'Wasted' Teen Kills Classmate in Ritzy Island Community

A teenager who killed a 17-year-old girl. in a UTV crash earlier this year has. entered a guilty plea in a deal approved. by the victim's family. His punishment. includes that he can never get a. driver's license, and he has to tell his. story to others facing drunk driving. charges. But what did he not receive? That's what we're going to take a look. at and what happened in this upscale. community of Oregon. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law & Crime. I'm Jesse. Weber. [Music]. Sauvie Island, Oregon, is a small.

community outside of Portland. It's near. the border with Washington. It's small, only around 1,000 people reportedly live. there during the 2000 census. In. addition to beachfronts, the island has. a lot of farmland with farmers growing. everything from strawberries and peaches. to zucchini and pumpkins. It's a popular. tourist destination, especially during. the fall. This is when local farms offer. things like hayrides and pumpkin picking. and corn mazes. But the rural areas of. Sauvie Island were the scene of. something horrific back in May. Teenagers celebrating the end of finals. were drinking on a large piece of.

property when a UTV driven by an. apparently drunk 18-year-old flipped. over, and that killed 17-year-old Ava. Lee Cruz of Scappoose. It's a city. adjacent to Sauvie Island. Okay, so to. help me parcel out what happened during. this investigation as well as how the. DA's office arrived at this plea deal. that they did, I want to welcome back on. criminal defense attorney Eric Fattis. Eric, good to see you. Thanks for taking. the time to come back here on Sidebar. So, the suspect in this case, Aiden. Heard, who was allegedly drunk when he. got behind the wheel of this Polaris UTV.

UTV, had only been 18 for a week when. this crash happened. He ended up facing. multiple charges, DUI, manslaughter, and. according to the District Attorney's. Office, his age was a factor. It. factored into the decision about the. punishment that he'd receive if he. agreed to enter a guilty plea. So, how. big of a difference does it make to be. charged as an adult versus a juvenile in. these type of cases? Oh, it it can make all the difference in. the world, Jesse. It can make a. difference with respect to sentencing.

Typically, in in most states, the. sentencing scheme for juveniles is. pretty limited. You you know, you can. put them in the equivalent of a juvenile. hall, an an underage facility for. a handful of years, but if you're on the. adult side, that potential prison. sentence is enlarged by years of not. decades. And so, it makes a tremendous. difference, and age is certainly a. factor in this case. So, according to this affidavit of. probable cause, it states, quote, "On. May 18th, 2025, just after midnight,

MCSO received information that a vehicle. flipped. Victim was not breathing but. attempting CPR. MCSO deputies arrived on. scene in the area of 15003 Northwest. Gillihan Road. It should be noted that. this is a more rural area of Multnomah. County, and portions of this incident. occurred on private property on a. pasture. Deputy Timothy Dominic was one. of the first people to arrive on scene. and was flagged down by a number of high. school-aged individuals. Deputy Dominic. had to run on foot in order to get to. the victim, AC. She was laying on her.

back, not breathing, unresponsive, and. appeared to have a deep skull fracture. to the left side of her head. AC did not. survive her injuries and died on scene. And the county district attorney. emphasized during a news conference that. this was an unusual case for them, an. alleged drunk driving crash on a piece. of private property as opposed to, you. know, on public streets. I guess, Eric, the question is, how does that make a. difference? You know, sometimes there are laws that apply only.

to public areas as opposed to private. areas. Those are often traffic laws. Usually, for a traffic law and a. citation to be issued, it has to occur. on a public road. But there are. exceptions to that. It's not as if a. person can just commit any crimes they. want because they're on private land. Here, it sounds like the prosecutors did. not think that that was an overly. important factor, although it is. different in the sense that, you know, this person wasn't on public roads. They. weren't necessarily endangering other. people, and so that could be a. mitigating consideration that the.

prosecutors took into took into account. Now, investigators, authorities, they. rushed to this property, which, by the. way, was reportedly owned by a local. school board member. So, we're going to. get to that in just a minute, but as. deputies tried to work out, you know, what went on here, how did this happen, they got multiple stories from. 18-year-old Heard that we need to talk. about. So, the affidavit lays out what. deputies learned, quote, "Prior to. driving around the property in the. Polaris, a group of 16 to 18-year-old. individuals were drinking alcohol in a.

barn to celebrate finishing finals. Heard, along with AC and Brooklyn. Johnson, then drove in the Polaris. around the properties. Heard was in the. driver seat, Johnson was in the middle. seat, and AC was in the passenger seat. It does not appear seatbelts or helmets. were worn. It was incredibly dark on the. property with minimal lighting as well. It was described that three of them went. around the property once, and during the. second run-through the properties, Heard. made an abrupt turn, overturning the. side-by-side. The roll bar then struck.

