Hyde Co State’s Attorney: Ravnsborg being charged with 3 misdemeanors

According to the presser being held by Hyde Co. States Atty Emily Sovell, Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg is being charged with three violations of law as a result of the 9/12/20 accident where a pedestrian was struck and killed while on the road.

  1. Operating a vehicle while using a mobile electronic device. (*this was before the accident and the prosecutors claim that the look/see at the phone took place on the East side of Highmore, and the accident was on the west side of Highmore.)
  2. Lane Driving
  3. Careless Driving

All charges are misdemeanors.

They’re saying that he was not under the influence of anything. I’m sure there will be more to come on this.

74 thoughts on “Hyde Co State’s Attorney: Ravnsborg being charged with 3 misdemeanors”

  1. I. I get this one, which we all do, and is a recently new law.

    2. I would like to see the evidence on this, which will prove true or not true. We still don’t know whether or not the pedestrian was walking the wrong way on the road, or was he intoxicated, etc.

    3. This is a bogus one, careless driving because he looked at his speedometer or radio or something like that??? Come on, we all do this.

    These misdemeanors sound more politically motivated than anything, I wonder who was influencing the state attorney.

  2. What a joke. At most a $1500 fine and 90 day jail sentence for what would clearly be vehicular homicide due in any surrounding state.

    1. There was no evidence for vehicular homicide, that is why it wasn’t charged. So no joke, just the legal system working and not charging an innocent man.

      I still have questions as to where the pedestrian was on the road, and was he drinking. Very strange for an individual to be out on a road at night on a Saturday, especially when he crashed his truck earlier in the day.

      1. He killed a pedestrian while operating a motor vehicle. He was unaware of his surroundings to the point he claimed it was a deer, despite the fact that the body hit the front of his car and rolled into the windshield. That’s clearly grounds for negligence, which in IA, NE, MN, & ND would hold up for a charge of vehicular homicide. Ravnsborg happened to do it in the one state where intoxication is a requirement for a vehicular homicide charge.

        1. Again, why is it always someone else’s fault besides the person who help lead to the accident? Sorry but Boever should not have been on the road at that time of night. Had he chosen differently, then he would have still been alive.

        2. He asked questions, he didn’t post “The person killed was the only one to blame”. Get off your high horse.

      2. The passive aggressive nature of your approach doesn’t diminish the repugnant nature of your act of victim shaming.

      3. He’s not innocent. What a stupid thing to say. If he was, someone else would have hit the gentleman, or he would still be alive.

  3. Wish someone would ask the Deputy SA why the elected State’s Attorney for Hyde County wasn’t involved. And secondly, what her relationship with the AG was previous to this. They were in law school together and I believe on law review together.

  4. The couldn’t prove he was distracted, I guess.
    1. He looked at his phone, unrelated to the accident. Really?

    These charges are lame. Ravnsborg should go before a judge and make them prove it.

      1. How is he done, there was no evidence to warrant additional charges? The system worked and kept an innocent man from being charged because of an unfortunate accident.

        Everyone knows Ravnsborg is a hard-working individual who cares about his job and helps others often. I for one don’t want to lose this up-and-coming bright GOP person, we in South Dakota need people like Ravnsborg despertly in public service.

        1. If he is ever nominated by the Republican Party again there is clearly something wrong with the delegates brains. He needs to do the right thing and resign or announce he will not seek nomination again. That’s the right thing to do. He was way under qualified to begin with. His judgment to pen his own statement in the days after the accident which conflicted with his statement to dispatch is all we need to know about his prowess as an attorney. My goodness he’s a train wreck. The party needs to wake up and ask him to do what’s right. He will have more criminal court experience as a defendant as he did as a prosecutor now.

