram Shop Act. The conduct of the bar in this case is also a textbook example of what dram shop laws are designed to prevent. The Georgia dram shop law permits liability to be imposed on a restaurant, bar, club, liquor store, convenience store or private individual when alcoholic beverages are sold or furnished to a person who is in a "state of noticeable intoxication," with knowledge that such person will soon be driving a motor vehicle. If, for example, bar workers served the man alcohol despite his slurred speech and unsteady gait and then did not try to intervene by calling him a cab, calling the police or trying to prevent him from driving away,they are liable for any deaths, injuries or property damage he inflicts by driving drunk.

Dram shop laws are designed to prevent businesses that serve alcohol from turning a blind eye in situations like this one. If the restaurant had intervened, the life of an innocent woman might have been saved. Business owners with liquor licenses know this law and know they need to abide by it.

1

Veryconcernedcitizen 1 year, 2 months ago

could this be murder if he was intentionally ramming cars?

0

FordGalaxy 1 year, 2 months ago

I'm trying to remember off the top of my head here, but doesn't murder imply malice aforethought? I figure at best this would be vehicular manslaughter.

0

NewsReader 1 year, 2 months ago

Nobody gives a crap about the Dram Shop Act. This man is solely responsible. End of story. Don't try to disseminate it as if anyone else had a hand in his inebriated decision to drive. The responsibility rests on him and him alone.

1

spudwebb 1 year, 2 months ago

Where to start.....this is what is wrong with our society today, always, always, always blaming someone else for each persons lack of accountability. This guy is blaming someone else for his dad being a total idiot. If I think like the son, then the son is liable too, shouldn't he have a better eye on his old man if he knows he drinks too much??? Here is an idea, get your dad some help and or go with your dad and drive him home. But wait, theres no law for that!! We can just blame the bartender when this kid KNOWS his dad has a problem, specifically with that bar!!! un real. Lady Liburn, I understand the "laws" but when we cry about government being to involved in our lives, but then want the government to step in and protect people?? where is the line??? if you're over 21 and you drink too much, don't drive. this isn't rocket science. Blaming the bar for serving him too much, law or no law is INSANE. Bartender isn't a caretaker. What a waste. Sounds to me like this family has a lot of issues, old man should be thrown in jail till he dies.

1

news2me 1 year, 2 months ago

Sounds as though Snider Jr. has prepped an excuse for his father knowing something like this would eventually happen. I don't think any amount of CYA PR or Dram law (which have been around since before Prohibition) are going to help this old drunk - murderer. Public outrage will make him regret making that statement.

1

GarBear58 1 year, 2 months ago

If Jr. knew that papa has a drinking problem why didn't he take away the murder weapon. Instead he tells the bar owner or bartender not to let him drink too much. At least he won't be drinking and crashing any more. He will have plenty of time to sober up and think about all the damage he caused and the lives that he ruined.

1

LilburnLady 1 year, 2 months ago

The Dram Shop law does absolutely nothing to help the drunk driver. I worked on a case many years ago where a drunk ran a red light at high speed and hit a car with four teenagers in it. One boy almost died and the others were injured. The drunk driver had no assets and little if any insurance. The drunk driver went to prison for six years. The injured teenagers (one of whom ran up over $100,000 in medical bills due to a brain injury) were able to sue the owner of the bar that served the drunk driver and let him leave in his truck.

The Dram Shop law does nothing to help the drunk who decides to drive. This guy will likely go to prison for a number of years for vehicular homicide and all of the other injuries he caused. He will take the full rap for his criminal actions and will pay his debt to society by serving time in prison. The victims, like the family of the woman who lost her life and the other lady who was seriously injured will be able to sue the insurance companies of not only the drunk driver, but also the bar owner for their medical costs, loss of life and other damages.

0

NewsReader 1 year, 2 months ago

So what LiburnLady. Nobody cares. If he has a bar, he also has sufficient liability insurance. It is probably a requirement for holding a liquor license.

I'm sure the ambulance chasing lawyers have canvased the stage to take their seat at the proverbial judicial collection plate. Nothing will ever pay the victims for their losses, but counsel will make certain they get theirs.

The bottom line, and what this discussion involves, is that this man is solely responsible for his actions. Why do you insist continuing beating this dead horse? Fault rests with the defendant, and the defendant only no matter who gets hurt in the collateral shotgun suit fallout.

0

jack 1 year, 2 months ago

Curious that the son, who obviously had prior knowledge of his daddy's propensity to drink, didn't warn the bar NOT to serve his father, only to not OVER serve him.

"Don't let him get to .24.....cut him off at .18!"

1

news2me 1 year, 2 months ago

I did a bit of research and found several instances warning Dram Laws in GA are difficult to prove. I don't provide links because I detest ambulance chaser scumball lawyers, but even they are brutally honest about the difficulty. I do feel for the victims and their families that are suffering because of this scum Snider Sr.