AC on her head, causing the likely skull. fracture that killed her. It is unclear. who, but the individuals in the area. managed to roll the Polaris back on its. wheels off AC. Johnson managed to escape. and crawl through the back of the. Polaris to get help. Efforts were made. to save AC's life. Now, Eric, let's. think about this for a second. The. alcohol, the helmets, the lighting, why. is that all important? So, it it's critical for the potential. charges here. My understanding is that. prosecution initially.

went forward on like a manslaughter. charge, and and usually the mind state. needed to prove that is recklessness, which means a person knew there was a. risk, disregarded it, took that risk. anyway. Even if it if it wasn't. reckless, it was still likely negligent, which means that they should have been. more careful under the circumstances. Like you said, very lack of visibility. Um, they're on roads that appear not to. be paved. There are no seatbelts or. helmets. There were no safety. precautions taken for this dangerous. activity. On top of that, you add the. alcohol, and it's just a recipe for.

disaster, which is what we have here. Now, obviously, this is a story that we. wanted to bring to you, and the reason. that we can do this, the reason we can. cover things like this, is not only. because of the amazing support that we. get from all of you out there, but also. from our incredible sponsor, Morgan &. Morgan. This is America's largest injury. law firm. This is a firm with over 1,000. attorneys. You know why they're so big? Because they win all the time. They have. recovered over 25 billion dollars for. more than 500,000 clients. In the past. few months, a client in Florida received.

12 million dollars after the insurance. company offered just $350,000. Out in Pennsylvania, a client was. awarded 26 million dollars. That is 40. times the insurer's $650,000 offer. You. have another client in Pennsylvania that. received 29 million dollars after being. offered only $500,000. And even if you. think your case isn't worth millions of. dollars, why not just start a claim and. fight for what you deserve? Morgan &. Morgan makes it so simple. You can start. a claim from your phone in just eight. clicks. So, if you're injured, you can. easily start a claim at. 4thepeople.com/lcsidebar.

by clicking the link below or scanning. the QR code on screen. Is there any explanation from a defense. attorney point of view? I mean, if this. is true, no helmets, no. uh seatbelts, lights out, drinking, I. mean, how does a defense attorney work. with that? Uh you know, from the defense side, you. got to look at what the mitigating. considerations might be. Um, this. driver, the defendant, was 18 years old. He was a young man. You know,

unfortunately, young people make stupid. decisions sometimes. That doesn't. necessarily mean it should ruin their. lives. However, in this case, we're. talking about a death, so that stupid. decision had a very real consequence. On. top of that, though, defense is going to. look at a likely lack of criminal. history, um and whether this person. really presents a danger to the. community going forward. You have this. 18-year-old, likely no significant. criminal history, a horrible event that. took place, but is he going to be a. danger over the next 5, 10, 20 years? Those are important considerations, too,

that might vote in favor of the. defendant. Let's also talk about what Heard. apparently had to say on the scene that. night after he was read his Miranda. rights. It says, quote, "When first. asked if he consumed alcohol, Heard. initially denied drinking. When. challenged about the fact that there was. an odor of alcohol coming from his. breath, he admitted to consuming only. one beer earlier in the night." And the. affidavit goes into the field sobriety. tests that were done on the scene, noting that Heard did not perform well. Court document also indicates that Heard. agreed to a blood draw so they could.

determine his blood alcohol content, and. the document continues, "At the end of. the evaluation, Heard then admitted, after being confronted again, that he. had two beers and a shot of vodka within. the hour before the crash." When asked. about his drinking habits, Heard. mentioned he has consumed alcohol on. several other occasions for special. occasions like Halloween or finishing. finals. Heard further confirmed he has. driven this type of utility vehicle in. the past. Now, Eric, that's bad. It's. really, really bad, but I guess maybe.

I and I don't want to put words in. anyone's mouth, is what he may be trying. to suggest is, "I drank before. I've driven this. before. That didn't have an effect on. what happened.". Uh you know, I suppose that might be the. the the horse that he was trying to ride. on this. However, it's it's certainly. curious and actually rather common. When. you have an alcohol-related event, to to. have the suspect say, "Oh, no, I I. didn't have anything to drink. Oh, well, yeah, I did have that one drink. Oh, now.

