Local News

Clayton woman charged in crash that killed friend

Posted January 9, 2012

Map Marker  Find News Near Me

Map

— Johnston County authorities have charged a 19-year-old Clayton woman with misdemeanor death by motor vehicle in the Dec. 10, 2011, crash that killed her 17-year-old friend.

Kristy Tamayo, of 1005 Dewberry Court, over-corrected after her southbound Honda Civic went off the right side of the 800 block of Amelia Church Road. The Honda crossed the center line and struck an oncoming GMC SUV head-on.

Tania Ritacco, who was a passenger in the Honda, died of her injuries. Relatives said Rittaco and Tamayo were best friends and were on the way home from a Bible study class.

Tamayo is scheduled to appear in court on Feb. 15.

115 Comments

This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • AtALost Jan 11, 2012

    "THERE ARE NOT JUST ACCIDENTS. There is ALWAYS a contributing factor. ALWAYS."

    Exactly. Being a nice girl and coming from bible study doesn't change the fact that the she did something that caused the accident. If a tire had blown or some other problem out of her control, they wouldn't have charged her. Hopefully others realize that there's more to driving than just being able to reach the pedals. Many are still texting and doing everything but paying attention to the road. If this was your family member was the victim, I doubt you'd think no charges were needed. Fortunately, no one died in the vehicle she hit head on.

  • leo-nc Jan 11, 2012

    "yep, read it. you're supposed to be intentionally breaking another section of the code for this one to apply. and, again, this is not one of the specific actions that are illegal (as far as what info is in the article)"----

    You are NOT supposed to be INTENTIONALLY violating another traffic law. READ CLOSELY PLEASE. Engaged in does NOT mean intentional.

    Lets see here.

    (1) The person unintentionally causes the death of another person,
    (2) The person was engaged in the violation of any State law or local ordinance applying to the operation or use of a vehicle or to the regulation of traffic, other than impaired driving under G.S. 20-138.1, and
    (3) The commission of the offense in subdivision (2) of this subsection is the proximate cause of the death.

  • abylelab -BT- Jan 11, 2012

    ++someone doing something other than paying attention to their driving.
    leo-nc++

    definitely can agree with that

  • abylelab -BT- Jan 11, 2012

    "and a polluted interpretation of that particular statute."---

    LOL really? Have you bothered to read it? The statute is dead on. I don't know if it can get any more clear. You either meet the elements or you don't. Emotion and sympathy don't play a role in applying the law. Sorry fella.
    leo-nc

    yep, read it. you're supposed to be intentionally breaking another section of the code for this one to apply. and, again, this is not one of the specific actions that are illegal (as far as what info is in the article)

  • leo-nc Jan 11, 2012

    ""If DOT would maintain the road's shoulder like they are suppose to she would not have to "over'correct". Most accidents like this is DOT's fault.""---

    WHAT?!?!?!? REALLY?!?!?! Uhhhhh, no, this is not correct. Almost 75% of the wrecks I go to including fatals are people going around a curve to fast, overcorrecting then crossing the centerline and wreaking havoc from there. On the straights, it's usually a rear end or someone doing something other than paying attention to their driving.

  • leo-nc Jan 11, 2012

    "I am not entertaining further conversation with you."---

    Thank you! ...and blah blah blah to the rest. You have no idea how many people I've protect, or lives I've saved etc. You have no idea how many times I've told a parent their teenager is dead because A, they screwed up or B, their friend screwed up. The simple fact is that she was negligent, not just innocent accident. The fact is that she overcorrected because of that. The fact is that she crossed the centerline and hit another driver head on. The fact is that she killed her friend due to NEGLIGENCE. NO, THERE ARE NOT JUST ACCIDENTS. There is ALWAYS a contributing factor. ALWAYS. After investigating thousands of crashes, I've seen it all. Be free my subject....and be gone.

  • leo-nc Jan 11, 2012

    "As I said before “one can draw a great amount of conclusions from your posts.""--

    You can't draw a thing. You know what assumptions do don't you? Maybe you should look in the mirror and think about that.

  • leo-nc Jan 11, 2012

    Ahhh yes, the pay my salary argument. I pay my salary too in case you were curious. I also pay for the salary of the workers I buy products from. Yes, you pay my salary, thank you very much. Now if you could reach in that pocket of yours and supply another penny I be able to get a raise for the first time in years, for dealing with people who feel the need to make themselves feel big about reminding me of same. If you want your penny back, let me know and we can arrange that. So keep coming at me and refuse to face the facts. That's fine with me. Doesn't bother me in the slightest but the fact is that this happens over and over..(charging people with the laws that apply to such a charge) And if you armchair QB's want to come ride with me for a while, then bring it on you computer tough guys.

    I do my job and I do my job well. Whether you think I'm arrogant or not makes no difference to me. You've been given the facts, so do what you will with them. End of story really.

  • nicoleangel2004 Jan 11, 2012

    REALLY?!?!?!?!
    "the law is in place, to assign responsibility in the wake of a tragic and emotional situation." -_-
    You're right. That sounds extremely girl. The girl just lost her friend and she will have to live with that guilt for the rest of her life. It is not right. She was not texting nor drinking. It was an ACCIDENT.

  • Scare Crow Jan 11, 2012

    Why is this still in the news, enough already, let it rest WRAL and go on to something else.

More...