........................................................................................................................ Business Owner Is Not Always the Liable Party in Dram Shop Action Only if a business is licensed to sell alcohol can the owner be held liable for injuries, death or damages under a dram shop liability action, even if the business owner was not present or did not give consent to the provision of alcohol to a minor or a noticeably intoxicated consumer 21 years of age or older. If a business is not licensed to sell alcohol, the owner of the premises can only be held liable under the Georgia Dram Shop Act if the owner was present and gave consent to selling, furnishing or serving alcohol to the minor or the noticeably intoxicated consumer 21 years of age or older. This protects the homeowner that may not be present when another person hosts a social engagement at the home or if the homeowner is present but does not consent to selling, furnishing or serving alcohol to a minor or a noticeably intoxicated consumer 21 years of age or older. This protection can also extend to a business owner where the business is not licensed to sell alcohol but an employee of the business serves or furnishes alcohol to their consumer without the owner’s consent or when the owner is not present.

Insurance Does Not Preclude Dram Shop Liability Claims One limiting aspect of Georgia dram shop laws is the absence of any requirement that a business licensed to sell alcohol have specific liability insurance which would pay damages for a dram shop liability claim. Unlike drivers that are required to maintain (at the minimum) liability insurance, a dram shop can sell, serve and furnish alcohol without any insurance to pay for any damages caused by the intoxication of their consumer. While most such businesses have general liability insurance protecting them if a consumer falls in their restaurant or if a fire or flood occurs, such insurance typically excludes dram shop liability. Therefore, a business would have to purchase an “alcohol liability rider” to cover these claims. Ultimately, this means that if the business did not have insurance, then victim may never recover for damage even if found liable because the business may not have the financial ability to pay the damages awarded to the victim. Further, if the victim was killed in the DUI accident, the family of the loved one and the estate might not recover for wrongful death damages awarded by a jury.

1

RiggaTony 1 year, 2 months ago

Of course, both this man and bar broke God's laws - the man by imbibing, the bar by existing. This is why I am against alcohol sales (especially Sunday sales). Obama the Muslim steals the presidency, then all of the sudden people are allowed to drink to excess, often on the Christian Sabbath. A coincidence? Only a fool would think so.

0

realperson 1 year, 2 months ago

I bet this DRUNK DRIVER gets away with MURDER....HOW could this be happening? People who DRIVE DRUNK AND KILL PEOPLE SHOULD GET LIFE BEHIND BARS!! I always thought it was against the law to MURDER innocent people!! This is the worst outrage I've ever heard of. Someone in Fla. only got 364 DAYS behind bars for Killing an innocent person while DRIVING DRUNK!!! Somebody else killed TWO innocent people and only got FIVE years in prison (he'll be OUT in 2 yrs)!!!! What is going on in this country....Police are sitting behind computers trying to stay out of harms way by arresting men who have never been offenders (for going on Adult Chat rooms) It just does not seem to be FAIR JUSTICE to me ...Anybody Agree?

0

news2me 1 year, 2 months ago

Police are sitting behind computers trying to stay out of harms way by arresting men who have never been offenders (for going on Adult Chat rooms) It just does not seem to be FAIR JUSTICE to me ...Anybody Agree?

................................................ realperson - Your personal life and issues are not our concern nor do they relate to this story. Back to your chat room time. SMH

1

realperson 1 year, 2 months ago

THIS MONSTER WILL NOT EVEN HAVE TO GO TO PRISON FOR MURDER>>>SOMETHING IS REALLY WRONG IN GWINNETT COUNTY & the rest of the country when DRUNKS CAN KILL innocent people and only get 364 days behind bars!! This is truly an unjust system where innocent people are getting MURDERED BY DRUNKS BEHIND THE WHEEL!

0

clutchcargo 1 year, 2 months ago

ALRIGHT Lilburnlady! Geez we get it! You are right about laws. Nobody wants to be told how literally correct you may be, we are talking common sense here. The only person to blame is the drunkard that killed someone and busted up a bunch of cars in his stupor. Nothing is more frustrating than reading an article, voicing an opinion, and then someone attempting to refute your opinion by inject proof that they are right. Congrats on being so right so much...

0

BuzzG 1 year, 2 months ago

If he had been using a gun instead of a truck to hurt people, liberals would be yelling to ban guns.

0

Kat 1 year, 2 months ago

The son should not have made any statement, especially to the media. The only way the son could have intervened would be to petition the court for full guardianship of his father. I am not sure of all the steps required to do this and if he would have been successful. How you attempt to take a person's vehicle and driving privilege from them is another set of issues. Just telling people that his father has a drinking problem and not to over serve him was at least an attempt on his part to do something. You can't blame the son for any of this. The man responsible is the man who decided to drink to excess and get behind the wheel of a vehicle. Looking at his age there is a good chance he was on medication and shouldn't have been drinking for that reason alone.

0

Sign in to comment