I remember I had two drinks. Oh, two. drinks plus a shot." That that number. keeps going up. And certainly, an. 18-year-old is not in control of their. faculties to a sufficient degree, even. if they've drank alcohol at some point. in the past. Their body can't handle it. the same way a 21-and-up person can. handle it. And so, even though he has. that past experience, is that mitigating. or is that actually aggravating that. he's been engaged in this kind of. unlawful activity as a minor going. forward, and lo and behold, we have this. tragedy that he caused while engaging in.

that same activity. And reportedly lying. to police is never a good idea. So, after his arrest in May, he was charged. with manslaughter in the second degree, DUI, two counts of recklessly. endangering another person. Were you. surprised by those charges, Eric? Not. terribly surprised. One thing people. need to keep in mind is that especially. when it comes to DUI, you know, a lot of. people think, "Oh, it's that that involves me in a truck on. a highway drunk or something." That's. not necessarily the case. In most. states, when you're behind the wheel of. something that is motorized, that in and.

of itself can qualify as drunk driving. if you're intoxicated. So, the fact that. this was a side-by-side, a utility. vehicle, that doesn't somehow immunize. the defendant from a drunk driving. charge. So, not surprised that was. brought and not surprised that the. reckless vehicular homicide charge was. brought either. It looks like the. defendant knew about a risk that could. have been that could have occurred and. and took it anyway. Now, Hurd appeared in court on May 19th, entered a not guilty plea. Ava's parents spoke at the hearing.

asking for mercy. According to KPTV, Brooke Curd said, "We wish we were not. writing these words and want you to know. she was everything someone could hope. for in a daughter, a truly beautiful. soul. While our hearts are broken for. our daughter, our hearts are also broken. for Aiden and his family. We are. pleading with this court not to ruin. Aiden's life. He will suffer enough and. it will not bring our daughter back and. in fact, it is not something she would. have wanted and it would tarnish her. memory." Now, Eric, that is.

a strength of a family that is pretty. remarkable, um but how much of a. difference does it make legally what the. victim's family wants in this? That's, you know, what a what a selfless. position for this family to take after. they have lost their beloved daughter at. the hands of someone else's negligence. to say, "Hey, um I don't think you should go super. hard on that guy either." Uh it matters. here, Jesse. It matters because the. judge takes into consideration, typically, the victim's position on what.

the sentence should be, on whether the. police should even be accepted. Often. times, the victim is objecting saying, "Hey, this is too lenient." But here, we. have the family sort of coming to the. table and saying, "Hey, this was a. horrible nightmare that happened, but it. was a mistake. It was an accident, and. we don't need to put this kid in a box. for the rest of his life." I imagine. that influenced how these proceedings. played out. Now, I want to play you some. things to get a better context of what. happened here. So, Deputy District. Attorney Kenzie Ludwig explained this. plea deal that Hurd agreed to on October.

8th. Let's take a listen. He has agreed. to plead guilty. It's extensive, so give. me a moment. To criminally negligent. homicide. Um so, that is uh for Ava's. death. He will do 60 months of formal. probation. There are number of other. pretty strict factors that are laid out. in the plea petition that are all part. of public record, but I think the most. important thing is is that he is not. permitted to have any consumption of any. type of alcohol throughout the pendency. of the probationary sentence. He's not.

permitted to drive. even on a public and private land. And. then in addition to that, he is uh I've. been asked to give 40 400 hours of. community service back to the community, and 200 hours of that will be promoting. um and contributing to his own community. in honor of Ava. Additionally, he is. going to also speak at victim impact. statements as well about his experience.

in this particular instance so that. people who are going through the system. uh who have. somewhat similar experiences can. understand firsthand what he also went. through to hopefully make a difference. Now, District Attorney Nathan Vasquez. said during the news conference that. this tragedy has affected so many people. in this small community and the hope is. that the resolution of this case will. offer a little bit of closure. This was. a very special person and it's such a. huge loss to our community. Uh we've worked extremely hard to come.

to the resolution we did. Uh it's not. This is obviously something we take. extremely seriously. um and in making these decisions and how. we resolve these matters, uh it is. uh uh. how we do it is with the very careful. input of the victim's family and making. sure that we are. um balancing both their wishes with the. with community safety. And through it. all, it is our. enduring message that this office will.

