[Lefty Noob]

Originally Posted by Gotham Dark Knight

How do you know? Does the man not have to be tried? And if so, can't it not have a sway on a jury just like it may in the court of public opinion? How do you know that it does not change anything legally?

Because they have evidence that he ran a redlight and rear-ended her. Sounds pretty cut-and-dried to me.

[Seahawker 562]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

Because they have evidence that he ran a redlight and rear-ended her. Sounds pretty cut-and-dried to me.

Yeah plain and simple. She cant be held responsible

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by Gotham Dark Knight

How do you know? Does the man not have to be tried? And if so, can't it not have a sway on a jury just like it may in the court of public opinion? How do you know that it does not change anything legally?

If the jury does their job then public opinion will account for nothing. In my court he gets the chair.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

Because they have evidence that he ran a redlight and rear-ended her. Sounds pretty cut-and-dried to me.

So?...Prove to me that, that is why she died and not as a result of not having a seat belt on?...Yes, he ran the light, guilt and he contributed to the death, guilty again...Did right out kill her all on his own?...Maybe, maybe not...

And last I heard that is why we still have trial by juries...if it was that simple a thing, we would not need a judicial system.

[Lefty Noob]

Originally Posted by Gotham Dark Knight

So?...Prove to me that, that is why she died and not as a result of not having a seat belt on?...Yes, he ran the light, guilt and he contributed to the death, guilty again...Did right out kill her all on his own?...Maybe, maybe not...

And last I heard that is why we still have trial by juries...if it was that simple a thing, we would not need a judicial system.

Hmm... I am ignorant of the intricacies of DUI law. Does the victim not wearing a seat belt play a role during the trial? Really? I find that hard to believe. I mean, seat belt or no, if a drunk driver didn't rear end her, she wouldn't have gotten into a wreck right then and there. Even if she was wearing a belt and survived, Leyritz would still be guilty of running the red light and causing the wreck. The argument you're making here seems to be along the same lines as a patient dying due to doctors error during elective surgery, say, bariatric surgery. Yeah, if the patient didn't have the surgery, they wouldn't have died. But that doesn't let the doctor off the hook for the malpractice, does it?

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

Hmm... I am ignorant of the intricacies of DUI law. Does the victim not wearing a seat belt play a role during the trial? Really? I find that hard to believe. I mean, seat belt or no, if a drunk driver didn't rear end her, she wouldn't have gotten into a wreck right then and there. Even if she was wearing a belt and survived, Leyritz would still be guilty of running the red light and causing the wreck. The argument you're making here seems to be along the same lines as a patient dying due to doctors error during elective surgery, say, bariatric surgery. Yeah, if the patient didn't have the surgery, they wouldn't have died. But that doesn't let the doctor off the hook for the malpractice, does it?

No, I am saying that there is a burden of proof that must be met by the State in this case, and I would think they need to prove (and I could be wrong) that it was the hit that killed her, and not neglagence on her part with regards to the laws of the State, which include seat belts.

Say for example the impact was at 15 miles per hour, not enough to kill someone, but an air bag deploys and kills a small child in the front seat of a car...is the mother's negligence for having the child in the front seat just as much, if not more a cause of death, then the impact? I think so.

Seldom clear cut in from where I sit...that is why trial lawyers make the big, big bucks I guess.

[Lefty Noob]

Well, Goth, I have to plead ignorance on this. I honestly don't know.

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by Gotham Dark Knight

So?...Prove to me that, that is why she died and not as a result of not having a seat belt on?...Yes, he ran the light, guilt and he contributed to the death, guilty again...Did right out kill her all on his own?...Maybe, maybe not...

And last I heard that is why we still have trial by juries...if it was that simple a thing, we would not need a judicial system.

This is one of those Catch-22 questions. Would she be alive if the seat belt were on ??? There is no black and white answer for that. Would she be alive if he had not run the red light ?? If not then it would not have been his fault. It is a situation where all the parties were in the wrong place at the wrong time plus they were all in violation of laws at the very same time. The damage is done and it is a no win situation for all involved. My guess is his lawyers may not argue that he is innocent but they will portray her as an accident waiting to happen. The victim becomes the defendant. It'll be interesting to watch this one play out.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

This is one of those Catch-22 questions. Would she be alive if the seat belt were on ??? There is no black and white answer for that. Would she be alive if he had not run the red light ?? If not then it would not have been his fault. It is a situation where all the parties were in the wrong place at the wrong time plus they were all in violation of laws at the very same time. The damage is done and it is a no win situation for all involved. My guess is his lawyers may not argue that he is innocent but they will portray her as an accident waiting to happen. The victim becomes the defendant. It'll be interesting to watch this one play out.

