Archive

ShareThis Page
Moon resident gets 2-4 years in fatal DUI | TribLIVE.com
News

Moon resident gets 2-4 years in fatal DUI

Tina Hoegerl just wants her husband back.

“With every passing holiday and special occasion, I miss him more. It does not get easier,” Hoegerl told a judge Thursday during a hearing for the man who killed her husband in a drunken crash. “I no longer have the person who meant so much to me. I have lost my soul mate and best friend.”

Bernard Strauss, 69, of Moon will spend two to four years in prison for his guilty plea to 10 charges, including homicide by vehicle and drunken driving in the June 8, 2008, hit-and-run death of Mark J. Hoegerl, 53, of Hopewell.

Common Pleas Judge Donald E. Machen approved the plea agreement.

Strauss offered a tearful apology to Hoegerl’s family and his own family. He said that nothing he does now can change what happened.

“I want to apologize to the whole family,” he said. “I know it’s just words, but I am sorry.”

Strauss was driving a silver Lexus along Broadhead Road when his vehicle struck and killed Hoegerl, who was riding a motorcycle. The victim was wearing a helmet but suffered severe head and trunk injuries.

Hoegerl was a teacher in the Hopewell Area School District.

“He is still so sadly missed by his students and staff at the two elementary schools where he taught. Teachers and students continue to visit his grave site,” Tina Hoegerl said. “Over two years later, I still receive cards and notes from parents whose children will cry over something that reminded them of ‘Mr. H.’ ”


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.