always be guided by the idea that we. will serve this community with. compassionate accountability. And that's. what exactly happened here in this. matter. So, according to the DA, Ava's. family's wishes that weighed heavily. That influenced the decision about what. type of plea deal to offer Hurd. They. have wanted some form of accountability, which Aiden has provided since the. beginning. Um and he's expressed significant. remorse. They were very active and vocal.

throughout the entire process in what it. they thought would be the best form of. giving back to the community as well as. seeing justice in their eyes and also. rehabilitating Aiden for the future. In. this case, I would say extremely early. and very often, uh what we heard out of. this young man was that he wanted to. take accountability, that he was um. immediately taking steps to. um you know, to engage in things like.

treatment and he was uh certainly. working with his with the victim's. family. Um he has never shied away from. accountability in this and his uh. responsibility for what happened. And. that those were big factors. So, all in. all, in the end, Hurd was sentenced to 5. years of probation, 400 hours of. community service. He can't drink. alcohol during his probation. He is. banned from getting a driver's license. for life. After hearing all that, Eric, and thinking about the conclusion, what's your thoughts? I'm glad they have.

measures in place to proactively address. the substance issues that may have given. rise to this case. I'm a little. surprised, Jesse, that there is no. significant incarceration. Look, in. Colorado, where I practice, if you get a. DUI even as a first offense and there's. an accident, even if nobody died, there's a chance you're going to jail. This gentleman was 18. He caused another. death under extremely reckless. circumstances. The fact that there is no. punitive measure as part of the sentence.

is surprising to me. And by the way, if. he violates that, what happens? He goes. to prison? If he violates that, he'll be subject to. the full weight, the full potential. sentence. of the crime to which he pled guilty, which I imagine carries several years in. prison. So, he is he is on kind of a. short leash here. They're going to be. monitoring him. They'll probably do. monitored sobriety, where he has to take. tests to ensure that he is not adjusting. any substances. And if he steps out of. line or commits another crime or is. charged with another crime, that could.

trigger probation revocation proceedings. and he could be looking at serious. prison time. Now, I want to talk about another aspect. to this. So, this crash caused a stir in. the community for another reason. According to The Oregonian newspaper, the property where this crash happened, as I mentioned before, it is owned by a. now former school board member. The. Daily Mail reports that the $1.8 million. property is owned by Brenda Jurisek and. her husband, Matthew Deardorff. Now, Jurisek served as vice chair for the.

school district. The probable cause. affidavit in connection with it made it. clear, quote, "There was no adult. supervision present or in the area where. the death occurred." So, a lot of people. want to know why Jurisek or other adults. haven't been charged in connection with. the apparent partying and the underage. drinking. In fact, hundreds of people. have signed a petition that called for. an investigation not only by law. enforcement, but by the school board. Part of the petition reads, "It is. particularly egregious that Aiden Hurd, a Scappoose high school student, faces.

legal consequences for the crash while. Brenda Jurisek, an adult and school. board member, appears to face none." And. during Hurd's arraignment, The Oregonian. quoted Deputy District Attorney Ludwig. as saying there were some deep concerns. that the location where this happened, these high schoolers do frequent the. property and consume alcohol and ride. these dangerous vehicles, and that this. could have been a very preventable. situation, and that the warning signs. were all there. However, when questioned. about whether the property owners or. anyone else aside from Hurd can be held. accountable criminally, the DA had this.

to say. Well, I was I was ready for that. question and waiting for it. Um I'll say. this. Um. you know, there's. the way that Oregon law is written, it. doesn't um match up very well when we. talk about criminal law and how do we. hold someone criminally liable for this. type of behavior? And what it is what. we're we're kind of talking about here. directly is it, you know, a landowner or. a homeowner that negligently allows. young people to consume alcohol and then. you have such a horrific tragic um.

outcome. So, the law doesn't really provide us. with good avenues to come to go at that. criminally. There are certainly some. civil options out there. Um and I know. that that's something that the family. will consider and go forth on. Uh that. I'll leave that completely to them. Uh when it comes to the criminal. component, you know, we had limited, I would say, evidence that connected us. directly back to the homeowners. Would we like that evidence? Absolutely.

