Drunk Woman Hands Over Car Keys to Boyfriend & Faces 30 Years in Prison for It!

[Liberal_in_LA]

She probably thought she was doing the right thing. When 21-year-old Erin Brown was too wasted to drive her Toyota Scion home after a night out on the town, she gave the keys to her boyfriend, Trevor Bradshaw. Which would’ve been a responsible decision, except he was drunk too — and ended up hitting and killing two pedestrians as he swerved through the streets of Nashville. That’s tragic in and of itself.

But prosecutors are now dusting off a rarely used law to charge Brown with vehicular homicide right along with her man, citing that anyone who knowingly hands over their keys to an intoxicated person is just as liable for any damages as the individual behind the wheel. Now she’s facing 30 years in jail because she wasn’t astute enough in her drunkenness to realize that her boo was too tipsy to drive.

So what we’re basically saying here is that it was up to Brown to discern how far gone Bradshaw was rather than it being up to him to admit that he was too stewed to play chauffeur. Under that line of thinking, it must be a mugging victim’s fault for wearing a super snazzy handbag and tempting a renegade thief to steal it.

The sad fallout from their bad decision-making means two young men are now dead: Michael Brooksher, 22, and Tommy Allen, 23. The best friends both suffered injuries that killed them shortly after they were plowed down at 2:30 in the morning back in December. If the D.A.’s office has its way, this incident will also claim the lives of two more young people, with Brown and Bradshaw serving three decades behind bars, which puts them darn near in their golden years by the time they get out if they serve full sentences.
http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_news/133358/drunk_woman_hands_over_car

[JVS]

1. Good. If you go out drinking for an evening with someone, you should know that they can't drive.

Designating a less drunk driver is not an acceptable way of dealing with the problem.

[Honeycombe8]

33. I'm with you on this one. She knew before they went out drinking that there wouldn't be

a non-drinking driver. She was sober then.

She may have handed her keys over just out of "my boyfriend does the driving" thing. I had relationships like that, back in the day. The guy just automatically did the driving. And it wasn't her decision that she was too drunk that had anything to do with it.

So sad. All the lives lost and ruined because of drinking and driving.

[MrBig]

2. I don't buy it

"anyone who knowingly hands over their keys to an intoxicated person is just as liable for any damages as the individual behind the wheel."

I doubt the prosecutors will be able to prove she knowingly handed her keys to a drunk person.

[Cali_Democrat]

3. Don't you have to assume that her boyfriend was drinking with her?

She had to know he was tipsy.

[Luminous Animal]

10. I've been out with people who will swear that they aren't impaired...

when I am sober or slightly tipsy, I can easily discern that they are not fit to drive. But when I've gone overboard with bourbon, there is no way that I would be able to accurately assess another person's capabilities.

[liberalhistorian]

17. Many people will claim they are fine when they are not.

Most people are not good judges of how well they can drive when they've been drinking. In fact, alcohol will often make you think you can do something when you can't.

[Cali_Democrat]

19. It can be tough when you're drunk

But when you see someone pounding drinks all night, don't you have to assume they are tipsy?

[Luminous Animal]

29. That's the thing about being drunk... diminished capacity to

make those assumptions.

[laundry_queen]

50. I have totally BTDT

When I was newly-legal, I had a group of friends and we would go out dancing/drinking nearly every night. We rotated who was the designated driver. We never had a problem, usually the DD avoided alcohol completely but sometimes would have 1 or 2 over 5 or 6 hours. One night, it was just 2 of us that wanted to go out, and my friend said she'd be the dd. I went a little bit overboard that night, and was seriously drunk. Ran into some other friends at the bar, and my original friend and I had a hard time finding each other at the end of the night. But we did, and she drove me home. The next morning I called her, talked about feeling like crap and she said, "Me too". I was like, "Oh, did you catch a cold or something?" And she told me, "Oh, no, I was every bit as drunk as YOU were last night! I don't even REMEMBER driving home."



