- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Politics
- School Zone
- Youth Camps
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Autopsy Says Bachan Had Blood-Alcohol Level of .17
Adrianna Bachan, the USC freshman from Montecito who was struck and killed in a hit-and-run collision near the USC campus, was drunk at the time of the crash, according to her autopsy report.
The autopsy report, first obtained and reported by the online-only Neon Tommy news publication, concluded that Bachan, 18, had a blood-alcohol level of .17. Supervising criminalist Dan Anderson of the Los Angeles County Coroner’s Department called her “double drunk,” Neon Tommy said. The legal limit is .08 and the legal drinking age is 21.
Claudia Cabrera, 30, of Los Angeles, is accused of driving the car that allegedly ran a red light and struck Bachan and a fellow student, Marcus Garfinkle, 19, of Scottsdale, Ariz., about 3 a.m. March 29. The students were hit in a marked crosswalk on Jefferson Boulevard at Hoover Street, on the north side of campus. Bachan died of her injuries.
Witnesses reported that the car drove about 400 feet with Garfinkle embedded in the hood and windshield before the driver stopped and a passenger — later identified as Cabrera’s husband, Josue Luna, 33 — got out and threw him to the ground. Garfinkle’s legs were broken and he suffered numerous other injuries.
An intense police search and a $235,000 reward resulted in several tips that led to the pair, who were arrested in April. Los Angeles police said Cabrera was driving with a suspended license for unpaid traffic tickets at the time of the collision and that the couple’s 7-month-old infant also was in the car.
Cabrera and Luna have pleaded not guilty to charges of vehicular manslaughter and hit-and-run causing great bodily harm. They are to stand trial Nov. 4.
Garfinkle said Bachan did not appear drunk.
“I’m a pretty good drinker,” Neon Tommy quoted him as saying. “So I know I was not very drunk at all. ... (Bachan) was not anywhere near inebriated. We had a full conversation.
“If she was dead sober, we would still have gotten into that accident. If she was blackout, we would still have gotten into that accident. If the light was purple, we would still have gotten into the accident,” he told Neon Tommy, a student-run online news project of USC’s Annenberg School of Journalism.
Bachan, the daughter of Carmen and James Bachan of Montecito, was a 2008 graduate of Santa Barbara High, where she captained the girls’ soccer team as a senior. She was an environmental studies major at USC and a new member of Pi Beta Phi sorority.
— Noozhawk publisher Bill Macfadyen can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk.
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules.
- No abusive, defamatory or libelous attacks. In plain English: No personal attacks.
- No vulgar or discriminatory language.
- If you do not follow these rules, don't be surprised if your comment is removed.
- Please use the Report Abuse button on offensive comments.
- Share what you know, ask about what you don't. Give us your eyewitness accounts, observations, background and history. Tell us what else you want to know about the story.
- Stay on the topic, PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK, and forgive people their spelling errors.
Noozhawk's intent is not to limit the discussion of our stories but to elevate it. Thank you for your respectful participation. Click here for our complete Terms of Use.
Comments are moderated, and will not appear until they've been approved.
» on 10.02.09 @ 11:31 PM
Why does this article start out by blaming the victim? Why is it that when a pedestrian is hit by a car, it is the pedestrian’s fault? It seems like the pedestrian is being blamed for the accident when they were in a crosswalk with a green light. When will pedestrians stop being blamed for the cars that hit them!!! Those “people” driving the car probably had a higher blood alcohol level. And they got behind a wheel, which Bachan did not.
» on 10.03.09 @ 07:58 AM
So what if she was drunk? She wasn’t driving a car - she was being escorted home by a sober young man who looked both ways before crossing in a cross walk with a green light!
Her blood alcohol is a red herring and I’m frankly disgusted with this ‘news’ site for introducing it the way that you have. You’ve been slipping more and more towards a “National Enquirer” type of info source and this is another big ugly slip. Shame on you.
» on 10.03.09 @ 09:11 AM
Hang ‘em high.
» on 10.03.09 @ 10:10 AM
Like it or not, this is going to matter…
The surviving victim himself clains he knows how to drink and “was not very drunk”... thus drawing into question his veracity of all the facts surrounding the accident.
Was the light “purple”? Or was it green for the car, as the defense will claim? If the only witness was inebriated, along with his more inebriated date that was killed… the driver of the car could legitimately escape the nastiest charges if it can be proven that the car had the green light and the couple was crossing against the light. The fleeing the scene part will still stick, but not the gritty bits…
Look, I’d like to see them both (people IN the car) fry for this but the above drama is what will be played in court.
