Court upholds drunken driver's murder conviction

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Texas is a strange place.

That's not limited to Texas. It's throughout the U.S. I find it strange that you find it objectionable.

[Joseph]

Just 2 weeks ago, we had a guy sent to prison for 5 years while DUI of legal drugs. With time already served, he will be out in 2 or 3 years. He had taken up to 20 codines in a few min.

He killed a woman on Highway 12 between Highway 29 and I-80. The people who saw him, started to call the CHP 20 min. before the accident and they did not get there until after the accident. The witness said he was all over the road, passing on the right, honking his horn for people to get out of his way. This highway has 30,000 cars per day crossing it from I-80 to Highway 29. It also has a double yellow line the entire distant between 80 and 29. It is also 2 lanes, 1 in each direction.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Wycoff
That's not limited to Texas. It's throughout the U.S. I find it strange that you find it objectionable.

I found that strange.

If you see somebody dying on the ground and refuses to help him, will you be charged with murder when he dies later?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I found that strange.

If you see somebody dying on the ground and refuses to help him, will you be charged with murder when he dies later?

How is that being grossly reckless? There is no duty to aid people unless you are start to help or caused the injury.

Btw, it isn't just all over the US. It's in any common law country. Depraved Heart murder has been around for a while in England.

I mean what else to do you charge some idiot who is randomly firing his gun into areas where people sometimes walk, and kills someone, but he didn't mean to hurt anyone? Manslaughter? Nah... that's too reckless an act to have such a minor charge attach.

[DinoDoc]

Why is your post pink?

[Ecthy]

Huh? What issues you got DD?

[DinoDoc]

Maybe. However that fails to answer the question of why Imran's post is pink.

[Ecthy]

Ah, must be OTBOT

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Texas is a strange place.

Whether it is or not, you disagree that this man is a hazard to people's health? Owes no penalty?
If Texas is a strange place, then come on down. You could be governor, as strange as you can be.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Ah, must be OTBOT

What is the OTBOT, and why is it turning posts pink? Down with the OTBOT

[SlowwHand]

I sense a rebellion in the works.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by SlowwHand


Whether it is or not, you disagree that this man is a hazard to people's health? Owes no penalty?

that's completely off the track. The question is if that hazardous, penalty-deserving behavior constitutes murder or not. You know, most legal systems have murder tied to an intention of killing.
That means that even if your attempt of murder fails, you'd get the same penalty (generally spoken, not taking into account that the an attempted murder can't be "brutal murder", another US weirdness).

In analogy, had this driver not caused a lethal incident, would they have him convicted of "attempted murder"? If not, I can't see the slightest reason for convicting him of murder.
You want high penalty for that kind of behavior that is a risk for the public, OK, a valid opinion. But don't call it murder.

[GePap]

As Imran stated, you can be convicted of reckless murder, if you do something so obviously dangerous and stupid that someone dying is a very probable outcome.

I agree with the ruling, after all, someone did die as a result of a felony this guy was committing. It is somewhat similar to say killing someone during a robbery. The robber might never have had the intent to kill anyone, but something happens during the incident that leads the robber to kill the victim (say the victim decided to play rambo and rush the armed robber, the robber gets spooked and shoots). In NYS at least, the robber would be charged with murder, since he was committing a felony (robbery) and while committing that crime he killed someone (even if there was no real intent there, but a seconds panic).

[Imran Siddiqui]

Reading it over, it does look like they charged the guy with felony murder rather than reckless murder. Either way could work, however.

[q=Wernazuma III]You know, most legal systems have murder tied to an intention of killing. [/q]

So in European civil law countries if some idiot was driving up and down sidewalks, but said he had no intention of killing anyway, yet did... you would just leave it at manslaughter? He should have known there was a very substantial risk of his reckless actions leading to someone's death.

[SlowwHand]

Not his first time to be arrested, and you just have to know there were dozens of times he drove while drunk and didn't get stopped.