Outrage Grows Over Concord Crash; 17-Year-old Driver Arrested for Killing Girl, Father

Driver was speeding, witnesses say, when he hit three cyclists. The third, 12, suffered minor injuries.


A father and his 9-year-old daughter were killed and a 12-year-old daughter was injured Saturday morning when a speeding, out-of-control sports utility vehicle sheared off a fire hydrant, struck them and slammed into a building.

The victims were Solaiman Nuri, 41, and Hadessa Nuri, 9, of Concord. The 12-year-old daughter, unidentified by police, suffered minor injuries, according to a news release from the .

The 17-year-old driver of the 2002 white Cadillac Escalade was treated for minor injuries at a local hospital, then arrested on a charge of vehicular manslaughter and brought to Juvenile Hall in Martinez, police reported.

Witnesses reported seeing the boy standing outside the wreckage of his customized SUV, apparently trying to call a friend on his cell phone.

The three family members were riding bicycles on the sidewalk at the intersection of Treat Boulevard and Oak Grove Road at about 9:30 a.m. when they were struck by the speeding Escalade, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Fire Marshal Lewis Broschard said. All three bicyclists were wearing helmets, Concord police reported. They were riding on Treat Boulevard eastbound.

Mark Lucas, the manager of the Oil Changers on the southeast corner of the intersection, was chatting with a customer in the bays when he heard a boom. He stepped outside to see the SUV flipping over. He estimated it flipped over four or five times.

Then, Lucas said, "I heard kids screaming."

Lucas said he often saw the Nuris riding bikes in the area.

Immediately after the accident, the girl who survived was crying and pointing back toward where her father lay with his bicycle, according to a woman who works in the area and declined to identify herself. The woman also saw citizens tending to the injured people in the immediate aftermath and water gushing out of the hydrant at the northwest corner of the intersection.

Preliminary reports indicate that the vehicle was traveling at an "excessive rate of speed" through the intersection when it lost control, hit the three bicyclists and then careened into the building, Broschard said.

Solaiman Nuri was pronounced dead at the scene; Hadessa, the 9-year-old, was taken to John Muir Medical Center in Walnut Creek, where she was pronounced dead.

The elder Nuri was an Afghan immigrant who came to Concord from New York about five years ago, friends told the San Francisco Chronicle. He drove a truck and volunteered for his younger daughter's youth soccer team. She was a student at , where students are off school this week for spring break.

The 12-year-old girl was also taken to John Muir Medical Center for treatment of minor-to-moderate injuries.

The SUV banged off the one-story building at 2975 Treat Blvd., which houses an optometry office and has other office space for lease. There was visible damage to the beige brick of the building. Broschard said city engineers were responding to assess the structural integrity of the building damaged in the crash.

The Escalade was westbound on Treat Boulevard. It sheared off the hydrant at the northwest corner. Solaiman's bike came to rest about 100 feet west of the intersection in a driveway at 2975 Treat Blvd, with a silver water bottle resting alongside it. The two colorful girls bikes came to rest on the sidewalk about 150 feet west of the dad's bike. The SUV, with its severely damaged front end, ended up in a lane of traffic on Treat Boulevard, about 50 feet west of the girls' bikes.

One front wheel came off the SUV and was up against a window of the building.

The building is across Treat Boulevard from Flying Colors Comics and Trader Joe's in the Oak Grove Plaza.

The police investigation lasted all day, with part of the block of Treat Boulevard west of Oak Grove Road blocked and marked off with yellow police tape.

Anyone with information about the incident is asked to call Concord Traffic Officer Ken Carlson at (925) 603-5931.

— Bay City News Service contributed to this report.

