Two questions:
1.) Why?!?!
2.) Where's the sense in billing the owner for the tow, and not the driver?!?!
Edit:
It's interesting what you come up with when you search for "SUV stuck bridge minneapolis" on Google. There's about as many different stories on this as there are news teams that have covered it! Some say the driver is suspected to have been DUI. Some say the Escalade is worth $68k, some say $70k (rounding up?). Some talk about the towing company that hauled the car out on dollies with an ATV - which they actually have pictures of - but others claim that all the towing companies the police called "said there is no way they could get the SUV off the bridge." and "A crane and a barge will need to be brought in to actually lift the car off the bridge.".
One thing is clarified though I suppose, albeit it's not said directly. The reason the owner is being charged and not the driver, is probably because the driver hasn't been found. The owner lent the Escalade to him a few days ago, and police are still looking for him.
Something I find particularly amusing is one quote from myfoxtwincities.com: "Minneapolis Police Spokesman Reier says the accident will cost thousands of dollars in addition to the damage to the bridge itself.". Honestly, could someone explain to me how you call this an "accident", when according to the same article "The driver of the car would have needed to drive off the road, through a park and onto the bridge to get the SUV in that situation."? Also, most of the write-ups on this make particular mention that the bridge is not a straight one, and that the towing crew had to navigate the car through a turn or two on the bridge - where it kept getting stuck again - to get it out. Seriously, at what point beyond all of this obviously deliberate effort would the police begin to realize that this is not an "accident"?