http://www.duiblog.com/2009/01/07/dui-murder/ Bad Drunk Driving Laws, False Evidence and a Fading Constitution Wed, 22 May 2013 01:11:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 http://www.duiblog.com/2009/01/07/dui-murder/comment-page-1/#comment-275152 Kelly Babbit Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:17:22 +0000 http://www.duiblog.com/?p=1335#comment-275152   Umm in order to convict of Second Degree Murder, it is not necessary for the State to prove the defendant had intent to cause death. More importantly how do you seriously say with any intellectual integrity that this was not 2nd degree murder?  1. Victim is dead- Killed in wreck 2. The death was caused by the criminal act of defendant- The crime of driving drunk. 3. There was an unlawful killing of victim by an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.  This is Basic Lawyer 101 correct?  Seriously, why do you regard the criminal act of driving drunk as a Constitutional right?   
Umm in order to convict of Second Degree Murder, it is not necessary for the State to prove the defendant had intent to cause death.
More importantly how do you seriously say with any intellectual integrity that this was not 2nd degree murder?
 1. Victim is dead- Killed in wreck
2. The death was caused by the criminal act of defendant- The crime of driving drunk.
3. There was an unlawful killing of victim by an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.
 This is Basic Lawyer 101 correct? 
Seriously, why do you regard the criminal act of driving drunk as a Constitutional right? 

]]>