Murderer? DWI case

Great Debates
1

This is my first Great Debates topic- be gentle!
regarding the following: http://www.courttv.com/trials/marvin/011700_verdict_ctv.html

I have strong feelings about this case, having recently witnessed a terrible drunk driving crash- luckily the carload of teens that the person I saw escaped unscathed- the driver did not fare as well. That’s why I bring this up.

The defense in this case claimed this was a terrible accident, but not second degree murder. The state said that she was drunk and drove, making her car a deadly weapon.
Murder or accident?

I vote murder.
PS- I watched most of the trial- She had consumed 2 Grande Margaritas and 3 shots of Rumplemins before with nothing to eat before getting in the car. She tested at .21 BLOOD alcohol 4 HOURS after the accident.

Love is like popsicles…you get too much you get too high.

Not enough and you’re gonna die…
Click here for some GOOD news for a change Zettecity

2

I’m with the state on this one.
Anyone who had seen her priors knew she had a problem driving drunk - and that presumably includes herself. At some point between a prior DWI incident and the lethal incident, she had to be sober enough to think, “Hey, I’m really screwed in the head, I need to get into a treatment program and/or give my car keys to my mother.” She didn’t. She chose to endanger everyone on the road (not to mention a lot of people off the road) all to get a bellyful of booze.

I mean, for cryin out loud when I was 17 I got into a couple of fender-benders - nobody was hurt, and the total damage was a busted headlight and a bent wheel rim to my vehicle (the other vehicles weren’t appreciably damaged). Even then I considered whether or not I was fit to be on the road. I decided I was, and haven’t gotten into any dings since then. But the point is, I thought about it.

Did this woman think about it? Either way, she’s a menace to society.

Some people seem to think this kind of thing isn’t such a big deal because driving is so common, and drinking is so common. Think for a second if she had been in her backyard, chock full of some stimulant (legal or illegal), target shooting with a rifle. And a bullet kills somebody across the street (she was too hyper to check her backstop). What would you call that? An accidental shooting? No, a negligent shooting.

3

I have to agree as well. If this were a first time offense, I could sanction mercy, but a repeat offender deserves a murder conviction.

In this day, there is no excuse for ignorance of the danger of drunk driving, especially for someone with a history of DWI charges. That woman had her priorities tragically confused.

Should she spend 60 years in prison? I’m not sure. It could be that 10 would knock her head on straight. Still… she’s taken 4 kids out of the world and whether in prison or out, she should spend the rest of her life trying to somehow make up for that loss.

4

I’m not ready to make a call on this yet. Not because I don’t have opinions; I have a herd of them. But because of something that happened very recently.

The sentence was reported in last Sunday’s Raleigh News and Observer. The story right next to it was a tie-in, another drunk driving fatality. That one happened about halfway between my work and my home – a drunk man with two passengers got onto a freeway/interstate-type US highway going the wrong way, collided head-on with another car sideswiping the guy who swerved out of his way off the road The two passengers in his car are dead; the two in the car he collided with are in bad condition.

We were five minutes behind this mess, and came on the accident as apparently every emergency vehicle in the eastern half of the county converged on the scene.

There but for the grace of God…

5

Yep. This one’s a no-brainer. It’s pretty well established under the law that if one knows one’s actions (in this case, drinking) will result in the loss of mental capacity (in this case, intoxication), any actions that occur following that incapacity are presumed to be done with full consciousness of mind.

IIRC there is an exception in some states that a defendant can argue that failure to take some action that would prevent incapacity (going off antidepressants, for example) is in itself a loss of capacity. But one of the real lawyers can fill in the blanks much better than I on that subject.

Sign up now to claim your share! Who Wants To Be A Phaedrusaire?

6

Depending upon the state & the specifics of each case, jurors are often given wide latitude in the “crime” they find someone guilty of, ranging from involuntary, or vehicular manslaughter, to 2nd degree murder for deaths resulting from DWI.

I won’t pretend to know the specifics of this case as well as the jurors. Therefore, I have no reason to question their decision.

It appears that the judge also had a fair amount of latitude, at least in deciding whether to have the sentences run concurrently vs. consecutively. There is a huge difference between 15 years & 60 years. While 4 lives were lost here, I have trouble with the concept that one act is intrinsically 4 times worse because the car she hit had 5 people in it instead of 1 or 2.
Certainly, any sentence beyond the 60 years is without meaning, since under current sentencing guidelines, there is no provision for parole.

I fully support the 2nd degree murder conviction. I have some qualms about the sentences running consecutively, but that is strictly personal opinion.

Sue from El Paso

Experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted.

7

SADD have been present and active in high schools for what, ten years? or fifteen? The information is there. I know kids can ignore all kinds of information - but they have to work at ignoring SADD.

And what does her state do about DUI/DWI? Was she sent to drunk school? Fined? Car impounded on previous convictions? To me this is an area where state law could really made a difference.

8

I personally don’t think it’s murder, but I think this person needs to stay locked up for a long time.

