Quantcast

Hit-and-Run Car Owner Says Her Sister Was Driving

2010_02_cjasmin.jpg
Cindy Jasmin tries to avoid the media (WCBS 2)
The woman who owns the car that struck two young women in a Prospect Heights hit-and-run—leaving one with a broken collarbone and the other with severe brain injuries—told police that her sister was the driver. Cindy Jasmin was questioned by police yesterday and WCBS 2 reports, "Jasmin told detectives she wasn't behind the wheel, her sister was, and that this sister is so distraught that she checked herself into a psych ward at this hospital in White Plains."

While police investigators did find Jasmin's sister in a hospital, cops are reportedly skeptical of her account. According to the NY Times, a law enforcement official says that Jasmin, "more than Frances, bears a resemblance to a woman seen on a videotape entering a livery car office several blocks from the accident scene shortly after the crash." Another police source told the Daily News, "This is being treated with some skepticism because of the difference in appearance between the two sisters."

One of the livery car service employees also spoke to the News and claims Jasmin was there, "She was shaking. She said she's been in an accident. She used the bathroom and left." Jasmin was released after the questioning and then headed to the Bronx in handcuffs, to face charges for driving with a suspended license.

The hit-and-run victims were Erinn Phelan and Alma Guererro. Guererro is recovering from her broken collarbone while Phelan, who works for the city's volunteerism effort, "in extremely critical condition," according to Police Commissioner Ray Kelly.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

Comments [rss]

  • Meinfuhrer



    Sheboons is as sheboons be.

    Fry 'em.

  • dgeee

    The fact that she left the scene of an accident renders her guilty as charged.

  • Petey

    Whether or not the pedestrians were jaywalking, its a crime because the driver didn't stay on the scene. Its pretty straight forward, you have an accident, especially one where you injure someone, you stick around. What they need to do is make leaving the scene with injury the equivalent of if you hit them while you're drunk with the same injury. That'll make people stick around, or at least get them for the same charge as if they were drunk.

  • Greenpoint60

    Its pretty straight forward- no so, they were smart enough to get their lawyer and doctors involved before the NYPD could arrest and question them.

  • boogpowell

    I agree. Its a crime that the driver left the scene. Now regardless of what the pedestrians were doing they should throw the driver and anyone in the vehicle in jail. There is no excuse for drilling people with your car then driving away. There is clearly something mentally wrong with people who leave the scene of an accident.

  • Petey

    If you're not drunk, and you stay on the scene, the worst thing that will usually happen is a ticket, and often not even that.

  • jaycjay

    "they should throw the driver and anyone in the vehicle in jail."

    It's only illegal to leave the scene of an accident if you were driving. Anyone else who may have been in the car could not be charged.

  • Thinky Think

    I agree.

  • jen

    If her sister did it, why didn't Cindy Jasmin come forward sooner? Guilty.

  • Greenpoint60

    if were that simple the lawyers would not be getting rich

  • potsmoker

    is this is the same corner as the recent late for work corrections officer with a suspended license???

  • Ishtar

    I think that was St. Marks and Flatbush.

  • soundfreak

    Yes, it was St Marks, but it's only one block away.

  • Greenpoint60

    Flatbush!! keep your eyes open at all times

  • Sketto

    Well at least the driver wasn't a drunken cop this time.

  • Greenpoint60

    Questions that need to be answered

    1-Who was behind the wheel?

    2-Was the driver driving against or with the light or speeding?

    3-Were the two pedestrians walking against or with the light?

    4-Were the two pedestrians jaywalking?

    5-Are there witnesses to this event or a surveillance video?

    6-Are there persons who can testify if the driver or the pedestrians were impaired or not prior to this event?

    A jury in Brooklyn will no doubt be considering these questions in future.

  • Frankly, none of those questions matter in light of the fact that the driver left the scene.

  • theevilone

    Regardless of whether the pedestrians were at fault, won't she be charged with leaving the scene of an accident?

  • Greenpoint60

    Its pretty straight forward- Not so with Brooklyn jury

  • mns

    These are questions to be answered. But, unless the two women jumped out in front of the car, the woman driving should go to jail.

    If the women were jaywalking, the driver should have seen them and swerved to avoid them. she should have been driving at a speed that allowed her to do this safely. visibility late at night is excellent at that intersection, *especially* late at night when the lights are bright and there are no cars to obstruct view.

    it doesn't matter if the pedestrians were impaired - it only matters if the driver had enough time to avoid them. period. end of story. at 30/35 mph, which is as fast as ANYONE should be driving on surface streets in nyc and at that intersection, i find it hard to believe that this woman couldn't have avoided the two women.

    if it turns out that this woman ran a red light, was driving over the speed limit or was impaired in any way, she should be charged with the same sort of crime with which we would charge a person who intentionally shoots a gun indiscriminately into a crowd thereby killing someone.

    in general, i find this rush to excuse car drivers of blame for killing pedestrians and bikers really disgusting. you are more likely to kill someone driving a car than doing anything else in your life. why the hell do we allow so many people to drive them? why the hell do we organize our lives around them?

    why don't we tax the hell out of drivers and pour that into mass transit? there is no constitutional right to having a freaking car! in a city like nyc, it should a luxury for the very rich, like living in a large apartment or house.

blog comments powered by Disqus

send a tip

tips@gothamist.com