        2. Go ahead.
          Maintain this level of delusion.
          If you are a delegate to the State Party convention, re-nominate Ravnsborg for another term.
          The Democrat and Libertarian parties are licking their chops that Ravnsborg is nominated and stands for re-election.
          Their party resources may be small.
          Their “bench” may be comparatively thin. But there are plenty of attorneys available as candidates.
          And Ravnsborg has already proven that one need not be an accomplished attorney to hold the office of AG.
          With Ravnsborg on the ballot – easiest win for a non-R ever.

          1. It is so sad that people still try to bring up Ravnsborg not being qualified for AG. I have heard from friends in the office that he is doing a tremendous job as AG, better than the previous AG.

            He also has a win record with the Supreme Court, more than Fitz can say about Win/Loss record that has way more losses than wins

            1. If you only prosecute the cases with a very high probability of success then you aren’t doing your job as a prosecutor. Ravnsborg was still the better pick, but the choices could have been better.

            2. “I have heard from friends…” LOL!
              About as credible as “My sister’s husband’s cousin said…”!
              It is so sad that people still try to bring up Fitz in lame attempts to bring legitimacy to Ravnsborg’s thin resume and dubious legal bona fides.
              From your confident statement, I assume that you are eager for Ravnsborg to return to private practice in order that he can provide legal counsel to you in your personal and business matters.
              Better get in line! Hell, Scott Hoy can’t represent them all!

  5. He was speeding, but was not charged .
    I realize it is only 2 mph over but think of how things might have played out if he had not been speeding at all on his infamous drive.
    I certainly hope he and the sheriff will go the honorable route and resign.
    No one else would get a pathetic excuse of charges. Shame and only shame to the prosecutors.

    1. 2 mph? are you serious?
      Law enforcement would never issue a ticket for that. All three will be difficult to prove.
      Your hate is obvious.

      1. @ymous I know a guy ticketed for 2 mph over here in SD…? Doesn’t matter those 2 mph could have made a difference.

        1. The outlier proves the rule? I have found if I am doing 65 mph on a two lane road and someone comes along, I get passed almost every time. Most officers pull someone over if they are doing quite a bit over the speed limit. Most of the time, they let 5 mph go, unless a school zone. In SD, we consider them “speed suggestions”. Get real!

        2. How? Would the person killed not have been on the road, would the trajectory of the car magically change, would the impact not have been sufficient to cause death?

      2. 1 tick over the Breathalyzer is a crime but since the sheriff failed at his job we don’t about JR’s BAC.
        Yes my hate is obvious,I fought very hard on the distracted driving bill and the top cop of this state has sworn to uphold the laws, blatantly ignored them and cannot be trusted to be AG and will not be a helpful asset for the Republican Party .
        A couple years ago Storm Central TV [KELO] had an interview with a Trooper who vowed to arrest anyone going 1 mph over the limit.
        I have never seen this happen but in the last 8 months I haven’t seen anyone charged with texting and driving until now. Anyone else in SD? Anyone? Lawmen? Where are the stats? [crickets]

        1. Actually, we do know. He had 0. He does not drink when attending these functions. If you have other proof, show it. The people at the function said he did not consume alcohol and he has a history of not consuming alcohol at these functions. It is really unfair to imply he had. BTW, the sheriff did not test him because he did not believe he had cause to at the time.

          1. South Dakota law requires a LEO to conduct a BAC test on any driver involved in an accident causing more than $1000. damage. As the sheriff failed to do his sworn duty we don’t know the truth. He should resign his position as well as AG JR.
            Remember, on the 911 call he said he hit something in the middle of the road not on the edge of the road. This man can’t be trusted in the capacity of AG. He will bring the GOP down with him if he stays.

      3. Apparently you’ve never driven through Mitchell speeding. I’ve been pulled over for doing exactly 2mph over the speed limit.

  6. Well just like Mitch McConnell verified D. Trump is certainly subject to civil charges for inciting the US Capitol riot and insurrection, so also J. Ravnsborg is subject to civil charges in the death of Joe Boever. So perhaps justice will prevail.
    Just wondering what ‘locked’ cellphones and ‘unlocked’ cellphones could mean…can a vehicle driver lock and unlock cellphones while driving without being distracted?? I wold suggest that is certainly going to be presented as evidence during any civil trial.

