cretinbob: Pretty blonde white girl goes scot free....yep....must be America.
Brick-House: Blow Jobs???
Atomic Spunk: You can hate the verdict all you want, but there's no denying that she has a damn good lawyer.
SirEattonHogg: I hate people who text and drive. I agree with treating it as a DUI or an on the spot execution if texting involved killing someone.Well the later is obviously not serious, but FFS, how hard is it to go to the side of the road or exit the freeway if it's so farking important?
Babwa Wawa: Wow. So many details missing from the account here. It HAS to be negligent driving. Amiright?
MechaPyx: Atomic Spunk: You can hate the verdict all you want, but there's no denying that she has a damn good lawyer.America has the best justice money can buy.
Oldiron_79: I think texting while driving should be treated as harshly as dui
mikaloyd: Its OK . The dead dude was riding a motorcycle. Its OK to kill them
sethen320: MechaPyx: Atomic Spunk: You can hate the verdict all you want, but there's no denying that she has a damn good lawyer.America has the best justice money can buy.To be fair if you look at the charges she's being charged with essentially the same crime 4 times and then charged with an additional two which aren't as serious and should really already be covered by at least one of the 4 initial accusations. This is pretty much why we don't trust cops or the justice system. FYI, I don't care how she looks. Pick a charge and go with it. If it doesn't stick then stop wasting a severely under-paid jury's time with this nonsense. And you're welcome to point out "b-b-b-but...a witness said...". I don't give a shiat. If she killed a dude this girl has to live with it and may get charged and rot in prison. If not, she still gets to live with this because we all decided to go on an unknown journalists' lead from an "anonymous" witness. We need to stop doing trials online using the information our "journalists" give us. Either give all of the info or GBTW and start reporting on something real.Publishing the statement by a random anonymous person that someone was on their phone (even though it's entirely possible) when they hit a person doesn't make it true. Facts are kind of important. We rely too much on opinion./This girl may have actually killed someone negligently but that article sucked.//You would make a shiatty juror. Your impartiality is non-existent. Please pick an excuse to NOT serve.
Theaetetus: Initially, the Anne Arundel County woman was facing six charges: negligent manslaughter by motor vehicle, criminal negligent manslaughter, reckless driving, negligent driving, failure to yield the right of way and text messaging while driving.On Monday, however, the Anne Arundel County State's Attorney's Office said that Meyers pleaded guilty to negligent driving, for which she was issued a $500 fine.And she only faced a $500 fine?! That's outra-The six initial charges had been based on evidence at the scene and witness accounts. However, as a representative for the Attorney's Office said, additional police work revealed conflicting evidence, which led to Meyers' plea deal.Accounting for the lessened sentence, in part, was the fact that although cellphone records have indicated that Meyers had sent text messages one to two minutes before the collision, they did not prove that she had been texting at the time of the collision.Furthermore, although the witness reported that Meyers had not come to a complete stop before crossing the highway, Attorney Anne Colt Leitess said that a data recording device in the car indicated that she had, indeed, stopped.I see... Subby, do you think we should just throw out due process if the defendant is hotter than you? Is this some new "justice peeking through her blindfold" thing?
zarker: Had come to a full stop before pulling out, and wasn't texting (at that exact moment)? Seems fine to me thenWho cares?
DanZero: Non OV Link
Animatronik: zarker: Had come to a full stop before pulling out, and wasn't texting (at that exact moment)? Seems fine to me thenWho cares?I think you're the only Farker who ACTUALLY READ TFA...The prosecution couldn't prove she was texting or failed to stop, so they settled for that. Not because she's blonde, apparently.
HindiDiscoMonster: reasonable doubt is for a jury/judge to decide, NOT an ADA/DA.
HindiDiscoMonster: Jim_Callahan: Well, phone records showed that she had been texting and driving several minutes earlier, but apparrently they got conflicting witness statements on whether she was actually doing it at the time of the collision.So the only thing they could actually pin on her was the pre-accident negligent driving and possibly failure to yield... and the second one was dodgy, since it was a private parking lot entrance rather than on the road itself.That's how reasonable doubt works.reasonable doubt is for a jury/judge to decide, NOT an ADA/DA. prosecutors are well known for throwing everything at a person and hoping they get more charges to stick than less. in this particular case, I believe the deal was made for the following reasons or a combination of the following:1. prosecutor attracted to defendant2. affluenza3. she demonstrated a unique ability of being able to suck the chrome off a trailer hitch/just my 2¢
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jun 23 2017 02:31:47
Runtime: 0.436 sec (435 ms)