It wasn't his car. It wasn't his keys. It wasn't his alcohol. He wasn't a passenger.
But this guy was charged with manslaughter, vehicular homicide, and other counts because he allowed his friend to drive while intoxicated, and that friend subsequently got into a head-on accident which killed a person in the other car, and himself.
Basically, he's being charged because he didn't take more action against his drunken friend. It's understandable on a moral and practical level.
But criminal charges?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
"Powell's attorneys said police did not warn him adequately that Pangle should not be allowed to drive."
The guy was arrested for drunk driving, and he had to be told that the guy shouldn't drive? So, their arguement is that their client is a complete idiot?
As for that guy in the other article... If his liver really is putting out alcohol into his blood, and he knows about it, then he's still guilty. I mean, DWI is DWI, regardless of how the alcohol got there. If someone injected ethanol straight into their veins, they could go driving and excuse themselves by saying that they were okay since they hadn't had anything to drink.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
quote:In July 2000, Kenneth Powell, 40, allowed his friend, Michael Pangle, to drive after he had been arrested for driving while intoxicated.
Pangle had been arrested. I therefore presume that he was taken into custody. So, I mean: "?"
Once again, we've stepped onto the slippery slope of personal responsibility and accountability. What was the guy supposed to do, put his friend in a straitjacket?
I smell worms.
[ August 10, 2002, 07:26: Message edited by: Colorful Cartman ]
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The courts have ruled before that people have an ethical responsibility to uphold the law. Also, although at first I was like "why didn't the police keep him?" many departments aren't ALLOWED to keep someone after they've been charged and bail is posted. The big factor here was with the jurisdiction's system of keeping tabs on vehicles. Baltimore City, for example, will not release a vehicle used in a DWI offense until the next day. Baltimore County impounds vehicles at a private lot, and vehicles are released when the owner or a friend shows up -- and more often then not, that makes it a lot easier for the drunk to get right behind the wheel.
The sober friend knew his other friend was drunk. He made a poor decision, and he deserves to be charged with a crime.
posted
Oh, I agree that the guy was an idiot, if he let the drunk guy drive. But charging him with a crime like that would mean, in my mind, that he pulled the trigger. Or drove the car, whatever. He didn't.
A citizen is supposed to uphold the law, yes. But how can he be held responsible for some other man's actions? I'm sure he wasn't a legal guardian of the other man, or something like that. What was he supposed to do, knock him out? Shoot him in the leg to keep him from getting in the car? There's only so much you can do...
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
Okay, I may have to change my mind on this. I certainly don't claim to be an expert on the law, especially regarding the consumption of alcohol in excessive quantities and in public.
Considering that the drunk guy had been picked up for DUI and public drunkenness, etc, it's certainly reasonable to assume that he was not in his right mind. Therefore, the friend who picked him up should have taken him home. And you're probably right that legally, the drunk guy was in his care.
The problem as far as I see it is still that he's being charged with vehicular homicide. In my mind, you get charged with a crime if you did something. Powell wasn't driving the car. Shouldn't he be charged with being an accessory or something, instead? Or maybe criminal negligence? I could understand those...
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote: (Snip)... Powell agreed, and when he arrived at the police barracks, a trooper gave him directions for getting from there to the arrest site, where the drunk driver's car was parked.
Powell followed the directions and dropped off his friend, to whom police had already returned his car keys, at his parked car. (snip)
Looks like the police were just as guilty.
-------------------- Sparky:: Think! Question Authority, Authoritatively. “Believe nothing of what you hear, and only half of what you see.” EMSparks
Shalamar: To save face, keep lower half shut.
Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
