FirstAlerts

Toledo woman charged with OVI after shuttle bus carrying BGSU students hits I-75

Cassandra Harper, 55, faces an OVI charge after a shuttle bus carrying 26 BGSU students was involved in an incident on I-75. The case remains undecided.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 26, 2026, 8:51 p.m. ETWritten Aug 26, 2026, 9:52 p.m. ET
A Toledo woman has been with operating a vehicle while impaired (OVI) after a shuttle bus carrying 26 Bowling Green State University students was involved in an incident on I-75, according to 13abc.com. Cassandra Harper, 55, was driving the shuttle bus and was found to be impaired, leading to the charge, the outlet reported. The Ohio State Highway Patrol (OSHP) is investigating. The charge is an allegation, and Harper is presumed innocent until proven otherwise. The case is at the charging stage and has not been resolved; no plea or trial outcome has been reported. The incident occurred on a date that has not been established in available reports.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 127 Aug 2026, 01:52current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.