Duh..what the hell did she expect? Lying on a road at night? She deserves the Darwin award if you ask me.
Still trying to figure out why the driver was charged with her death. After all he didn't hit her on purpose..the girl literally asked for it. Thoughts?
Queso From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1998 times:
Quoting Springbok747 (Thread starter): Still trying to figure out why the driver was charged with her death. After all he didn't hit her on purpose..the girl literally asked for it.
Hmm... Well, looking at it from purely a technical aspect and not knowing anything about the laws there, maybe it's similar to the "involuntary manslaughter" charge we have here in the States. When somebody dies as a result of the operation of a motor vehicle and there was no outward intent or extenuating circumstances, a charge of involuntary manslaughter is usually brought by the investigating officers. The prosecuting attorney or grand jury can then examine the case to see if the charge should be pressed or dropped. It's a sort of CYA for the judicial system to make sure "intent" is more likely to be discovered if there is any.
Edit: Didn't catch this the first quick read-through and here's your answer:
"The driver was charged with driving causing death, drink-driving, and driving unregistered, unlicensed and uninsured."
I would venture a guess that she passed out between a local party and wherever she was headed. I know people who've done that before. Most of the time the cops found them and tossed them in the tank for a while.
No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
HuskyAviation From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1153 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1868 times:
This reminds me of all those deaths after the movie "The Program" with idiot kids lying in roads between the lanes. Were any of those drivers charged (I honestly don't know)? I would really doubt it unless there were other factors, like drunk driving, or some other kind of gross negligence.
In most US states, drunkenness essentially substitutes for the mens rea necessary for general intent crimes (or, roughly, those requiring only "recklessness" as to the result of the crime) Since most statutes often called "involuntary manslaughter" are more properly called reckless manslaughter and not surprisingly usually have recklessness as the mens rea. You could charge him with reckless/involuntary manslaughter in most US states.
The problem in obtaining a conviction is causation, and that would really depend a lot on what state you're in. Generally, for you to be convicted of a crime involving recklessness, the way the crime/accident happens must be a harm within the risk of the recklessness. This would be a slam dunk if the girl had been sitting in another car; the problem is that you could easily claim that either the recklessness wasn't the cause (that is, any driver, even a non-reckless one would have hit the girl) or that the way this went down is so weird as to not be a foreseeable result of the recklessness imparted by being drunk (that is, when you get drunk and drive, you're taking the risk of hitting parked cars, other driving cars, pedestrians crossing the street, but NOT people lying in the street, since that's totally unforeseeable). There's also an issue of the girl being an intervening actor.
That all said, I have no idea about Aussie criminal law. It may be (but is not likely) radically different.