Murphy April 11, 2012 at 06:22 AM
My prayers and heartfelt condolences to the loving father and beautiful daughter...May the surviving family members be embraced by a large supportive community of family and friends at this very sad time.
bryan April 11, 2012 at 02:15 PM
He's out of Juvenile Hall and he's free. He can even drive again, if he can rustle up enough money for another whip. Right now the family lawyer is telling him how to dress, how to act, what to say. The process begins. The end result for the Nuri family remains the same. I'm hoping their representation gives voice to the outrage so many of us feel but the Nuri's have amazingly kept at bay. Maybe this will change, I don't know. But something is broken. Pull the kids license. Now.
Harry Jenkins April 11, 2012 at 02:27 PM
What is a whip?
Nicholas April 11, 2012 at 02:31 PM
It's the hoodrat name for the gangstamobiles these ----- people ----- drive. It's what he called his car. His friends said he loaded it up with an "expensive sound system." It might be interesting to see if that played a part in the crash. I'm a biker and yeh,these guys scare the heck out of me, but not for the reasons they think.
Born and Raised April 11, 2012 at 03:02 PM
DP, I'm not a big fan of the arrogant, entitled Lamorindan either but I don't see all of them to be so. They're out there for sure, just go to any 4 way stop sign and they'll eventually make themselves known. Where I draw the line is making myself out to be the righteous societal saviour that you do. "Messenger" with a "mirror"? Perhaps you need to turn that mirror around some. As to the drivers guilt, well, let's see more of what shakes out of the investigation before we start profiling and getting worried about an Escaled in our rear view. I'm not saying he's innocent just want to see more facts before I say hang him.
Born and Raised April 11, 2012 at 03:14 PM
You sound like some of the friends posting on his Facebook account defending him right after the "incident". When he ran into those people and killed them he made it everyone's business. You are obviously a young person (Adults don't compose like you) who thinks that because he made a "mistake" that he deserves some slack and that nobody should "gossip" about him. You're forgetting one huge fact in all this; he ran those people over while speeding and in doing that he's going to have to take responsibility. Part of that is putting up with outraged citizens like us. We may be judgemental but you should really look at what you typed before making a claim of idiocy about us. I'll tell you what the world could do without, kids making mistakes like killing innocent pedestrians on the sidewalk.
Born and Raised April 11, 2012 at 03:15 PM
Well put.
Eliz April 11, 2012 at 07:27 PM
What makes you think he can still drive? Wouldn't the DMV take his license right away for reckless driving? Even if they are still investigating it, he should not be (assuming someone would even let him drive their car).
Eliz April 11, 2012 at 07:37 PM
CalB1997: If you are not interested in the comments, you don't have to read them. You are right that we all make mistakes parenting. It is just that you don't know they were mistakes until something bad happens. To assume "they should know better" is arrogant. All parents do the best they can with the knowledge and inner resources they have. Some are just plain terrible at it. This might not apply here anyway. There is no way for me to know.
Claire Voyance April 12, 2012 at 02:54 AM
Yet again, the public has convicted a person before all of the facts are known. Did the driver lose control of the vehicle after swerving to avoid a wild animal (e.g. squirrel)? Did the driver lose control of the vehicle after swerving to avoid a stray domestic animal (e.g. cat, dog)? Did the vehicle malfunction (brakes, steering, accelerator, etc)? Was the driver temporarily blinded by a reflection or other visual impairment? Did the driver suffer a seizure? etc. etc. etc. Trayvon Martin DUKE LACROSSE All convicted by the public before all of the facts are known. Worse are the media clowns who exacerbate the hysteria, especially a local website that shamelessly published facebook screenshots that seriously inflamed the hysteria and probably polluted the jury pool.
Harry Jenkins April 12, 2012 at 02:59 AM
You have a point.
bryan April 12, 2012 at 04:31 AM
Yeh, that's the ticket. He swerved to avoid hitting a squirrel. Of course, he was going 80 mph or more INTO a crowded intersection at the time, but as long as that squirrel was spared. Let's get real. Please.
Nicholas April 12, 2012 at 12:35 PM
Are you serious? This person rolls into an intersection at 80mph PLUS... takes off the top of a fire hydrant, rolls through three people riding bikes on the sidewalk and KILLS two of them, is going so fast when he hits a building officials DECLARE IT UNINHABITABLE and, after he is bitchslapped by his airbags stands by whats left of his car and not far from where his victims are SCREAMING FOR HELP -- and CALLS HIS FRIEND TO SAY HE MIGHT BE IN TROUBLE. Not 9-1-1, not the police... his bro. And you're worried about how hard a time his defense attorney is going to have getting him off????
Nicholas April 12, 2012 at 01:40 PM
No. His rights have been protected because he hasn't been charged with anything or convicted of anything so he's free to drive if he chooses. If you have a medical condition, your license can be pulled after review. Kill two people, and there are no repercussions until the state gets around to proving you did it.
Claire Voyance April 12, 2012 at 06:44 PM
Bryan "the Judge Without All of the Facts," Do you have conclusive evidence that the vehicle did NOT malfunction? No, you don't. Ever heard of SUDDEN ACCELERATION? Educate yourself: http://suddenacceleration.com/
Claire Voyance April 12, 2012 at 06:45 PM
Nicholas "the Judge Without All of the Facts," Do you have conclusive evidence that the vehicle did NOT malfunction? No, you don't. Ever heard of SUDDEN ACCELERATION? Educate yourself: http://suddenacceleration.com/
Chris Nicholson April 12, 2012 at 06:55 PM