  7. Nothing to see here, just a man treated like a normal citizen who drove over a guy and then given the sheriffs car to leave the scene and months before charges announced and misdemeanors instead of an actual charge. Yep, just an average joe proving the system works.

    1. You really did miss a Key Detail.
      The victim, Mr Boever was not “on the road” (and, pssst, [whispers] neither was Ravnsborg’s vehicle).
      Your attempt to smear and shame the victim is reprehensible.

  8. God, I loathe Jason Ravnsborg, but I don’t necessarily disagree with this outcome. The requirement of recklessness would have prevented a conviction, in my mind. I’m not necessarily comfortable with him remaining AG, but not bringing manslaughter charges makes sense to me.

  9. While the charges are probably appropriate based on the evidence and South Dakota law, it is still my opinion that Attorney General Ravensborg should resign. His credibility as the state’s highest ranking law enforcement officer is gone. It would be a selfless act and a classy way to go out. It would preclude a likely painful impeachment process with the same end result.

    1. Based upon what??? If he had jaywalked should he resign? If he was involved in a fender bender in which he was at fault should he resign? He was involved in an unfortunate accident. Things do happen and it is tragic. You cannot say he has acted irresponsible. When the accident happened, he contacted the sheriff. They looked for what he thought was a deer. He came back the next day. He cooperated including turning over his phone.

      1. You absolutely can say he acted irresponsibly. This is why he was charged with careless driving. That careless driving led to an accident. That accident killed a man. His actions afterward indicate that he tried to do what the law required, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t driving a one ton automobile in a negligent manner.

  10. AG Ravnsborg is and always has been honorable to his position within the Law and as an honored veteran willing to die for someone/anyone he never knew. The Ultimate Sacrifice. All our Veterans make that same sacrifice. We all make mistakes mostly being easily forgiven. This one though is much different as an innocent human being was killed regardless of incident. The Law & Order of similar events need then to be carried out regardless of anyone involved.

  11. Just as I don’t think the death penalty gives peace to a grieving family, I don’t think extra-ordinary punishment because he is a public servant will give the family any peace. Unless there is more to the story than we now know, this is a tragic accident where a man died and everyone living who was involved will have a heavy heart for their entire life. I pray they relcieve the graces to live with this burden.

  12. The two questions I wanna know:
    1. How was the exact time of impact determined? The car should have a recorder for this info, but it wasn’t mentioned. If it’s based on his word alone, how hard is it to hang up a phone after you hit a person, wait two minutes, then place an emergency call… And say it happened 15 seconds ago.
    2. What responsibility does a driver or responder have to determine what was actually hit? There’s a chance a person in this situation could be saved if found and treated.

  13. What is “lane driving”? What made it careless driving? As for the operating an electronic device, be careful if you wish to cast stones. Has it ever been determined why the victim went back to the car after abandoning it in a ditch and going home?
    Has it ever been determined what the blood alcohol level of the victim was at the time of the accident?
    This is not to blame the victim, but the answer to those questions might shed some light as to why the accident happened. In any case we have a tragedy of a family losing a loved one and an individual who has shown himself to be a hard working public servant having his reputation smeared.

    1. Smeared? He was negligent, and his negligence killed a man. I agree with no manslaughter charges, but you are full of it if you try to portray Ravnsborg as a victim of circumstance.

  14. Had the driver been anyone other than a highly placed state official, the charges would have been felony. The AG should have taken a leave immediately to quell even the appearance of impropriety.

    We wouldn’t believe a 15 year old kid if they said they couldn’t tell the difference between a person and a deer, but for him oh, by all means, kill a man, pay a token fine and have a happy life?

    This is a sad day for a grieving family, the state, and justice.

