• WrenFeathers@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    That’s not how vehicular manslaughter trials work. It’s like any other murder prosecution. He’d need to prove it was an accident. And mowing down someone with a car in front of witnesses in broad daylight?

    Yeah…

    Guilty.

    • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      no he doesn’t need to prove it, in a criminal trial in most countries, the prosecution has the burden of proof; in the US “beyond a reasonable doubt”

    • DrunkEngineer@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      The max penalty for 2nd degree vehicular manslaughter is only 7 years. In theory he could be prosecuted for 1st degree or even aggravated, but those require DUI or multiple fatalities.

      • WrenFeathers@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Now look up what the maximum sentence would be for when someone purposefully murders someone with a car. Because Vehicular Homicide in the second degree- is where a death is caused “without an intention to do so” and where there is neither reckless driving, nor a DWI offense.

        You’re manufacturing an argument while leaving out key facts.

        Your boy WANTED the CEO dead. So, don’t use accidental death cases to compare it in bad faith

        Vehicular homicide with intent carries the same penalties as with a gun.