I really had NO idea at all. I was too drunk myself to make any kind of judgement call on how drunk my friend was. And, out of our group of friends, I had never run into that kind of irresponsibility. I would never have suspected my friend was that stupid. I trusted her, since she was the dd, to be sober. I'm just so thankful she didn't kill us that night, and other people as well. So stupid! But yeah, if YOU are drunk, you are totally incapable of making a judgement call about if someone else is sober or not.

[Luminous Animal]

53. After an experience similar to that when I was 22. After that

I decided that I would always be the DD.

[cherokeeprogressive]

56. How about someone you drink with regularly?

I know when my wife is drunk. It's not in how she acts, but in how many cocktails I've seen her drink.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

11. if you can't really give consent when you are drunk

can you make the call about who is or is not drunk when you are drunk?

[Liberal_in_LA]

13. probably not

[Robb]

6. I was thinking about that part, too.

Although a reasonable person might suspect that the man you'd been drinking with all night might be just as drunk as you, it's not a sure thing that an intoxicated person might.

[liberalhistorian]

16. If they were drinking together, which sounds like the case,

then it will be quite easy for prosecutors to prove she knew she was handing the keys to a drunk person. The fact that she was drunk herself and her judgment was thus "impaired" is not often considered a mitigating factor in these types of cases, since she chose to intoxicate herself, it was not forced on her. If they were both drinking, then they both should have known better than to have driven and should have made arrangements for another way home. Period. There is NO EXCUSE nowadays for drunken driving, NONE WHATSOEVER. I'll reserve my sympathies for the victims and their poor families.

[qazplm]

21. no it wouldn't

not if she was intoxicated at the time. The law in most states is clear that you cannot specifically intend to do something if you are intoxicated. As someone else said, we would be saying she was raped if they were both drunk and had sex, because she wasn't able to consent.

What if the plan was for her to drive, so he drank away, but she ended up drinking too much?

I simply require more facts at this point.

[liberalhistorian]

25. The "facts" are that two innocent people

are dead because these two were selfish and irresponsible enough to drink and then drive. Period. There is NO excuse for drunken driving anymore. If they were drinking together, then she should have had some idea that he'd be intoxicated, too. Taxis and designated drivers exist for a reason.

[Justice wanted]

4. This is what comes of Privatizing prisons. AND promising to keep them stocked with prisioners.

This is a sad situation. She did the right thing-granted she probably didn't realize how drunk he was and that was a wrong judgement-but this is sick.

[miyazaki]

27. nailed it.

Pretty soon we'll all end up in prison.

[rug]

5. They're going to have to prove she wasn't drunk enough to not know how drunk he was.

They're overcharging her to get a plea out of her and have her sign a cooperation agreement. They want her as a witness.

[morningfog]

22. Yeah, they are going to have a hard time threading that needle.

Her level of drunkness is what it hinges on. This is prosecutorial misconduct, in my opinion.

[rug]

24. Agreed.

Bullying her into a plea.

[Major Nikon]

23. I don't know of any crime where you're absolved just because you're drunk

So I really don't see as how they would have to prove any such thing. It might be a bluff, but it's a pretty good one.

Her actions resulted in the death of someone else. Being drunk doesn't seem to me to be a good defense.

[rug]

28. If the statute requires knowing conduct they have to prove the mens rea of knowledge.

Depending on the particular statute, even voluntary intoxication can negate the required mental state. Though it's not the case here, involuntary intoxication is a complete defense.

[Major Nikon]

35. Manslaughter doesn't require criminal intent

They just have to prove you behaved so recklessly that you exposed the public to danger. I'm not going to make a comment on her guilt or innocence because I don't know the situation. I think that if she made an agreement with her boyfriend to be the designated driver before they started drinking, she may not be to blame. However, if she just handed the keys over to him knowing they both had been drinking, she is part and parcel to the crime. That's still very reckless behavior. The moral to the story is have a plan on how you're going to get home before you start drinking.

[moriah]

36. Recklessness also requires a mens rea.

That the person knew that what they were doing caused a substantial risk of injury but did it anyway.