    1. Had the driver been anyone other than a highly placed state official, the investigation would have been a couple weeks and it would have been ruled and accident with no charges at all.

      1. @Pondering You are in a delusional state. Get out of your bubble or off your cloud or whatever. Believe me, the outcome would be very different for the “average joe”.

        1. I agree with Pondering, this should have been wrapped up months ago with no charges. There is no evidence to support warranting these charges other than political motivation.

          I want to know who is politically behind these charges, Fargo (who has been heard saying he is not a fan of Ravnsborg), or even Noem (she has put out a lot of miss leading information over the months)

  15. I like to draw conclusions based on events that I’ve experienced. I grew up in Minnesota and a classmate of mine was struck by a car and killed. It was a tragedy, he had just got done with hockey practice and was walking home with a big hockey bag on his shoulder and crossed a busy highway in snowy & icy conditions, slipped and was killed. The man who struck him stopped and notified authorities. An investigation was done that night and it was determined the following morning that since he didn’t cross the highway at a crosswalk coupled with the snowy/icy conditions no charges were filed. That I agree with!

    This I do not, I know that stretch of road, flat and straight, no inclement weather. The LAW is 65 mph and it was determined he was going 67 mph plus he left his lane of travel, struck and killed a man he was legally walking on the shoulder of the highway. How is this NOT manslaughter? I know how much lawyers and law enforcement love to look at the world in 2 shades, black and white, but NOW they choose to use discretion in this atrocious manner. This man needs to resign immediately, he is NOT above the law. And by his move to not resign just speaks volumes of this mans character. Delusional. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED. IS THIS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA? Or East Germany? Can’t tell… corruption on another level here in SD.

  16. We are the party of law and order, of which Ravnsborg is a member of. He’s also the leader of law enforcement officers and prosecutors. For the sake of the Republican party Ravnsborg must resign. For the sake of all SD police officers and prosecutors Ravnsborg must resign. This is a tragic incident where a man lost his life. Whether Ravnsborg committed a felony or misdemeanor he committed a crime where a man died. I believe Ravnsborg is a good man but there are consequences to our actions. Reading the vitriol on the various platforms and the conspiracy theories of quid pro quo on AG’s decision not to appeal Amendment A to the involvement of the Governor has made this Republicans stomach upset. Public perception is important. We have a great state led by conservative beliefs and I want to keep it that way. I’m sorry for Mr Boevers family. I’m sorry Ravnsborg will have to live with the knowledge that someone died in an incident he was involved in. Nothing will bring Mr Boever back. But, Mr Boever’s family has asked for his resignation. Many in the public is asking for his resignation. Ravnsborg needs to do right by Mr Boever’s family. We as a state and a party need to follow our platform of law and order.

    1. Exactly, Him not resigning means SD laws mean nothing. Law enforcement is a joke. And why should anyone else care. In a nutshell.

      1. Remember the family is a bunch of liberal democrat radicals like Nick Nemec who if you search the blogs has bashed ALL REPUBLICANS INCLUDING RAVNSBORG, long before this happened.

        The media only talks to him as he spouts his conspiracy theories because he is bashing a Republican.

  17. Between this and the Amendment A stuff, our great state has taken a hard turn toward tyranny. Our “leaders” are literally above the law. Scary situation.

  18. can somebody explain this business of a “locked/unlocked” cell phone and what is a “look/see” on an electronic device?

    Does using your cell phone for GPS constitute using an electronic device? If your phone starts giving you audible directions is that a violation?

    1. No.
      Actually I found Mr Moore to be the more solid barrister in his citations of the codified laws as were actually pertinent to the prosecutors’ decisions in the case.
      Savell only offered excuses and rationalizations. For nearly everything.

  19. Janklow was charged with vehicular manslaughter with less evidence. Was the “deep state” involved back then too? The AG would have been tried and convicted already if he had a (D) next to his name, come on people…..

Comments are closed.