65 cars, 3 big rigs pile up in Massachusetts
By The Associated Press
Published: Sunday, Dec. 1, 2013, 9:30 p.m.
WORCESTER, Mass. — Freezing rain was blamed for highway pileups that sent dozens of people to the hospital on Sunday morning in central and northern Massachusetts.
Massachusetts State Police say a crash involving 65 cars and three tractor-trailers closed Interstate 290 in Worcester about 7 a.m.
About 35 to 40 people were taken to hospitals. Two were seriously injured.
Both directions of the highway were reopened by 11:45 a.m., authorities said.
Sergeant Stephen Marsh compared the road to a sheet of ice.
“It was like if you went skating with your kids. It was that bad,” he said.
A state police car was rear-ended, and the trooper was forced to hurriedly return to her cruiser to avoid cars sliding toward her.
The National Weather Service issued a freezing rain advisory through 11 a.m. Sunday for much of western and central Massachusetts, northeast Connecticut and northwest Rhode Island.
Police advised motorists returning home from the Thanksgiving holiday to wait until state highway crews treated the roads.
Michael Verseckes, a spokesman for the state Department of Transportation, said crews treated roads earlier, but conditions deteriorated quickly.
“It came up suddenly and quickly, and the number of crews we had just wasn't enough,” he said.
Temperatures are forecast to rise into the 40s on Monday, keeping roads free of ice.
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.
- Consensus on how to notify data breach victims lacks
- Scientists: Test West Coast for Fukushima radiation
- Expats renounce citizenship over U.S. tax hassles
- Obama losing close adviser to end 9 years of service
- Obama gets in some golf on family trip to Key Largo
- El Nino could bring relief to U.S.
- Spyware in government computers ‘has Russian paw prints all over it’
- Wikileaks founder teases about more secrets to be released
- California man named as bitcoin creator denies involvement
- Kansas public school funding unconstitutional
- World War II veteran receives once-declined Purple Heart