there was an old redditism that the best way to get off with murder is to use your car and call it an accident… I wonder if this is that. Get plastered, kill a nazi, go to jail for 5 years instead of 20.
there was an old redditism that the best way to get off with murder is to use your car
Not a redditism. An urbinist-ism. Reddit had a healthy contingent of urbanists, but you’ll find us here on Lemmy too, over at !fuckcars@lemmy.world, or !urbanism@slrpnk.net. (Or, frankly, because it’s a movement with significant overlap to anticapitalism, just all around the threadiverse.)
And it’s completely true, too. I can easily think of half a dozen cases where someone killed someone else with a car and got away scott-free in my country alone (in fact: with just one exception, the ones that come to my mind are all in my city alone). And only one of those cases even went to court as far as I know.
I have a cousin who once said that he’s gotten more tickets on a bike in Manhattan than anytime he’s driven through the city. He then followed that with, “in fact, I’m pretty sure that as long as you don’t hit anything that pays or collects taxes, the police will tell you to go away because you’re interrupting the flow of traffic.”
I ride in the parks after curfew bylaw and we pretend they’ve done their job for a moment where they “chase” me to an alley they can’t drive through and I wait for them to fuck off for 2 minutes.
In Italy there’s been a big push against this in the last decade.
There’s now a law called “road murder” (omicidio stradale) which makes the penalties for killing someone while driving, especially if intoxicated, more similar to intentional murder (rather than manslaughter). It’s essentially aggravated manslaughter, when you cause the death of someone while driving recklessly.
Honestly I’d push for a change in law such that a crash between a car and a more vulnerable road user is legally presumed to be the car’s fault unless evidence is provided to the contrary. The big problem we’ve had far too many times where I live, and in many other parts of the world, is that because you can’t prove the driver was riding negligently (or more to the point: because you can’t convince a car-brained jury pool or judge panel to find that they were negligent), far too often they get off scott-free.
Generally speaking, here it’s often presumed that it’s the car’s fault, or at least that’s how I feel it’s perceived.
Still, negligent driving includes DUI, driving while on the phone, driving too fast, driving in the opposite lane, not stopping to a red light or yield, illegal passing of another car and failing to stop after the incident occurred.
Moreover, the law now specifies that DUI is a criminal offense even when no incident occurred and blood level of alcohol is above 0.8 g/l, with possible jail time from 6 months to a year.
It’s become quite strict. Although I’m not sure how much it will actually affect the number of incidents, I’m not always very pro to “just increase the penalties” kind of laws. We need a more comprehensive plan to reduce the likelihood of incidents as much as possible, especially deadly incidents.
here it’s often presumed that it’s the car’s fault
By people and the media, or by the law? Because those are definitely not the same.
Though unfortunately in most of the anglosphere, the answer is that the average person will presume it’s the *non-*car-driver’s fault, and the law will make no presumption either way (which has the effect of letting drivers get off).
Moreover, the law now specifies that DUI is a criminal offense even when no incident occurred and blood level of alcohol is above 0.8 g/l
Wow that’s really cool! Is 0.8 g/L the only level of BAC that’s used in Italian law? Or are there like, other lower thresholds with less legal severity? I ask because, assuming 0.8 g/L is the same as a 0.08% BAC, that seems really high. For context, in carbrained Australia the limit is .05.
Not a lawyer, so I’m not sure about the law, but generally speaking the perception I get (ie what people say) is that “it’s always your fault” when speaking to drivers. Btw, this doesn’t mean that streets are any safer for cyclists or people walking or that people driver any better. This is why I’m not always in favor of laws that just add more penalties, but fail to do any structural changes.
As for alcohol level, the law says under 0.5 g/l is fine, between 0.5 and 0.8 it’s a minor infraction (fine and possible license suspension), between 0.8 and 1.5 it becomes a criminal offense, with bigger fine, longer license suspension and jail up to 6 months, and over 1.5 g/l it’s still bigger fine, longer suspension, up to a year of jail etc. Then there are the aggravating circumstances, like if you also cause an accident, it’s doubled, if it’s a repeat offender there’s the revocation of the license etc.
I mean, how long did it take the cops to get there? Because .42 is crazy fucking high. It can absolutely kill you it’s so high. She would have had to have more than 10 drinks in an hour for that. That’s about two thirds of a fifth between the time it was called in and when the cops got there.
I’m not saying it’s not doable. I’m saying if she did that she was trying to die.
This depends on the state and depends wildly on the circumstances. Driving in a reckless manner, e.g. while intoxicated, and killing someone is probably a felony everywhere.
She lists on her WriteAPrisoner page that her biggest inspiration is Maya Angelou, a black civil rights activist. She also has her bachelor’s in journalism. Not impossible lol.
Unfortunately her earliest release date is midway through 2033, 15 years after incarceration in 2018.
there was an old redditism that the best way to get off with murder is to use your car and call it an accident… I wonder if this is that. Get plastered, kill a nazi, go to jail for 5 years instead of 20.
Not a redditism. An urbinist-ism. Reddit had a healthy contingent of urbanists, but you’ll find us here on Lemmy too, over at !fuckcars@lemmy.world, or !urbanism@slrpnk.net. (Or, frankly, because it’s a movement with significant overlap to anticapitalism, just all around the threadiverse.)
