Toms River Woman ID'd as Victim in Fatal Crash

Police: 60-year-old was thrown from the back of a motorcycle in Mount Olive accident.

A 60-year-old Toms River woman has been identified as the victim of a , police said Monday afternoon.

Svetlana Boyette was a passenger of a motorcycle that was heading southbound on Route 206 when it struck a vehicle making a left turn out of the 7-Eleven parking lot, according to a statement released by the Mount Olive Police Department.

The impact of the crash caused Boyette to be thrown from the motorcycle, police said.

The driver of the motorcycle, Richard Boyette, 63, of Toms River, and the driver of the other vehicle, Angela Manfredo, 20, of Flanders, were each transported to Morristown Medical Center for "less serious injuries" and were both expected to be released after receiving treatment, police said.

According to police, Manfredo's Toyota Camry pulled out of the 7-Eleven parking lot and began to cross the southbound lanes of Route 206 when it was struck on the driver's side by the motorcycle.

No charges have been filed as of Monday afternoon, police said.

The crash is being investigated by the Mount Olive Police Department in conjunction with the Morris County Prosecutor's Vehicular Homicide Unit.

The Flanders Fire Department, the Budd Lake First Aid Squad, paramedics from St. Clares Hospital and the New Jersey Department of Transportation also assisted at the scene.

from 8:30 p.m. until Monday morning at 12:30 a.m., while authorities investigated the scene.

If anyone has information regarding the crash, contact Mount Olive Police Officer Eric Anthony at 973-691-0900 ext. 7590.