» on 10.03.09 @ 10:38 AM
What a tragedy, for all, specially for Bachan and her family, but also for the little one in the car. Now his/her parents are criminals and she is going to grow with that great sorrow in her life.
To the Bachan family my most conforthing thoughts of love and peace.
Mom
» on 10.03.09 @ 11:03 AM
Your report that Andrea was drinking is about as relevant to this story as reporting that she ran 5 miles that morning. You’ve brought insult to an injured family, for no newsworthy purpose. Yuck. Shame on you.
» on 10.03.09 @ 12:13 PM
I read this news story twice and I still don’t see where it starts out “blaming the victim” as Respectful Pedestrian claims.
» on 10.03.09 @ 12:21 PM
Who cares if she was drunk or not…. Its still a tragedy.
» on 10.03.09 @ 01:17 PM
Anthony - the kid walking her home wasn’t the only witness to the accident, as you claim. The other witnesses, (the ones who watched the car stop 400 feet down the road and throw Garfinkle from the hood of the car on to the street and drive away) reported that the light was green for pedestrians.
As well, if woman driving had a green light, why didn’t she stop and reneder aid? Why did she speed off, unless she herself was under the influence and she had. I’ll take the word of anyone of those witnesses on the sidewalk before I’d take the word of a person who would like us to believe that she was stone cold sober behind the wheel, ran over a pedestrian crossing against the light, stopped the car 400 feet later so her husband could pull another injured victim out of her windshield and throw him to the street and then went on her merry way home.
If you believe her - I’ve got some swamp land to sell you ...
» on 10.03.09 @ 01:50 PM
As uncomfortable as this is, it is not tabloid-esque. If you read the sourced article, I think the point of this is that the defense may try to use this info to get their client off. Yes, it’s pretty pathetic and desperate. No one is blaming her for drinking, and no, it is not illegal to be “walking under the influence”. It will be interesting to see how this pans out.
» on 10.03.09 @ 03:25 PM
“If you read the sourced article, I think the point of this is that the defense may try to use this info to get their client off” - SBnewschic
Right, and that’s a “point” that Mr. Macfadyen completely omitted in his tabloidesque rendition of the information.
I don’t know any of the people involved, but when I read things like this, it makes me sad - what ever happened to basic human decency?
My heart goes out to the family of the victim.
» on 10.03.09 @ 04:04 PM
We’re condemning Noozhawk for including information. And we’re condemning Noozhawk for excluding information. ?? Ohhhhh-kay.
» on 10.03.09 @ 06:14 PM
MCM,
I agree that the driver and her scum passenger are scum and should get thrown away for a long time.
But you’re wrong on the “facts” and the DA’s office obviously agrees with me on this one… there is no reason why a crime of this stature should ONLY be a misdemeanor and not a FELONY… except for the fact that the evidence is shakey. If your “other” eye witness even exists, obviously they are less than credible as well in light of the reduced charges. Read up on this - the defendants were offered ridiculously short prison sentences in a plea deal (which the defendants refused). No reason for this light weight offer if there really was a rock solid case. Should be a Felony - it is not. That give you a clue?
Like I said, I’d like to see both people from the car hung out to dry especially the cold bastard that tossed the boy from the car down the block - but the case against them is shakey at best.
» on 10.03.09 @ 08:28 PM
There is felony vehicular homicide and misdemeanor vehicular homicide. The difference between the two is a legal issue not an issue of “if the DA has a strong case”. The difference between the misd. and felony has to do with the level of negligence the driver employed when causing the collision. A typical felony vehicular homicide is when the driver is DUI - a garden variety misdemeanor vehicular homicide is when the driver commits a routine traffic violation that causes a death in a collision. Because the offense, which led to the collision, was not grievous in nature (in this case it was a routine red light violation) then the law identifies the level of culpability to be a misdemeanor level. The hit and run charge would be a felony because they fled from a collision where they caused injury and death. Considering the hour that the collision occurred, and the circumstances surrounding the collision, the driver was probably DUI but, when the arrest occurs so long after the collision, there is no way to prove she was DUI so the only homicide option is a misdemeanor.
» on 10.03.09 @ 10:07 PM
Dear “Anthony” -
You don’t know what you’re talking about - at all.
Dear “from a COP” -
Thank you for explaining it so succinctly.
