You be the Judge: What is the appropiate punishment for something like this?

[Ben Kenobi]

This is pure and simple murder. Whatever she gets, you can bet that it will be more humane than what she gave.

LWOP.

Especially for the part where she ignored the moans.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Suppose he wasn't lodged in the windshield, but was thrown off into a ditch or a bush, or even to the side of the road.

That didn't happen so why should we consider it.

She in fact did not prevent him from getting help, she just failed to get help for him.

Which makes her criminally liable for the man's death. As MtG said we have more than enough underlying felonies to sustain the murder charge.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
That didn't happen so why should we consider it.

The two cases are fundamentally the same.

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Which makes her criminally liable for the man's death.

Why? There's no law in the US that compels people to obtain help for victims.

Now, if the man was able to get help himself if left unattended, but she prevented him from doing so, that would be different.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Okay, but you are arguing that driving under influence is the same as "reckless disregard."

Most people who committed DUI thought they could still control the vehicle.

The legal standard is what a reasonable person would think. Generally, if someone tests a blood alcohol count (BAC) close to the limit for a DUI standard, then an accident related homicide would be treated as ordinary negligence.

IIRC, California law is explicit that DUI with a BAC that is a certain multiple over the legal limit crosses the threshold into reckless disregard, because any reasonable person that drunk off their ass would know they were lucky to get the keys in the igntion. Combination DUI's (multiple substances) and DUI of certain controlled substances also crosses the standard.

There's a second reckless disregard issue, and that's confining the individual trapped in a garage, waiting for him to die (and in fact discussing what to do with the body when he does die.)

That takes it so far over the reckless disregard standard that arguing the initial incident isn't even necessary, and probably won't be part of the DA's argument at trial. (why confuse the jury with extraneous issues to the minimum essential elements of the charges)

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
She locked him in her garage. That's kidnapping.

Sure, but I still can't see how that would make it first degree murder.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Okay, but you are arguing that driving under influence is the same as "reckless disregard."

Most people who committed DUI thought they could still control the vehicle.

We know DWI and killing a person could be considered murder, but what if you hit a person and he doesnt die? but rather you're so ****ed up that you decide to take him home and apologies for what you've done?

That should be interesting scenario to answer.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

Why? There's no law in the US that compels people to obtain help for victims.

You and Chegitz are wrong on this. There's no law that compels people to obtain help for third parties in general, but if you yourself contribute to the cause of injury, then laws come into effect in different jurisdictions - adding new charges, or increasing the degree of culpability under existing charges.

Same thing for third parties - if you drive past and ignore it, no violation of the law, but if you know someone has someone in their garage, and intends to confine that person there until he dies, and you don't report it, you're an accessory to murder and/or kidnap.

Now, if the man was able to get help himself if left unattended, but she prevented him from doing so, that would be different.

Which is exactly what happened - he was locked in a garage, with two broken legs and internal injuries, his body stuck through a windshield and his upper body hanging downward. He was pinned in place, and shut in the garage to keep people from seeing him, until he died, as a deliberate choice by the defendant.

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

Suppose you hit somebody with your car when drunken, and fled the scene because you're afraid that your drunken state would be discovered, and this person eventually died of a lack of medical care. That's not murder.

If you flee the scene thinking that the person you hit may well die, but you accept that, it is murder under our laws (dolus eventualis). It's just virtually impossible to prove, unless you have circumstances like in this case. Here we may even have a case of knowingly letting him die.

"To show murder, there must be intent on the suspect's part to take the victim's life before the act."

Depends on two issues: 1. Is dolus eventualis (or reckless disregard) euqal to intent your system?

2. Can you commit murder by a non-act (Garantenstellung here, omission to perform as Imran mentioned). If the answer is yes, knowingly letting that person die is murder for sure.

[MichaeltheGreat]

For 1, the answer is yes, in some form, in every state I'm aware of, and in Federal criminal practice.

For 2, generally, yes you can, if the non-act is subsequent to another act. For example, you lock someone up in a remote basement with no food, but then leave them alive and never come back.

[HershOstropoler]

I see...

Although the example for 2. would require that "locking someone up in a remote basement with no food" is for some other purpose; otherwise you'd have an action + intent there already.

[Dis]

I'd say murder, but she may have been in so much shock she didn't know what she was doing.

I suggest aquitting the suspect and sending her to counselling.

[oedo]

I'd say murder, but she may have been in so much shock she didn't know what she was doing.

but she had at least two days to reconsider her crime, until Biggs was bleeded to death. she most likely slept over it. shock doen´t seem to be an excuse here.
the longer I thing about it, the worse and more criminal her behavior becomes to me.

[Dis]

2 days ehh?

Yes that is too much.

I can see one day to sober up- I'm assuming she was drunk.

I really won't feel bad if she's convicted of murder. I don't care if she spends the rest of her life in jail.

[Dis]

Also she could have dropped the guy off at a hospital and hid out for a day to sober up.

We had a guy do that in my town. He hid out for a day to sober up, then turned himself in.

[JCG]

to all the people that are indirectly trying to excuse/help the legal team of this *insert expletive*.

From the moment that this woman chose (just as she chose to drive under the influence of narcotics and alcohol) to take the poor man back to her home and deny him assistance, instead of a)taking him to a hospital b)calling 911 c)abandoning him on the spot so that someone else could help him, this stopped being just an accident and became a serious crime.

Whether it's felony murder or 2nd degree or something else doesn't change that.