jazzman July 09, 2012 at 08:07 PM
new rules involving accident related deaths in NJ,and only to move these investigations along, All drivers involved need to agree to the release of there cell phone information regarding texting and phone call history,till that happens every accident i read about i suspect that one of the drivers was using a cell phone at the time of....or leading up to.... the accident!
IAMAMAZED July 09, 2012 at 08:23 PM
Yeah, the 63 year old was texting on the motorcycle. Jazzman you are dimwit
Anne July 09, 2012 at 08:24 PM
How are you going to regulate everything people can do on cell phones? They can *receive* a text and read it (or not), they can be looking at pictures, checking a map or controlling music among other things. I don't have the answers, but I don't see legislation being the solution.
Jon July 09, 2012 at 08:32 PM
ALL accidents are preventable. Yes, ALL accidents are preventable. Not only that, they could have been prevented if EITHER party did something different. Even in an extreme case, such as someone sitting at a red light and getting hit, they could have prevented it by staying home. In cases of accidents involving cars/trucks/buses, I agree 100% with you. My first thought is always the same: "How could someone have done something so INCREDIBLY STUPID unless they were distracted. They MUST have been texting or talking on the phone or swatting a bee or grabbing a CD or applying makeup or eating or .... name your favorite distraction. But In cases involving a motorcycle or pedestrian or bicyclist, there is another risk factor that often plays a big part: The other driver "did not see" the motorcyclist/pedestrian/bicyclist. Motorcycles have lights, and are certainly visible if you LOOK and if you PAY ATTENTION. The problem is with the paying attention part. My theory is that drivers see a motorcycle and either (a) fail to judge its speed correctly due to lack of practice at doing so, or (b) subconsciously "dismiss' the motorcycle, thus rendering it effectively invisible to their conscious mind, because it doesn't fit the visual profile of the kinds of things that they are on the lookout for (cars and trucks), i.e., the kind of things that can kill them if they get hit by them. Based on this article, it SEEMS the car pulled into the path of a motorcycle he "didn't see."
jesscott July 09, 2012 at 08:33 PM
You should do some research on accidents involving cars and motorcycles just so you can learn how many brain dead car drivers turn left in front of motorcycles. And this has been going on long before the scourge of cell phones.
stacie bohr July 09, 2012 at 08:56 PM
I know it is presumptuous but more than likely this accident involved a distraction of some sort or poor judgement on someone's part. I tend to disagree with the all accidents are preventable...they should stay home part. That's kind of unrealistic. My husband had an accident when a deer jumped into the road on his way to work. He can't just stay home from work for accident prevention.
Jon July 10, 2012 at 05:03 AM
Sorry to hear about your husband's accident, Stacie. I have hit deer on two different occasions. The first one broke a $6 directional lens, and the second one cracked a $19 plastic radiator grille, which I simply super-glued back together instead of buying a new part. Why so little damage both times? Because I knew I was in "deer territory", and I was driving at a speed appropriate for the risk. (It was dusk both times, and I was driving 5-10 mph below the speed limit, and watching the sides of the road carefully. Both times, the deer jumped out of nowhwere, and both times, I had enough time to hit the brakes and slow down almost to a complete stop by the time I hit the deer. Both times the deer ran off, apparently uninjured, and the amount of damage to my cars speaks for itself. (The first a VW Golf and the second a BMW M3.) Come to think of it, those are the only accidents I have had since I started driving in 1981, and I have driven over 400,000 miles, about 20% of which was on a motorcycle, all accident free. I don't mean for this to sound like bragging - I am not bragging, just stating what is possible when one pays the appropriate level of attention (i.e. COMPLETE ATTENTION) to the task at hand. Driving is unique in that you are operating a deadly weapon which can be equally lethal to others as to yourself. It is most lethal when operated carelessly, which is sadly the most common method of operation for most people most of the time. Thank goodness for luck!
MDL July 10, 2012 at 05:07 AM
seconds in ones life, that is all it takes, this accident would not have happened. But they do.. as a fireman rescue I think this everytime i come onto a accident.. its sad very sad.. but just one little second ahead or behind and we wouldn't be talking about it..please always drive defensively every minute of the day and try to read into every car and its driver when approaching areas where you would least expect it..people just don't think they will die now days and it shows in there habits on the road...
Jon July 10, 2012 at 05:11 AM
The other thing I wanted to add was that if your husband had left home 5 or 10 seconds earlier (or later) that day, he probably wouldn't have hit that deer. So the accident was preventable not only through increased attentiveness and being prepared and ready to respond at any moment, but also through the element of luck in timing. But since luck is not predictable, it shouldn't be relied on as an accident prevention mechanism, even though it is the prevailing mechanism in use today. Focus, attentiveness, and active awareness are the techniques that should be mastered and used at all times if one wishes to remain accident free. For fun, treat yourself to a viewing of the movie "Serendipity". It is a really wonderful romantic movie that illustrates the principle of luck in timing really well.
stacie bohr July 10, 2012 at 11:03 PM
I hear what you're saying Jon. And because Jay leaves every morning in the dark, he is aware. But I know what you mean. Is Serendipity the movie with Gwenyth Paltrow? The one where catching a train or not literally changed her life?
Jon July 11, 2012 at 04:05 AM
Nope, Jon Cusack and Kate Beckinsale. Trust me - it's a great movie! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0240890/
stacie bohr July 11, 2012 at 07:53 AM
Thanks, Jon. I'll check it out. And it's a movie genre right up my ally!!
Jon July 11, 2012 at 03:27 PM
I'm confused. The article above says "Svetlana Boyette was a passenger of a motorcycle that was heading southbound on Route 206 when it struck a vehicle making a left turn out of the 7-Eleven parking lot". But the article at http://longvalley.patch.com/articles/one-dead-two-injured-in-mount-olive-crash says: "The motorcycle was pulling out of the 7-11 convenience store, attempting to turn left onto the roadway and struck a Toyota Camry driving southbound on Route 206" These two statements of the facts are exact opposites. So which one is right?
Jason Koestenblatt (Editor) July 11, 2012 at 04:22 PM
Hi Jon, Thanks so much for the comment and being part of the conversation relating to this tragedy. The article here is the accurate version. There was a communication error between myself and the Mt. Olive Police Department regarding the original version. We're going to amend that article to reflect the correct information, and thanks for bringing it to our attention.


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
See more »