Murder requires intent.
thank you crusty
pretty much what i have been saying the whole time. even manslaughter needs to show at fault. which none of us have evidence for. felony hit and run due to injuries is all the diver can be charged with at this time. and he should be charged and hopefully convicted of that.
fwiw you all are playing lawyer when you arent. Let it play out.
This weighs on me a lot when we are out. We've got 8 kids in our group 17 and under. It's our (the parents) responsibility and obligation to keep them safe while we are duning. They are kids. Kids do dumb stuff sometimes and it's our job to teach them the consequences of doing dumb stuff. I cannot control stupid people out in the dunes but I can control what I allow the kids to do. For instance, there is absolutely zero night riding in our camp by the kids. They are not allowed to leave the perimeter of the circled rigs on foot to play hide and seek or such. When we are out riding, there's usually an adult leader, followed by all of the kids and then another adult rear. Along with that, the other adults will act as a rover of sort making sure all the kids are seen by potential other riders/drivers and mitigating risk. All bikes have a flag and the kids are all wearing appropriate safety gear.
Does the fact that it's a felony make these maybe somewhat normal people that normally would do the right thing panic and now they know that coming forward could mean a big sentence where as if there was no penalty they could come forward without fear of being locked away for what was in all likely hood a terrible collision...? (accidents can be prevented) I think the case for lessening the charge for this offense could help more than hurt.
It's not the fact that he hit them, it's ALL about the fact that he left them there afterwards... Yes accidents happen, but as I said before innocent people don't run, hide, stash and vanish.
same can be said for all the people calling for the driver to be arrested for murder. they are playing judge and jury when they are not. let it play out is basically what i have been saying, we dont have facts to make judgements. only thing we know its hit and run, but that does not mean murder or manslaughter or what ever you want to try and call it.
If you read carefully i said “you all” didnt mean for it to seem like i was singling you out, sorry if i gave you that impression. Your post happened to be the last post in the thread when i went to quote the activity.
Murder and involuntary manslaughter have different definitions, so no it's not whatever we want to call it. He killed them, maybe someone else said murder but I don't recall doing that myself. He killed them and left, that in itself warrants the arrest, FELONY hit and run and involuntary or vehicular manslaughter charges. No intent required. If, and that's the key word, they find him I'd wager those will be the charges levied.
The suck part is the only thing that would have constituted a felony if he had stopped, would have been drinking. Nobody wants to talk about it or mention it but lets face it, we've all done it out there at one time or another... look how many arrests are made in G on any given weekend during the duning season.
you have been saying none stop he killed them he killed them. as of right now all we know is they kids died in an accident. not the driver killing them. those are two different things. yes no intent required vehicular or involuntary but you must show fault for the accident. and that is something you or i or anyone else knows about. we do not know the details we do not know who is at fault. as of now they died in an accident they were not killed. you have been wanting to be judge and jury already saying he is guilty of killing them yet as of now there is not one piece of evidence to show that.