Here is a different case, not involving DUI, but I wondered what the “proper” punishment should be:

Some teenage boys (four, I think) in coastal GA got together and pulled a prank. The prank: removing the STOP signs from an intersection.

Of course, it wasn’t long before there was a wreck–and it involved fatalities.

The boys ended up getting something like 18-year sentences.

So here is my point: Were these boys just stupid, or were they really looking to see someone get killed?

I believe the former, but at the same time, someone did get killed–thru these kids’ actions, so they had to be punished.

But how much?

In 18 years, they would have spent over half their lives behind bars in a prison, and will spend the rest of their lives behind bars separated from “polite society.”

OK, that’s enough.

I guess my point is that I, too, always wonder what the “proper” punishment for something should be–and whether the person, having been duly punished, should be shut out from having a normal life, provided he/she doesn’t slip up again.

And if there is that great a fear that he/she might slip up, should that person ever be released?

So many questions. . . .

9

Although this person should do some serious time, is 2nd Degree Murder appropriate?

I’m sure there are people more knowledgeable on the subject than I am, so please tell me if I’m wrong, but I always thought 2nd Degree Murder was when a person deliberately killed someone (without premeditation).

This was not a deliberate murder. She was responsible for the deaths, and should do serious time, but by making this crime have the same punishment as one where a murder is deliberate is simply inappropriate.

If one crime is worse than another, the worse crime should have a worse penalty. It logically follows that the lesser crime must have a lesser penalty. If a person personally hated those four people, and killed them, that person should do the same time as this drunk girl? Of course not; it’s a worse crime. And even with the leeway of sentencing, I feel it is different enough to have a different charge.
If they are using the murder charge because manslaughter doesn’t carry enough of a penalty, they need to change the manslaughter charge, or make a special “DUI manslaughter” charge.

10

Ok, now just for kicks, how about someone posting an answer to the OP that actually lists the requirements in their state for a murder conviction (as opposed to manslaughter, let’s say), then applying the facts as they are known to the definition of murder?

It’s easy to feel that punishment should be harsh, but knowing whether the desired result is provided for under the law is a whole 'nother thing…

11

From the CourtTV website:

In my opinion, driving drunk multiple times with a blood alcohol level that she showed and killing 4 people shows exactly the requirement that is shown above. I live in NY and am unsure of the murder statutes here, but as far as her state goes, I agree 100%

Love is like popsicles…you get too much you get too high.

Not enough and you’re gonna die…
Click here for some GOOD news for a change Zettecity

12

IANAL, but in most states second degree murder has several qualifications besides being a deliberate killing without premeditation (that is the common part of the statute; I’m not aware of anywhere where a deliberate killing without premeditation doesn’t meet the standard for 2nd degree murder).

The qualification I’m most familiar with is gross negligence or depraved indifference to human life. These qualify things like taking a gun and firing it while people are ‘downrange’ from me, leaving a small child that I’m responsible for in a dangerous situation, or similar qualifications. While in these situations you didn’t intend to kill anyone, they are activities that stand a really good chance of killing someone and you didn’t have to take the action.

There are also ‘felony-murder’ laws where an accedental or unintentional killing can qualify as first or second degree murder when you’re comitting a violent felony. For example, you’re (armed) robbing a convenince store, the cops show up, you start shooting, and the cops shoot your partner in crime. Under a lot of felony murder laws, you can be tried for the murder of your partner, possibly even for 1st degree murder.

Kevin Allegood

13

In my town a few months back we had an interesting case in some ways similar to this. There was a man who had an epileptic seizure while driving, and killed someone when he wrecked. Now, most people would say it was not his fault.

It was his eighth accident in as many years.

A lot of the press coverage focused on ‘why was he driving anyway, he shouldn’t have had a license’. I agree that is true, but there had been problems - I think he had successfully sued once in order to have his license reinstated after it was suspended for a few months. It seems to me that he knew it was only a matter of time before he would have another seizure while driving, and that he is just as liable as a drunk driver.

If you have any condition that prevents you from driving safely, whether it be drunkeness or epilepsy, it is your responsibility to stay off the roads. If you kill someone in such a state, to me that is wanton negligence and depending on state laws is murder.

14

If she was at .21 4 hours after she stopped drinking, then she was probably at cloase to .4 when she got on the road–maybe even a little higher. With priors, she has to know the seriousness of the case.

I would personally sentence her to a lifetime of community service, speaking at every school, town, bar, etc. in her state.

BTW, I have a DUI case pending, so I know that (in my case) one of these babies is your wake-up call. I don’t think that I was terribly irresponsible before, but drinking impairs judgement. I still drink, just now I take cabs, get rides, request in advance if I can stay over, or consume more water than anything else.

She knew, or reasonably should have known what she was doing. She should have a stiff penalty. Still, jail isn’t going to do her or anyone else any good, so I still opt for the community service (with maybe some kind of house arrest or something thrown in).

Bucky