Negligence is what goes by a "reasonable person" standard. That a person didn't know, but should have.

[Major Nikon]

40. The fact that alcohol impairs judgement is common knowledge

If being drunk excuses one from the intent of being reckless, drunk driving wouldn't be a crime.

[moriah]

41. Yep. Negligence can be easily proven.

Recklessness may be a stretch.

[rug]

48. That's a strict liability crime.

They just have to prove the act not the state of mind.

[rug]

47. No, but you must be aware of the risk of death and consciously disregard it,.

It's still a higher standatd than criminal neglect. They're squeezing her.

[Major Nikon]

49. There's a bit more to the story

Apparently she knew her boyfriend was drunk, or at least that's what the prosecution is claiming.

http://www.wbir.com/news/article/206685/2/Hermitage-woman-faces-vehicular-homicide-charges-in-rare-use-of-law-after-handing-over-keys-to-boyfriend

[rug]

52. That's what the case will pivot on - if they can prove it.

[Skinner]

7. I'm not really feeling much sympathy for this woman or her boyfriend.

But, but, I was drunk when I handed the loaded gun to my drunk boyfriend!

[Liberal_in_LA]

8. some people can drink and not seem drunk. Maybe her boyfriend was that

type of drinker.

[Luminous Animal]

12. I have two friends like that.

[liberalhistorian]

18. Just because you don't "seem" drunk

does not in any way mean that you are not drunk or that you're capable of driving.

[RC]

38. Back in my 20's I was like that.

Got handed the car keys several times because they thought I was sober enough to drive.
Never mind I was just short of needing a corner of the room to stand up and needed both hands to operate the door knob. But I could apparently walk straight.
I never did take the keys in those circumstances.

[athenasatanjesus]

9. I can see a penalty,but nothing as severe as the person who did the driving.nt

[leftyohiolib]

14. why not.how many bars have been sued b/c they continued to serve someone who was "obviously" tipped

[boppers]

15. A trial to face 30 years in prison, or being killed without trial....

Sounds like she's looking at the the better outcome of the tragedy.

[qazplm]

20. voluntart intoxication is a defense

to a specific intent crime as I assume that crime probably is.

Having said that, they possibly are both responsible. She drove there, apparently without a plan for a DD. Unless he was supposed to be the DD, in which case it's 100 percent his fault. But if he wasn't, then he was in a situation where he may not have been planning on driving at all, and thus didn't plan ahead, and then while drunk is asked to on the spot assess his ability to drive.

In the end, both are responsible, but he was the one behind the wheel.

[unblock]

26. two people are dead. it was her car, her keys, her permission. you think she could walk away free?

she's not remotely an innocent bystander in this tragedy. she played a key role in bringing about the deaths of two completely innocent people.

should she spend the next 30 years in prison? i doubt that would be the actual outcome -- just because there's a statutory punishment up to that many years doesn't mean that in practice a jury will convict her of that particular crime and that a judge will impose that particular sentence. my guess is that she will get something less than the actual driver.

but you've got to admit that impaired driving is FAR too tolerated in this country and i think it's a very good idea to get tough, at LEAST where there are actual deaths involved.

[JonLP24]

30. It would be helpful to know BAC

In regards to the observing boyfriend and how much he had to drink kind of thing. So would weight but I would never expect that in an article. A few drinks can put you just over, two tall drinks can put you over so it may have appeared to her that her boyfriend didn't have that much to drink. I don't even have information on what exactly they both did prior to the handing of the keys situation. That's why we have trials, interested in learning more but I can't say one way or the other. One way you could say she is totally responsible, OTOH, very few if anyone in that situation would perform a field sobriety test/breathalyzer when handing the keys to a DD. Though they would know the DD wouldn't or didn't drink. She may have made a bad guess if he only had a few.

[Odin2005]

31. Both these idiots deserve jail time.

[Comrade Grumpy]

37. Thirty years worth?

[Odin2005]

44. They KILLED people.

[Chan790]

54. Yes.

30 years worth. Both of them. It's better than the next 30 years are going to be for the families of their victims.