Ever heard of plaintiffs lawyers making stuff up to make millions? No, you haven't. Sudden acceleration (as you use that phrase) is a myth. Who do you think funds that propaganda website? What is their motivation? Ever heard of brakes (hydraulic and emergency)? The effective power of brakes are always many many time greater than the power of the engine. Unless brakes and e-break failed simultaneously with a "sudden acceleration" incident, then this is not plausible as a causal factor. Further, the driver would have to fail to shift to neutral, shut off the ignition or take other mitigating action. Despite you anonymous moniker, your "real world" vision seems clouded-- not to mention your perception of the unknown.
Claire Voyance April 12, 2012 at 07:59 PM
Chris, "(sic) plaintiffs lawyers making stuff up to make millions" Plaintiffs' lawyers cannot get away with "making stuff up" because: [1] Sanctions for frivolous lawsuits are EXTREMELY severe (and judges hate lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits) and [2] Punishment for perjury (e.g. lying about facts) is even worse. A frivolous lawsuit never gets past the initial stage of filing the complaint and certainly never results in an award of damages. Remember, the plaintiff(s) and their lawyer(s) merely present the facts and law to the judge (bench trial) or jury (jury trial). The judge or jury determines liability and damages, NOT the plaintiff(s) or their lawyer(s). P.S. "Sudden Acceleration" is simply a name for a legitimate mechanical malfunction (or was the Toyota recall just a conspiracy committed by plaintiffs' lawyers?). Car Brake Overrides Proposed in U.S. After Toyota Recalls http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-12/car-brake-overrides-proposed-in-u-s-after-toyota-recalls.html
Chris Nicholson April 12, 2012 at 08:16 PM
Thanks for the Civil Procedure lesson. I will make a note: "fear of sanctions means that lawyers cannot profitably assert bogus claims." You should provide that wisdom to insurance carriers. Who knew that their actuarial risks were so low! Yes, fear of lawyers and their frivolous cases were the root cause of the recall, not a rational assessment of the risk/reward facts. If you think otherwise, then you are being intellectually dishonest.
Oppelt April 13, 2012 at 03:56 AM
How about raise the California driving age? As an Jersey native, kids do not start driving until (at all) until 17 w/ full after dark at 18. Today, esp. with all of the distractions think we (as a collective) should consider raising the age. I sincerely hope by the time my youngin' reaches teenage years we are a tad more conservative with age when we hand over the keys.
Jose April 13, 2012 at 04:36 AM
I understand the sentiment for changing the law, but it is the parents who are enabling this. How many 16-18 year-olds can afford a car? I would guess that it is very few. A car plus insurance plus maintenance plus gas plus an occasional parking ticket is a very expensive proposition. If the parents provide all of that to an inexperienced, inattentive driver, don't they deserve a share of the moral responsibility when the speeding driver kills someone with the car? Ummm. I answered yes to that question, and I answered no to my eldest until he was 18. You can do it!
Eliz April 13, 2012 at 03:06 PM
Didn't I just suggest that and someone said raise the voting age too? Laws do help support the parent who wants their kids to wait. Many parents are not as strong as you Dave.
Jose April 13, 2012 at 03:26 PM
I am not opposed to raising the driving age with exceptions for kids who can show they need a car for work, but I doubt it would pass. Many parents are anxious to have their kids drive themselves to school and football practice after being the chauffer for umpteen years.
CJ April 13, 2012 at 04:05 PM
I admitted it, after suffering excruciating levels of pain. It was more to point out your lack of PC in this case. My lack of PCness is worn as a badge of honor.
Oppelt April 13, 2012 at 04:46 PM
Oh come on. In the 80's I bought my 1977 Ford Granda for $800 then put a transmit ion into it at 17. I worked my arse of from 7th grade on (summers, weekends—and was in 4H, varsity cheerleader and attended an Art College). Agreed, it's up the parents. In my situation I grew up in a very affluent area on the East Coast (like here) and did not have the same—but my parents taught us to work hard for whatever they couldn't give us. So, yep, I bought my car—was it a sleek shiny new vehicle—no, but it was mine.
Oppelt April 13, 2012 at 04:46 PM
That said, there were plenty of kids (at 17/18) in my HS that had (bad) accidents. And this is did not matter if their parent gave them a porsche on their 17th birthday or they bought their own clunker. The worst accident involved driving the family station wagon along a country/farm road. One would think this was a relatively safe path. But a delivery truck driving towards them, veered into their lane head on. Unfortunately when the driver reacted—she veered right quickly—ead on into a tree and rolled into farm fences. One classmate was killed instantly, another (her BF) resulted in wheelchair bound (with mental disabilities) and she survived (but her entire face had to be entirely rebuilt w/ lots of metal underneath (and no, it was never even close to the same). She was the class president junior year. There was no cells in '87, no rain, just daylight taking her BF and friend to swim practice across town. It was terrible. Accidents do happen. But I simply disagree (esp. today) that 16 is a good age to drive. It's not just the driver (and their attention)—it's also other drivers (are they paying attention?), things that could malfunction, etc...and the drivers reaction to those.
Oppelt April 13, 2012 at 04:52 PM
Young adult license @17 requires adult in the front until 18 in Jersey (for a basic license you must be 18). http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/Licenses/YoungAdult.htm Jersey is also the only state where it has consistently shown that teen crashes are lower. http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-4433994.html
Michael Taylor April 13, 2012 at 04:54 PM
Agreed. Wow. Terrible repercussions for a split second on the road. Sometimes I'm grateful I don't have kids. I don't know what I'd do if this happened to one of them.
Jon B May 19, 2012 at 02:36 PM
I believe PA is similar...or it used to be, anyway.
TMoraga January 02, 2013 at 09:03 PM
The Adults/Parents been charged or have a lawsuit filed against them yet?


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something