I need some arm-chair lawyer help... (long)

[boomboommsu]

Driving is huge responsibility (even if most take it for granted). If she wasn't capable of driving well enough to not hit a cyclist, nor to not run her over afterwards, then she shouldn't have been driving. The responsibility is on the driver.

The DA should at least PUSH for the felony charge, and maybe take a plea down to misdemeanor if she gives up her license. for ever. otherwise, put her in jail as long as possible. she's as much a danger to the communtiy as a drug dealer.

 

[Shmuley]

For example, shooting a rifle into a house. You didn't see the person inside the house and you didn't "intend" to kill them, but we infer an intent to commit homicide from the recklessness of your behavior.

We can infer the intent necessary to convict the ***** for aggravated assault by arguing that her act of getting out of her car, looking at the injured lady, seeing how close she was to the car while lying there injured, but getting back in her car in order to get away, is sufficiently reckless. A jury could make that finding. BUT the stupid *** DA has to bring the charge in order and try the woman before a jury will get the chance to make that inference.

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

He can get that bite mark guy to do anything.<div>
</div><div>In all seriousness, you should take this to the presses. It's an election year so you should try to get leverage this against the DA. Yeah, the guy is supposedly safe electorally, but a grassroots campaign against him could take him out. I sincerely hope he gets taken out anyways.</div><div>
</div><div>Is it possible to go to someone in the State AG office if Allgood refuses to press charges?</div>

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

I don't care if she's a single mother with 10 kids and has to drive her car between five jobs to make ends meet. Dumb17s like that do not belong behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. Maybe she could get a bike.

 

[boomboommsu]

...their position is that if she wasn't speeding or drunk, then it wasn't reckless. needless to say, i disagree.

he also quoted the driver as saying "Oh my god, i didn't see her" and then "what were ya'll doing in the middle of the road" after she hit her but before she ran her over again.

So, if she was in the middle of the road, why didn't she see her? Sounds like enough of a case for recklessness, for everyone who isn't that idiot DA.

And how do you run over someone that you KNOW is right in front of your car, without being reckless?

it seems like the DA is so used to accidents caused by speeding and DUI, that he's forgotten it's not the end-all and be-all of reckless driving.

 

[MrHooch]

is there any evidence that this was intentional? Everything I have read seems to indicate it was not...or at least there is not evidence it was.

Again, I may regret this but it seems pretty obvious that this is the problem here. It appears that the evidence (what little is available...even on reddit) indicates it was an accident...a terrible one...but still an accident.

it's an honest question. There is no evidence it was intentional, however the couple in the car following Ms. Norton could see the cyclists for a quarter of a mile before the accident transpired, and they never saw her swerve, hit her brakes, or try to avoid my mother in any way. It can't be proven that this is intent, but it is at least criminally negligent in my (admittedly uninformed) legal opinion.

 

[Johnson85]

for injuring somebody during the commission of another crime? I know a lot of states have a felony murder rule, basically where somebody dies as a result of a person committing felony, it's deemed murder even if it was a complete accident and unintentional. Is there anything similar in Mississippi for injuring somebody? Seems like it should be a crime to injure somebody trying to flee the scene of an accident (presumably also a crime). That would at least put the driver on the hook for running over her the second time.