Just watched a 60 Minutes piece about a drunk driver who killed a 7 year old girl. The prosecutor charged him with murder instead of manslaughter under the basis of depraved indifference, his actions were so reckless that a death was inevitable. While not excusing the guys actions to me murder has to have intent and I don't believe the drunk driver intended to have an accident. Just wondering what others think.
I think it was reckless manslaughter, but if it were my daughter, there would be a murder charge. Directed at me.
No. It doesn't matter what the prosecution tries to spew, murder by definitional is the intent to kill. Negligence is manslaughter. The legal system is getting out of hand by redefining words.
Whatever you want to call it, I think in most instances that being drunk should not lessen the consequences of a crime. One of my longtime pet peeves is people using alcohol as a defense in a vehicular calamity, rape or sexual assault or violent crime. So as to not derail the thread, I'll leave it at that.
No. Murder constitutes knowledge of your action leading to death. Manslaughter fits the bill perfectly. Now, what they can do is create a harsher sentence for vehicular manslaughter. That's the best way to go.
When a close friend of mine was killed by a drunk driver about 12 years ago, the driver was charged with intoxication manslaughter. He was given 10 years probation. Probation. I agree that a murder charge is impossible as there is no intent to kill. You can't tell me though that this sentence was in anyway fair. My friend is dead and this guy merely has to meet his probation office on time. If all went well for him, he's free and clear now. To be fair, 2 of our other friends were there when it happened (all 3 were walking down the street). They beat the living s*** out of the guy and put him in the hospital. He was smart enough not to press charges.
Here's the thing most people forget about the Justice System in our country: it's about rehabilitation not retaliation. People serve their time to become members of society once again. You can't tell me a drunk driver who kills will ever do it again, especially after his jail time. Thats the difference between a manslaughterer and a murderer. Murderers do the act because something is faulty within them and they have the ability to kill again. If a murder can be rehabilitated, they too can be let out to society again. It doesn't mean it's fair or right tho. It sucks, it sucks hard. The only solace you can take is that if you do believe in a creator, he will bring about retaliation necessary in the end.
The DA is try to rewrite the law. That is not her job. It is scary the crap DAs try to pull. Maybe he should have gotten 5 years, but 18 that seems pretty harsh. It is not like these harsh penalties reduce drunk driving. W has a dwi and he was president of the US.
For those who think its impossible to be tried for murder, it can happen. You can even be tried for murder for wreckless driving.
As for the original post, yes it's manslaughter and not murder. It's death by an individual who had no intent to kill the girl. He just didn't care enough about the little girl to call a taxi. Her death was an unintended death by him, but an inevitable consequence if drunk driving was repeated often.
Sure. Let's call it murder. Then, we can also start charging people for murder when they are texting, talking on the phone or changing the radio station while driving. What about the guy who just worked a 12 hour shift and fell asleep at the wheel? Get him too. Or we could call it what it is which is manslaughter and let the legal system do it's job instead of trying to re-define words based on knee-jerk, emotional responses.
Yes. What stops me from downing lots of alcohol to kill someone I wanted to kill anyway? The moment you drink, you are consciously accepting that certain things will be out of your control. Once you drink more, you are basically completely willing BY CHOICE to have yourself act in a way that you wouldn't otherwise act. Drinking is a choice with responsibilities. To protect this guy's choice to drink and drive. this girl's death is reduced to negligence. He wasn't negligent when deciding to get intoxicated.
