PhillyPanda t1_is6gdu6 wrote on October 13, 2022 at 5:21 PM

Reply to comment by GreenAnder in Police arrest second suspect in Roxborough High School shooting by atwork925

> Judge tosses most serious charges.

The judge didn’t “toss the charges,” he was found not guilty of the charges, which means the prosecution didn’t meet their burden of proof

GreenAnder t1_isae4vm wrote on October 14, 2022 at 1:48 PM

I'm not sure how "man hits woman with car, woman's unborn child dies" is something that needs to clear a burden of proof. The judge found the man not responsible for the death, it's not arguable that his actions lead to the death of her unborn child. Things that are facts in this case.

- The man was racing

- He was drunk

- He crashed his car

- The woman lost her child

PhillyPanda t1_isasi6i wrote on October 14, 2022 at 3:26 PM

>I'm not sure how "man hits woman with car, woman's unborn child dies" is something that needs to clear a burden of proof.

That’s… very concerning. All criminal accusations need to clear a burden of proof. The more extreme they are, the more important meeting that burden of proof is.

murder in the third degree is usually thought to require an element of malice which is something more than negligence/recklessness. An argument can certainly be made for malice but it has to be made. For many car accidents that kill another, involuntary manslaughter is the charge that you can get to stick. You might remember a judge actually initially dropped third degree murder charges for the woman who killed two police officers while drunk. They were reinstated but the prosecution will need to prove she did act with malice, it isn’t a given or even all that likely.

There is no charge of involuntarily manslaughter to an unborn child so it wasn’t an option for a charge. If the woman had died, I’m sure we’d see involuntary manslaughter, homicide by vehicle while DUI, and homicide by vehicle charges but there are only a few options to charge under for killing an unborn baby.

“Tossing the charges” is a phrase used for dismissing charges as the judge did in the cop killing dui at first, not when they are actually deliberated and decided on.

GreenAnder t1_isbdbj3 wrote on October 14, 2022 at 5:46 PM

If all that is true then there is no definition under the law that would have stuck to this guy, your claim that the DA didn't meet the burden of proof is technically true but functionally meaningless. He fell through a loophole in PA law, they couldn't even have charged him with aggravated assault of an unborn child since he had no way of knowing the woman was pregnant.

All that taken into account he wasn't 'innocent', he just wasn't guilty of the charges because PA doesn't have a statute that fits the crime he committed. That was likely the reasoning behind the higher than normal bail amount.

PhillyPanda t1_isbe9m8 wrote on October 14, 2022 at 5:52 PM

Except you can get third degree murder charges to stick for what he did (driving drunk at high speeds), it does happen. Was probably more likely if he’d chosen a jury trial bc of how sympathetic the jury would be. A bench trial was probably a strategic move on the part of the defense as the judge is more likely to stick to the letter of the law vs sympathy. It was a reach of a charge but it was possible, I wouldn’t say the judge tossed the charges, I also wouldn’t say the prosecution was incompetent.

There should be an involuntary manslaughter charge for unborn children. There’s a voluntary manslaughter charge. Seems like a bad oversight. There should be a slam dunk charge just like there is for born people.