General Discussion

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)

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

Sun Feb 26, 2012, 07:08 PM

Feb 2012

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.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

59 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Drunk Woman Hands Over Car Keys to Boyfriend & Faces 30 Years in Prison for It! [View all] Liberal_in_LA Feb 2012 OP

Good. If you go out drinking for an evening with someone, you should know that they can't drive. JVS Feb 2012 #1

I'm with you on this one. She knew before they went out drinking that there wouldn't be Honeycombe8 Feb 2012 #33

I don't buy it MrBig Feb 2012 #2

Don't you have to assume that her boyfriend was drinking with her? Cali_Democrat Feb 2012 #3

I've been out with people who will swear that they aren't impaired... Luminous Animal Feb 2012 #10

Many people will claim they are fine when they are not. liberalhistorian Feb 2012 #17

It can be tough when you're drunk Cali_Democrat Feb 2012 #19

That's the thing about being drunk... diminished capacity to Luminous Animal Feb 2012 #29

I have totally BTDT laundry_queen Feb 2012 #50

After an experience similar to that when I was 22. After that Luminous Animal Feb 2012 #53

How about someone you drink with regularly? cherokeeprogressive Feb 2012 #56

if you can't really give consent when you are drunk La Lioness Priyanka Feb 2012 #11

probably not Liberal_in_LA Feb 2012 #13

I was thinking about that part, too. Robb Feb 2012 #6

If they were drinking together, which sounds like the case, liberalhistorian Feb 2012 #16

no it wouldn't qazplm Feb 2012 #21

The "facts" are that two innocent people liberalhistorian Feb 2012 #25

This is what comes of Privatizing prisons. AND promising to keep them stocked with prisioners. Justice wanted Feb 2012 #4

nailed it. miyazaki Feb 2012 #27

They're going to have to prove she wasn't drunk enough to not know how drunk he was. rug Feb 2012 #5

Yeah, they are going to have a hard time threading that needle. morningfog Feb 2012 #22

Agreed. rug Feb 2012 #24

I don't know of any crime where you're absolved just because you're drunk Major Nikon Feb 2012 #23

If the statute requires knowing conduct they have to prove the mens rea of knowledge. rug Feb 2012 #28

Manslaughter doesn't require criminal intent Major Nikon Feb 2012 #35

Recklessness also requires a mens rea. moriah Feb 2012 #36

The fact that alcohol impairs judgement is common knowledge Major Nikon Feb 2012 #40

Yep. Negligence can be easily proven. moriah Feb 2012 #41

That's a strict liability crime. rug Feb 2012 #48

No, but you must be aware of the risk of death and consciously disregard it,. rug Feb 2012 #47

There's a bit more to the story Major Nikon Feb 2012 #49

That's what the case will pivot on - if they can prove it. rug Feb 2012 #52

I'm not really feeling much sympathy for this woman or her boyfriend. Skinner Feb 2012 #7

some people can drink and not seem drunk. Maybe her boyfriend was that Liberal_in_LA Feb 2012 #8

I have two friends like that. Luminous Animal Feb 2012 #12

Just because you don't "seem" drunk liberalhistorian Feb 2012 #18

Back in my 20's I was like that. RC Feb 2012 #38

I can see a penalty,but nothing as severe as the person who did the driving.nt athenasatanjesus Feb 2012 #9

why not.how many bars have been sued b/c they continued to serve someone who was "obviously" tipped leftyohiolib Feb 2012 #14

A trial to face 30 years in prison, or being killed without trial.... boppers Feb 2012 #15

voluntart intoxication is a defense qazplm Feb 2012 #20

two people are dead. it was her car, her keys, her permission. you think she could walk away free? unblock Feb 2012 #26

It would be helpful to know BAC JonLP24 Feb 2012 #30

Both these idiots deserve jail time. Odin2005 Feb 2012 #31

Thirty years worth? Comrade Grumpy Feb 2012 #37

They KILLED people. Odin2005 Feb 2012 #44

Yes. Chan790 Feb 2012 #54

well, the mugging analogy doesn't make much sense fishwax Feb 2012 #32

This fails every test I can think of in terms of why you would want to prosecute something stevenleser Feb 2012 #34

+1 You nailed it on perfectly rational grounds. Joe Shlabotnik Feb 2012 #42

I agree JonLP24 Feb 2012 #46

No death that is the result of a drunk driver should be considered "ACCIDENTAL". cherokeeprogressive Feb 2012 #57

lol. i think you forgot the sarcasm thingy. stevenleser Feb 2012 #59

Maybe it's time to make breathalizers available to restaurant patrons? ecstatic Feb 2012 #39

I raised that once 20 something years ago and found out the reason why places dont do it. stevenleser Feb 2012 #51

This is the sort of injustice Americans love. Vattel Feb 2012 #43

No sympathy here. Sorry, I have no problem with it. aaaaaa5a Feb 2012 #45

I think the prosecutor is making the right decision. n/t Chan790 Feb 2012 #55

This reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons... Drunken Irishman Feb 2012 #58