And it’s completely true, too. I can easily think of half a dozen cases where someone killed someone else with a car and got away scott-free in my country alone (in fact: with just one exception, the ones that come to my mind are all in my city alone). And only one of those cases even went to court as far as I know.
Dan Sheehan (of “NOT A WOLF”) wrote a piece about how easy it is to get away with vehicular murder on his blog: https://www.reallyveryhuman.com/p/where-can-a-car-kill-me
I have a cousin who once said that he’s gotten more tickets on a bike in Manhattan than anytime he’s driven through the city. He then followed that with, “in fact, I’m pretty sure that as long as you don’t hit anything that pays or collects taxes, the police will tell you to go away because you’re interrupting the flow of traffic.”
How tf do you get a ticket on a bike? Just hop on the sidewalk and down an alley or two and nobody’s going to catch you.
I ride in the parks after curfew bylaw and we pretend they’ve done their job for a moment where they “chase” me to an alley they can’t drive through and I wait for them to fuck off for 2 minutes.
Sadly this article is paywalled
Go go gadget archive.ph !
(Paste the link there)
No luck.
Try another, maybe wayback machine has it.
The prosecutor is gonna bust the fattest nut of his life during discovery if he reads the defendant’s credit card statements
In Canada you’d be unlucky to even get jail time at all, it’s fucked. We’re kinda infamous for this.
One I remember was a driver going 120 km/hr in a 60 zone, ran over some girl guides, and kills an 8 year old.
2 years of house arrest.
In Italy there’s been a big push against this in the last decade.
There’s now a law called “road murder” (omicidio stradale) which makes the penalties for killing someone while driving, especially if intoxicated, more similar to intentional murder (rather than manslaughter). It’s essentially aggravated manslaughter, when you cause the death of someone while driving recklessly.
That’s brilliant.
Honestly I’d push for a change in law such that a crash between a car and a more vulnerable road user is legally presumed to be the car’s fault unless evidence is provided to the contrary. The big problem we’ve had far too many times where I live, and in many other parts of the world, is that because you can’t prove the driver was riding negligently (or more to the point: because you can’t convince a car-brained jury pool or judge panel to find that they were negligent), far too often they get off scott-free.
Generally speaking, here it’s often presumed that it’s the car’s fault, or at least that’s how I feel it’s perceived.
Still, negligent driving includes DUI, driving while on the phone, driving too fast, driving in the opposite lane, not stopping to a red light or yield, illegal passing of another car and failing to stop after the incident occurred.
Moreover, the law now specifies that DUI is a criminal offense even when no incident occurred and blood level of alcohol is above 0.8 g/l, with possible jail time from 6 months to a year.
It’s become quite strict. Although I’m not sure how much it will actually affect the number of incidents, I’m not always very pro to “just increase the penalties” kind of laws. We need a more comprehensive plan to reduce the likelihood of incidents as much as possible, especially deadly incidents.
By people and the media, or by the law? Because those are definitely not the same.
Though unfortunately in most of the anglosphere, the answer is that the average person will presume it’s the *non-*car-driver’s fault, and the law will make no presumption either way (which has the effect of letting drivers get off).
Wow that’s really cool! Is 0.8 g/L the only level of BAC that’s used in Italian law? Or are there like, other lower thresholds with less legal severity? I ask because, assuming 0.8 g/L is the same as a 0.08% BAC, that seems really high. For context, in carbrained Australia the limit is .05.
Not a lawyer, so I’m not sure about the law, but generally speaking the perception I get (ie what people say) is that “it’s always your fault” when speaking to drivers. Btw, this doesn’t mean that streets are any safer for cyclists or people walking or that people driver any better. This is why I’m not always in favor of laws that just add more penalties, but fail to do any structural changes.
As for alcohol level, the law says under 0.5 g/l is fine, between 0.5 and 0.8 it’s a minor infraction (fine and possible license suspension), between 0.8 and 1.5 it becomes a criminal offense, with bigger fine, longer license suspension and jail up to 6 months, and over 1.5 g/l it’s still bigger fine, longer suspension, up to a year of jail etc. Then there are the aggravating circumstances, like if you also cause an accident, it’s doubled, if it’s a repeat offender there’s the revocation of the license etc.
Removed by mod
I mean, how long did it take the cops to get there? Because .42 is crazy fucking high. It can absolutely kill you it’s so high. She would have had to have more than 10 drinks in an hour for that. That’s about two thirds of a fifth between the time it was called in and when the cops got there.
I’m not saying it’s not doable. I’m saying if she did that she was trying to die.
Now I’m wondering if she didn’t just kill the dude and then chug one of those big Kirkland vodka bottles.
People have been caught with those levels before. You need to be an expert tier alcoholic to pull it off, though.
Genuinely true! Killing with cars is a misdemeanor.
This depends on the state and depends wildly on the circumstances. Driving in a reckless manner, e.g. while intoxicated, and killing someone is probably a felony everywhere.
In theory, sure.
She lists on her WriteAPrisoner page that her biggest inspiration is Maya Angelou, a black civil rights activist. She also has her bachelor’s in journalism. Not impossible lol.
Unfortunately her earliest release date is midway through 2033, 15 years after incarceration in 2018.
She’s going to prison for at least another 15 years before she’s eligible for parole.
But I hear you in the car accident bullshit
I’d buy her a drink!