[fishwax]

32. well, the mugging analogy doesn't make much sense

I don't see how Brown is at all like someone wearing a super snazzy handbag and getting mugged.

Still, I think they'll have a hard time getting a conviction on this charge, if they do continue with it. But then there are a lot of details we don't really know from the article (or the one it links to) including how drunk she was, how drunk he was, whether they'd been together while he was drinking, and so on.

[stevenleser]

34. This fails every test I can think of in terms of why you would want to prosecute something

1. Punish intentionally bad behavior? - Fail: There is no intent here. Someone, I think Rug, mentioned Mens Rea. Not only is there no intent to do wrong, it's obvious the intent was to do right.

2. Send a message to others not to do it again? - Fail: If you are drunk, your ability to think is impaired. She did about all one can expect of her by knowing she herself shouldnt drive and handing over the keys.

-------------------------

Not every single accidental death means that someone should be prosecuted or sued. It just so happens in this case that the boyfriend SHOULD be prosecuted. Just because we are upset that two people died needlessly doesnt mean we should be looking to expand the circle of who we hold responsible.

I think that her level of culpability ended when she handed over her keys. Remembering the times I have been drunk, even that level of cognition in that condition requires superhuman effort.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

42. +1 You nailed it on perfectly rational grounds.

Unfortunately, I think we are becoming an increasingly vengeful society. Separating personal loss and moral outrage from excessive and unusual punishment are becoming a thing of the past. This is why I don't support mandatory minimum sentencing, or the death penalty.

[JonLP24]

46. I agree

especially with an article that has very limited information--fishwax highlighted some key things.

[cherokeeprogressive]

57. No death that is the result of a drunk driver should be considered "ACCIDENTAL".

She drank with the bloke many times. She HAD to know how much he had to drink, and in this day and age I refuse to agree with any claim that she had no idea how drunk he might have been.

[stevenleser]

59. lol. i think you forgot the sarcasm thingy.

At least I hope so.

[ecstatic]

39. Maybe it's time to make breathalizers available to restaurant patrons?

this is a tough one. My first response to this article was, "Cry me a river." I don't really drink, so in most cases I would be the designated driver. But I see people drink and they say they're fine to drive. The problem is, you want to trust that people know their limits, but oftentimes, they don't.

[stevenleser]

51. I raised that once 20 something years ago and found out the reason why places dont do it.

It turns out that where that has been tried, certain people think it is funny to try to outdo each other in Blood Alcohol Level. The bars and restaurants ended up sending a lot of people to the hospital with dangerous BALs.

[Vattel]

43. This is the sort of injustice Americans love.

[aaaaaa5a]

45. No sympathy here. Sorry, I have no problem with it.

She should serve time right along side her boyfriend.

[Chan790]

55. I think the prosecutor is making the right decision. n/t

[Drunken Irishman]

58. This reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons...

Homer and Barney go on a local tour of the brewery and both have a few drinks. It's clear Homer is far more sober than Barney and decides, because Barney is too intoxicated, he'll drive home (after a little fight between the two). Well, as they're leaving the parking lot, Homer is pulled over by the police.

He shows no signs of being drunk and the officer is about to let them on their way when Barney blurts out, "give him the breathalyzer!" - well, Homer fails.

So, the officer arrests Homer on DUI and oblivious to the obviously drunk Barney, allows Barney to drive home. The scene ends when Chief Wiggum, hidden in a beer stein (staking out potential drunk drivers), is hit by a drunk Barney and rolls down the hill.

This is a tricky situation. I believe the intent was probably good, though, even that is questionable (she might very well have known he was drunk and decided he was 'less' drunk than she was, so, he drove - which is absolutely wrong), but if she spent the whole night with him, and he drank at all, it was still a bad decision. It doesn't matter if she was drunk or not, if she knew he was drinking, and potentially drunk, she was reckless.

It's sad - but I don't think it's comparable to a mugging victim being at fault for wearing a super snazzy handbag. This woman is not the victim. The victims are dead.