Drinking suspected in Calif. crash
SAN FRANCISCO — A 36-year-old woman is dead, her husband hospitalized in critical condition and nine other people were hospitalized after a crash early Sunday on a San Francisco Bay Area highway involving a car driven by a man who police said had been drinking and a party bus.
In the 2 a.m. crash, a Honda coupe driven by Raul Padilla, 43, appears to have slammed into the center divider on Highway 101, then came to a stop facing oncoming traffic, California Highway Patrol Officer Art Montiel said.
After the Honda stopped, the front end of a party bus, with 18 people on board, hit the disabled car. Two other cars were involved in the collision.
“We're still trying to figure out who came into contact with what,” Montiel said.
The woman killed in the crash was a passenger in the Honda and was married to the driver. Her name has not been released while officials try to contact family members.
Padilla was hospitalized in critical condition. He was wearing his seat belt, but his wife was not, according to the CHP.
Padilla and his wife had “consumed alcohol” before the crash, but toxicology tests would have to be conducted to determine if he had been driving under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crash, Montiel said.
“If it is determined he was under the influence, he could face felony DUI charges and manslaughter charges,” Montiel said.
Most of the party bus passengers suffered minor to moderate injuries.
The bus was equipped with seat belts.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Reagan shooter Hinckley closer to permanent freedom
- Only 3 wolves left at national park on Lake Superior; moose population would skyrocket
- Keystone pipeline project gains favor among nearby liberals, study shows
- Ohio woman finds mother, sister — at work
- FBI unit supplied flawed forensics
- New York City rent increases oust small retailers
- ‘Dr. Oz’ to counter criticisms on air
- Gas pipeline explosion probed at California gun range
- ‘Moore’s Law’ led to Silicon Valley of computer chips, information age
- Public access to police body cam videos assailed
- Dementia patients’ rights considered