Um we certainly worked with. investigators and and the people that. were willing to talk to us, and we we. looked for that and searched for that. Um we welcome that evidence if that were. to come. um come to us in the investigation, we. would certainly look at criminal. charges, and if we were able to bring. them, we would. Let's start there. What. do you think about the criminal charges, potential criminal charges? You know, most states, and and I believe. Oregon has this, uh have what's called a. charge like contributing to the. delinquency of a minor. And usually that.

that can be intentional, but it can also. be negligent. It often arises in. situations where minors are provided. with alcohol or there is some sort of. unlawful influence by the adult that. that contributes to a minor committing a. crime. So, I'd imagine that those would. be on the table. Certainly, they need. enough evidence to prove that. But you. look at, you know, a case like drug. distribution. It's not exactly. analogous, but often times the dealer. can be charged criminally for a death if. they had provided the substance that. gave rise to the death. Does that same.

principle apply here? You know, I think. that those are very real questions. Sounds like the community still has some. open questions about the responsibility. of the parents and then the school board. member in this case. You think there's a civil case here? Oh, 100%. Yeah, I think there is. absolutely a wrongful death case here. It sounds like the parents have. significant assets, and so those can. potentially be attached through a civil. course of action. And in looking at that, you know, the. parents have this nice house, they're.

prominent members of the community, they. have these vehicles on the property. So, certainly it could be a high stakes. civil case that we see next in this. ongoing saga. You know what's interesting about that? So, Brandi Jurasek resigned from the. school board in August after what she. called intense public pressure in a. statement accompanying her resignation. Jurasek wrote, "Some people have made. serious accusations about our family in. the days since Ava's death. We want our. community to know that the claims are. false. We did not provide alcohol to.

minors. We do not condone underage. drinking, and we have never allowed it. in our home. I understand that people. are in pain and looking for answers, but. this rush to judgment fueled by social. media and encouraged by people who don't. know us has created a firestorm that. distracts from what really matters. I'm. saddened by how quickly some in this. town have turned on us, and I'm. concerned that the attention now falling. on the school board is interfering with. its work. For that reason, I've decided. to resign from the board effective. immediately. I'm not stepping down.

because of the accusations, they're. false. I'm resigning because the board. needs space to focus on the students, staff, and families it serves. I don't. want any presence to become a further. source of division. Now, Eric, if that's. true, you can understand that, right? You can understand why she's stepping. down. It's bringing. a lot of attention here. It may actually. compromise the work that they're doing. The other side of it is, you know, this. is her side, we don't really know what. happened here. But just your reaction to. the resignation and that statement.

You know, in looking at that statement, of course, if the parents had literally. nothing to do with this, then they probably do not deserve That. being said, parents can be negligent. without having some knowing involvement. in the criminal activity of these young. people and teens. Even if they didn't. know about the alcohol use going on, maybe they should have. Maybe they had a. duty to at least provide some level of. supervision, especially if there are. minors involved, and not just let these. 18-year-olds do whatever they want on. their property. So, I think that that. objection remains even if the basis for.

the resignation is 100% true that the. parents had no involvement in the in the. drinking activities. And let me just take it away from the. law for a second. Let me go back to the. human aspect of this. Think about the. loss here, the preventable loss, because. according to Ava's family, this is a. girl that wanted to attend the. University of Oregon, study child. psychology, had a whole future ahead of. her. They've set up a scholarship in her. honor. According to a site with. scholarship information, each year.

one-time scholarship will be awarded to. a student who plans to attend a college. or university, trade program, or. community college. Students should have. experience with and or desire to support. the education, mental health, and. development of youth. Ava planned to. attend the University of Oregon and. pursue a career supporting the positive. mental health of kids, a cause that. meant so much to her. And in the end. now, there's just a memory. We won't. know the work that she could have done. And that loss to her family, her. friends, the community, that's where I.

think I don't want this to get lost in. all of this, Eric, as we talk about the. legal charges and responsibility. Uh. there's no it's never going to be the. same again. Well, it is just immeasurable. You know, I've read reports from the that contain. statements from the victim's parents, and they are just devastated, and as to. be expected. You know, this is a young. girl who died through no fault of her. own. She was doing. what what is probably most people would. consider. common.

activities among teens. Now, it did not. get out of hand. It did not sound like. she wasn't the driver. She wasn't. necessarily encouraging it to get out of. hand, but it did. That being said, she. is really the innocent victim in all of. this, and that loss will never go away. This sentence will never bring her back. Eric Faddis, thank you so much for. taking the time. Good to see you. It's good to be with you. And that's all. we have for you right now here on. Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so much. for joining us, and as always, please. subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should get your. podcast. You can follow me on X or.

Instagram. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak. to you next time. [Music].