Update On Upstate New York Limo Accident

I was giving you a similar circumstance in regular life. Think of it as trying to get the most in a negotiation and giving up some to get what you both agree with. You look at it as if the prosecution is locked in place with either maximum or nothing. There's lots of grey when groups of human beings are involved.

 

Except it isn't even remotely relatable to the conversation. If you can't see the difference between an open negotiation between two parties, either of which is free to walk away from the table at any time for any reason, and a criminal trial where the state is forceably (as in the person is not free to decline) charging an individual who is supposed to have the presumption of innocence (the state burden of proof is on the state), then I don't know what to tell you.

 

The bottom line is the prosecutor is free to file whatever charges he wants to and/or can convince a grand jury might be plausible. You may not like it, but that's part of the reason defendants under the U.S. Constitution have so many rights under the law, including the presumption of innocence. Many countries do not have "presumption of innocence," and it is certainly true that there is no presumption of innocence socially (as in, when society around you is making a judgment). In fact, in many countries, if you are charged with any crime, odds are 99% or better that you will be convicted, and there's a 100% chance you'll be convicted by an angry Twitter mob.

If there's a technical reason the prosecutor isn't certain that he can get a homicide conviction, in this case I think having a manslaughter charge available for each count is the right thing to do. Sometimes (and it may depend on state laws, I'm not sure) juries can convict on "lesser included offenses." So a person could be charged only with intentional homicide but still convicted of manslaughter if, say, one of the elements for intentional homicide isn't agreed upon by every juror but the agree on all the elements for manslaughter.

As far as your concern for some unfair bias against the defendant, the very fact that he's charged is enough in many people's minds to decide that he's guilty. That's just human nature. If it goes to trial, the judge will instruct the jury on what they can and cannot consider and what each element means.

As an aside, if it's injustice you're concerned about, there are better cases in this forum than this particular case to take a stand on. I mean, there's no question that the limo killed a bunch of people. Why get worked up about this guy getting a fair trial? Why not worry about the dumb ### who parked his truck on the shoulder when he shouldn't have getting a fair trial when some other dumb ### ran into him and killed themselves?

 

Not to that guy. What makes his case any less important than any other? And I'm not necessarily making a stand on this specific case, but rather the specific method of piling on charges...throwing the book at 'em in hopes that something sticks...taken by the prosecutor. The guy may be guilty as sin, but if I were on the jury the simple fact that the prosecutor piled on like that would raise the bar considerably that the prosecutor would have to meet to convince me he wasn't full of excrement. Just because it's a common practice doesn't make it any less sleazy.

 

Thank you for the much needed legal clarification.

 

Why do they always hire illegal immigrants with no license instead of americans with CDLs? An illegal flipped a semi and killed 2 people near where I live just last year.

 

I agree, actually, but it's been that way so long that it's unlikely to change. Having worked in the legal industry for ten years, I can assure you that it's pretty much all sleazy, only the people involved generally aren't as good looking as the sleazy actors who portray sleazy lawyers and judges in TV shows and movies.

 

I think the driver actually did have a cdl, he didn't have a passenger endorsement though.

They let the son out on bail but he has to wear an ankle bracelet. Supposedly, the father wants to return to U.S. to help his son, but I'll believe that when I see it...