» on 10.04.09 @ 11:23 AM
It is amazing to us that people who do not like that certain facts are reported bash the forum of communication. Would we be better off if we didn’t know the facts and that nobody reported things that might offend someone’s personal belief system?
This is relevant information about a case that has been of significant interest to our community. The actions of the participants and of those who have worked on the law enforcement and those who have reported the news have been slammed from all sides. So, further information about the character of all these participants is reasonable to analyze.
This is also important information that we will be sharing with our granddaughters before they go off to school at a rich university with lots of temptation around.
I know it hurts when someone’s angel turns out to not be as pure as they were portrayed before, but there is a lesson to be learned. Fact is, if the 18 year old girl hadn’t been out drinking illegally, walking the streets in the middle of the night with an “experienced drinker” at DOUBLE THE LEGAL LIMIT for adults, she would probably be another unknown freshman at USC, alive, well and able to visit her family today.
That doesn’t make what happened right, but look at this for what it really is. It’s not MURDER or even VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER. The worst part is the hit and run aspect, and that will be dealt with appropriately by the LA County authorities.
People get hit by cars every day and sometimes it is very tragic. Parents allow their children to go off to college and sometimes it ends up tragic. Why not prevent the preventable with a little common sense.
Finally, it’s SUNDAY and many of you probably went to church today. I wonder if you remember the concepts of MERCY and FORGIVENESS… or have they been erased from a NEW AMERICAN DICTIONARY?
What’s done is done. But, where do we go from here? To a hell filled with Recrimination, Blame and Guilt? Or to the forgiving space in the merciful heaven of our benevolent creator!!!
I hope that Adrianna and her family can find peace from this knowing that she is with a kind and loving God who called her home to be an Angel needed in his kingdom.
» on 10.04.09 @ 12:45 PM
Lamont & Fred Sanford -
The ‘character’ of the victim is neither on trial here, nor does it have anything to do with the guilt or innocence of the accused. As well, the victim is not dead because she went away to college, or because she went to a party, or because a young man was walking her home; she’s dead because someone ran a red light and hit her in the crosswalk. All this other stuff is just meaningless verbiage which does nothing but encourage creeps like you to crawl out of the woodwork to place blame on a victim who can no longer speak for herself.
As I said before, it’s nothing but a red herring, and a shameless one at that.
» on 10.04.09 @ 03:23 PM
Thank you MCM, and all others who castigated Noozhawk for running this article (and actually reporting the facts). Also, kudos MCM and others, for your glorious defense of the dead, freedom of the press, as well as open, transparent media, government and law enforcement… LOL !!
Truth be told whether hit by a car or not, being a teenage girl drunk at 0.17 level, alone on the streets at 3AM in boulevard area of USC, is simply dangerous and actually illegal behavior. NO, It IS NOT A REASON OR INVITATION TO BE HIT BY A DRUNK DRIVER AND KILLED, BUT IT IS DANGEROUS, ILLEGAL ACTIVITY. It is called PUBLIC DRUNKENNESS. That is a worthy footnote to this story that was fairly reported. Sorry if you don’t like it.
If an person is encountered in that drunken condition at that time of day by Santa Barbara Police or Sheriff, they will most likely be charged with public intoxication, and taken to the jail or sobering center for their own safety.
When we crawled out of the woodwork our intent was to point our that two wrongs don’t make a right and to encourage those still living on this Earth to preserve their soul, whether by staying away from the evil of alcohol, or from the sad affair of making vicarious online revenge their life’s work. Either activity could consign one to eternity on the banks of River Styx.
Sometimes people actually make mistakes that have severe consequences. Even nice people from good homes. It’s very reasonable to point out that someone who is very drunk can stray into the path of danger whether it is their fault or not. It’s also reasonable to provide the public as many facts as possible about a celebrated story. (thank you Noozhawk for doing so).
As stated before, we’ll discuss this with our granddaughters. It’s a good, albeit sad, lesson about drinking and driving, underage drinking, drunkenness, taking care of yourself and looking out for family members, and how the law works.
No matter who is guilty or who is blamed, a person lost a life and a family lost a child. Your vicious comments will not change, nor do they glorify in any way, that fact.
Acknowledging and learning all of the facts might help someone make better decisions about how to spend their time.
Furthermore, the comments of many, juxtaposed against what is a seemingly forgotten concept of mercy and forgiveness simply gives us reason to pause.
MCM, did you learn anything from this information? Will you will tell your children that it’s ok to behave in an irresponsible way and put themselves in potential danger because the harm that comes their way may be someone else’s fault? I guess at least you will still be able to “fry” the perpetrator or “hang ‘em high”. That’s almost as good as having your kid at home alive, isn’t it?
