So unjust is the 110-year prison sentence for Rogel Lazaro Aguilera-Mederos that we are asking Gov. Jared Polis to begin the process immediately for a clemency review that could reduce his time in jail to something more reasonable.
We are not intending to undermine the verdict from the jury — Aguilera-Mederos did indeed kill four people and seriously injure others in a tragic and preventable crash.
But we do think there is an important distinction that the law, as written, did not allow jurors or the judge to make. The 26-year-old was not drunk. He was not intentionally driving recklessly because he was in a hurry or out for a thrill or running from police. He was not even full of road rage as his semi-truck accelerated down Interstate 70 out of control.
Rather, a tool that Aguilera-Mederos used for work failed. Whether it was from a lack of training or a lack of common sense, Aguilera-Mederos got back in his truck with the brakes smoking and hot from being used excessively to slow the heavy logging truck on the steep grades west of Denver. The brakes then failed completely and Aguilera-Mederos didn’t use the emergency ramp that could have safely stopped his truck.
Had traffic not been stopped at the bottom of the hill, Aguilera-Mederos might have avoided tragedy, but instead, he careened into the cars stopped in I-70 traffic and killed Miguel Angel Lamas Arellano, 24; William Bailey, 67; Doyle Harrison, 61; and Stanley Politano, 69.
America’s justice system has always struggled with how to treat negligent homicide cases.
Excessive punishment feels cruel, but so does a complete lack of consequences. If the goal is to deter others and foster rehabilitation, how many years in prison would suffice? If those responsible for unintentional deaths are guilty of such egregious transgressions of normal care and decency as to warrant prison time, what is an appropriate sentence?
So much depends on the facts of the case. And when we look at the mistakes Aguilera-Mederos made on April 25, 2019, we judge that life in prison is far too severe.
District Court Judge Bruce Jones agrees.
“I will state that if I had the discretion, it would not be my sentence,” Jones said. “I would say that perhaps the legislature, in imposing a requirement of consecutive sentences, had in mind that there might be cases where a judge should give it further consideration after hearing from the Department of Corrections, and this may very well be one of those cases.”
The reason Jones did not have discretion is that lawmakers have set mandatory minimum sentences for certain crimes, and then required that the sentences be served consecutively and not concurrently. Because four people were killed and so many were injured, the years added up to more than life in prison. This case shows clearly that Colorado’s sentencing laws are in need of much more reform than the changes that have come in recent years.
Polis could of course wait to see if Jones is able to later revise the sentence if Aguilera-Mederos seeks a review, however, with public attention on the case right now, we think the governor’s executive clemency advisory board should take up Aguilera-Mederos case and commute part of his sentence. Such an act could also spare the surviving victims in this case and the families of those killed a lengthy appeals process, although many heartbroken survivors have understandably said that they support a prison sentence in the case.
To guide him, Polis and his review board should look at similar cases across the state over the years.
Former Boulder Mayor Bob Greenlee was charged with nine counts including felony vehicular homicide, negligent homicide and vehicular assault after he killed a woman in a crash on U.S. 160 over La Veta Pass in 2016.
Prosecutors at the time said that Greenlee was speeding and driving aggressively in his Escalade before he attempted to pass a car and caused a collision.
Greenlee accepted a plea deal to criminally negligent homicide and three other counts. He didn’t serve a single day in prison, although he was sentenced to a year of home detention, 10 years of probation, ordered to perform 200 hours of community service and fined $100,000 in addition to being ordered to donate $1 million to a charity of the prosecutor’s choosing.
Greenlee’s age – he was 77 at the time of the sentencing — and his deteriorating health played into the judge’s decision: “Despite the fact that I consider probation to be the appropriate sentence here, I cannot disregard or speak lightly of the conduct of the defendant,” he said. “This is an egregious act, an act of inexplicable conduct by the defendant. It was inexcusable behavior.”
Would prosecutors have been more willing to offer Aguilera-Mederos a deal of one year in prison for each life he took if he was a man of financial means and could have donated $100,000 a year to charity?
First Judicial District Attorney Alexis King said in a public statement: “My administration contemplated a significantly different outcome in this case, but Mr. Aguilera-Mederos wasn’t interested in pursuing those negotiations. The jury’s thoughtful verdict reflects the strength of the evidence presented and recognizes the harm caused to the victims. We requested the minimum sentence allowed by law and welcome future opportunities for the court to reconsider its sentence, consistent with the mission and values of this office.”
However, neither the district attorney nor Aguilera-Mederos’ defense attorney answered questions from this board about specific deals that may have been offered or rejected.
We are losing faith in America’s justice system, and clemency is one way to ensure the scales of justice remain balanced.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
