Fatal accident: the daughter of a Hells guilty of having killed her best friend

The daughter of a Hells Angel who killed her best friend in a violent face-off has been convicted of driving while drunk after a day of partying on a boat.

• Read also: Hells girl had a normal drive

• Read also: Fatal accident: The daughter of a Hells was intoxicated, according to the lawsuit

“A reasonable person, placed in the same situation, would have been aware of the risk created by his behavior: the reasonable people around him tried to dissuade him from driving”, argued Judge Richard Marleau, declaring Karell Tanguay guilty. of the nine counts against her, at the Salaberry-de-Valleyfield courthouse.

The tragedy dates back to July 15, 2018. After a day celebrating at the Régates de Valleyfield with friends, bottle of alcohol in hand, the young woman, who will soon be celebrating her 26th birthday, took a taxi to go to a restaurant , but she eventually changed her route to get to her car.


The scene of the accident shows the violence of the impact.

Photo courtesy of the court

The scene of the accident shows the violence of the impact.

Despite her condition, she still took the wheel, with her best friend, Olivia Drozdoski Richardson, as a passenger. Shortly after, the accused caused an accident in a curve of Route 132, in Saint-Stanislas-de-Kostka, in Montérégie.

“The impact is of rare violence. None of the four occupants escape unscathed. Olivia dies,” the judge summed up.


Karell Tanguay

Photo courtesy of the court

“She was the danger”

In his substantial 49-page decision, however, he concluded that Karell Tanguay was responsible for the collision and that she was impaired by alcohol.

“She was encroaching on the other lane. She was the danger,” said Judge Marleau.

In defence, it was asserted, during the pleadings, that Karell Tanguay had “normal” driving and that she had “promptly reacted” one second before the collision. The magistrate did not adhere to this version.

“It rather shows that she was deviating from her path, that this conduct was dangerous and that she does not see the danger,” said Judge Marleau.

The defense also argued that no one at trial could establish how much alcohol she had consumed or if she was drunk.


Bottle of alcohol in hand, we see the accused, Karell Tanguay, the day of the tragedy.

Photo courtesy of the court

Bottle of alcohol in hand, we see the accused, Karell Tanguay, the day of the tragedy.

“We have photos where she pretends to drink. I have no proof that she drinks, pointed out Me Michel Vleminckx. Evidence of consumption of Mme Tanguay is quite limited. »

Judge Marleau indicated that it was “not necessary” to answer this question.

“The accused will have taken [de l’alcool] enough to achieve the results demonstrated [qui étaient au-delà de la limite permise] “, he wrote in his judgment, recalling that the defense had repeatedly tried to undermine the credibility of the various experts during the trial.

A strong message

For the couple involved in the violent collision, the guilty verdict was a real relief, as they still live with their after-effects.

Victims are now hoping the judge will hand down a sentence that is “fair, but also sends a strong message against drunk driving”.

“You have to show young people what can happen when you’ve had too much to drink,” said Emil Chicas.

The accused is the daughter of Yvon Tanguay, veteran of the Hells Angels and member of the Montreal chapter.

♦ Sentencing submissions will take place later this year, at a date to be determined.

what they said

” It is a relief. They tried to blame it on my car, on me, but the judge understood what really happened that day. […] We just want justice done. »

– Emil Chicas, victim

“Now I have trouble standing for a long time, walking. Every morning, I still have pain everywhere, I can’t even play with my grandchildren. »

– Emil Chicas, victim

“The accused voluntarily chose to become intoxicated. […] She could only be aware of the risk. »

– Justice Richard Marleau

“The curve is neither a trap nor the cause of the accident nor the culprit of the accident. It remains one of the circumstances that a driver must face on his journey. Nothing more. »

– Justice Richard Marleau

“The only inference is that once in a taxi, [l’accusée] changes his destination, has his vehicle brought to him and gets behind the wheel. »

– Justice Richard Marleau

Do you have information to share with us about this story?

Got a scoop that might be of interest to our readers?

Write to us at [email protected] or call us directly at 1 800-63SCOOP.


source site-64

Latest