What a wonderful world!
» on 10.04.09 @ 08:39 PM
As a mother, it’s impossible to look at a photo Carmen Bachan and not be reduced to tears. Her griefstricken face is a heartbreaking sight. It’s a reminder to all of us to hold our children close and never let a day go by without telling them that we love them.
Why anyone would feel that they have the right to judge the character of her daughter who was slain so tragically leaves me speechless.
» on 10.05.09 @ 08:20 AM
A shame, might have been able to save her own life. No excuse for the drivers negligence but much about life is be about reacting to and avoiding mistakes made by others. How many times has someone swerved into your lane on the highway and you get out of the way?
» on 10.05.09 @ 08:35 PM
It should not matter that she had that level of alcohol she was walking in a crosswalk with her having the right of way. The bottom line is that random acts like this don’t make it OK for people to try and get away with it. It is sad that people make a judgement or try to make their wrong OK based on such results. If she had gone into the crosswalk on a red light then it would be different but in this case it was not OK for them to have taken off the jury selected should stay focused on the act itself not the victims actions!
» on 10.06.09 @ 01:17 AM
Nobody has said what the driver/passenger did was anything near “ok”. Nobody has excused them for anything at all.
What has been pointed out, something that some refuse to hear, is that the victims were wasted. No, that doesn’t excuse hit and run… but alcohol degrades anybody’s reaction time… No, this girl should not have been killed, no it is not her “fault”... but being completely intoxicated in the middle of the night on an LA boulevard is not exactly the best situation to put oneself in either.
That is the point. That is why this is news and relevant.
Lamont & Fred are right on the button with their comments.
» on 10.06.09 @ 08:39 AM
“What has been pointed out, something that some refuse to hear, is that the victims were wasted.”
Anthony - you’re making stuff up again. Unless you’ve got a blood alcohol for that young man who was escorting Ms Bachan home, you should really try to draw a line between your fantasies and reality when making such claims. Just a thought.
» on 10.06.09 @ 12:40 PM
I knew the legal limit for driving was .08. So there’s a limit for walking around? As long as you’re not a danger to self or others you can get stunk drunk and walk L.A. .
» on 10.07.09 @ 09:55 PM
As a teacher at Santa Barbara High, I never had Adrianna in class. But I always lecture my seniors about being safe while at college. They are on their own for the first time, and there are lots of temptations out there for them. Drinking is one of them. I know they are going to party (I just look at my time living in Isla Vista), and I know they are going to make mistakes. I employ to them them to try and be as safe as possible and to always try and make good decisions, because when drinking it is difficult to make good decisions.
I do not know how much alcohol, if at all, the gentleman with Adrianna had. I feel the driver and the passenger are totally at fault. But I also wonder if Adrianna was not drunk, would she have been able to save herself from this situation? We will never know because of the reckless actions of the driver and passenger of the car.
The Noozhawk has the right, and should, to print the information given to it in regards to this situation. Teenage drinking is out of control in the Santa Barbara area, and it is taken to college with them. This is just a sad situation all around.
» on 10.22.09 @ 10:02 PM
Unbelievable that they would publish insidious trash about the victim of a murder. Next we’ll know both victims dating history and how much money their family had.It was a murder, the weapon was a car and the victim was a young, beautiful, intelligent, sparkling young lady. Light to her family, friends and Pi Beta Phi sorority.
To run a red light, kill a pedestrian in a crosswalk and later stop the car,get out and throw the injured body of her date off the hood, shows a callousness that is beyond comprehension.
More Local News »
Santa Barbara Transient Accused of Attempted Rape
A woman is attacked in Santa Maria while walking to a restaurant from her motel room
106-Year-Old Leonard Cruess Attributes Long Life to Love of Family
The Goleta resident is still going strong, with a daily routine that includes exercise, the Catholic Rosary and his signature drink
COMB’s Second Barrel Project Faces New Stumbling Block
Work is basically on hold until a federal permit is obtained; the Cachuma board also discusses the problem of mussels and elects new officers
Fun and Fit: One Deep Breath, Lose 5 Pounds — Myth or My Ohhhhm My?
K & A take a few deep breaths of their own in search of the truth
Police Identify Woman Who Died in Fall Off Hood of Car
Boyfriend faces charges in the death of 41-year-old Isabel Tole Renosa of Santa Barbara
Weather: Fair 68.0º
Search Noozhawk »