Exactly. Look, I am not for Leyritz. I personally don't drink, and if he cause a death through a DUI then there has to be consequences...all I am saying is, I don't think its gonna be a clear cut case here.

[legend]

Gotham, you must have had to think long and hard to come up with a scenario like me killing a hijacker from 9-11 before he did what he did to make that point. And you still don't have me convinced.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by legend

Gotham, you must have had to think long and hard to come up with a scenario like me killing a hijacker from 9-11 before he did what he did to make that point. And you still don't have me convinced.

LOL...long and hard?...top of my head my man, and since when do I have to convince you of anything?...You have your view point I have mine...but hey if you wouldn't have killed the hijacker and become a hero...that's cool...

[LSC9901]

My guess is that the court charge will be DUI with death resulting. Neither of those charges can be denied. The PD investigation will almost certainly be able to determine the speed at which Leyritz was traveling. The controversial point I see being made here is would she be alive today if she had been wearing a seat belt ??? The report should give a good indication of that just by determining his speed. If he was doing 25 then maybe she would have survived. If he was doing 60 then the chances are much lower for survival. If all the numbers are against him then trying to destroy her integrity is a real waste. If there is a 50/50 chance she would have survived, and it can be well documented, then it might be worth the fight. Again, so it appears anyway, he is guilty of DUI. Death resulting will only add time to the sentence if there is one. Since there was a death, there is a greater chance he will spend time in jail.

I rest my case your honor.

[legend]

Gotham, the way you posed your hypothetical situation was someone killing the hijacker long before he made it to the plane, when nobody could possibly have known what he was up to. Needless to say anyone would have tried to stop them once their mission was known. The bottom line is Leyritz killed a woman that would be alive today if he hadn't been driving drunk. But perhaps she would have hit a van filled with kids a mile from where she died. Who knows. There's only one way things can happen, and that is how they actually happen. Everything else is left to what ifs.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by legend

Gotham, the way you posed your hypothetical situation was someone killing the hijacker long before he made it to the plane, when nobody could possibly have known what he was up to. Needless to say anyone would have tried to stop them once their mission was known. The bottom line is Leyritz killed a woman that would be alive today if he hadn't been driving drunk. But perhaps she would have hit a van filled with kids a mile from where she died. Who knows. There's only one way things can happen, and that is how they actually happen. Everything else is left to what ifs.

LOL..Obviously you do not know our judicial system...

They way things happen have nothing to do with the case, unless you are able to prove them that way in a court of law...there is a burden of proof that goes with the case...if lawyers for the Defense can prove that she, through her neglete played a part in her own death, the outcome may be different...and Leyritz probably has the funds to do it.

And you are taking my comments way too serious...

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

My guess is that the court charge will be DUI with death resulting. Neither of those charges can be denied. The PD investigation will almost certainly be able to determine the speed at which Leyritz was traveling. The controversial point I see being made here is would she be alive today if she had been wearing a seat belt ??? The report should give a good indication of that just by determining his speed. If he was doing 25 then maybe she would have survived. If he was doing 60 then the chances are much lower for survival. If all the numbers are against him then trying to destroy her integrity is a real waste. If there is a 50/50 chance she would have survived, and it can be well documented, then it might be worth the fight. Again, so it appears anyway, he is guilty of DUI. Death resulting will only add time to the sentence if there is one. Since there was a death, there is a greater chance he will spend time in jail.

I rest my case your honor.

Ah see, a well laid out case...good for you.

But it becomes a battle of expert witness...my Engineers (and by the way I am one) will try to prove to the jury, that their Engineers can't possibly have accurate data for the case...for instance, skid marks to measure speed with still have variables with regards to friction of the tires, road conditions etc...and impact measurements might have wiggle room with regards to angle of impact, condition of the car etc...Leyritz does not even have to win the argument...but I think if he leaves the jury with "reasonable doubt" he has a case...

BTW, my old job use to send me in to settle a dozen or so small claims cases ($5,000 and below) on Engineering related issues...and I never lost one...not because we were right mind you, but because I could argue against the attorney representing the other company in a way that made him believe we had a strong case, and he settled for whatever we offered, which was never much...I never lied either...I just created doubt...that's all...That was my whole game plan...