PDA

View Full Version : Hit And Runs



apgambrell
03-30-2014, 07:55 AM
When someone hits another person with their car but does not stop and the person who was hit ends up dying, what charges will the driver face?

I know one would definitely be failure to stop and render aid but I am unclear on what the other charges would be.

NeuroGlide
03-30-2014, 08:03 AM
When someone hits another person with their car but does not stop and the person who was hit ends up dying, what charges will the driver face?

I know one would definitely be failure to stop and render aid but I am unclear on what the other charges would be.

It depends upon jurisdiction because the specific laws very from place to place, so you'ld need to check your story setting, but I would expect the minimum to be vehicular or involuntary manslaughter.

jclarkdawe
03-30-2014, 04:07 PM
Big difference in charges not only from state to state, but what was the cause. If the driver is the cause of the accident, much more serious charges. If the victim was the cause of the accident, much less serious charges.

Understand that it is completely possible to hit a person while driving, kill them, and have absolutely no legal liability. If the accident is in that category, then the only charge might be hit and run/leaving the scene of an accident.

Problem is that if you leave the scene of the accident, it's a lot harder to prove that you weren't liable, including proving that you were sober.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

apgambrell
03-30-2014, 05:47 PM
This ties back to my story where the suspect attacks the victim, but she gets away and he ends up running her down with his truck with the intent to silence her. He flees the scene and she survives then ends up dying in the hospital later.

So, he flees the scene and intentionally hit her. I'm not sure how it can be proved that he intended to hit her but the police CAN argue he meant to do it and bring harsher charges against him, right?

King Neptune
03-30-2014, 06:24 PM
This ties back to my story where the suspect attacks the victim, but she gets away and he ends up running her down with his truck with the intent to silence her. He flees the scene and she survives then ends up dying in the hospital later.

So, he flees the scene and intentionally hit her. I'm not sure how it can be proved that he intended to hit her but the police CAN argue he meant to do it and bring harsher charges against him, right?

Of course there could be other charges. What you describe is first degree murder, if they can prove it.

WeaselFire
04-20-2014, 10:52 AM
Problem is that if you leave the scene of the accident, it's a lot harder to prove that you weren't liable, including proving that you were sober.
Ahh, but that's the fun. You don't have to prove you were sober. They have to prove you weren't. Drive directly to a bar and pound down a few shots, tell the bartender to call 911, you just hit someone in the road. Decent lawyer and you tested over the limit because you were drinking after the fact and you left the scene both because you didn't feel safe and you needed to call 911.

I'd have had fun as a lawyer, not so much in the studying for the degree part. :)

Jeff

cornflake
04-20-2014, 11:56 AM
This ties back to my story where the suspect attacks the victim, but she gets away and he ends up running her down with his truck with the intent to silence her. He flees the scene and she survives then ends up dying in the hospital later.

So, he flees the scene and intentionally hit her. I'm not sure how it can be proved that he intended to hit her but the police CAN argue he meant to do it and bring harsher charges against him, right?

If you want to prove he intended to hit her, you can. If you want it to be ambiguous, it can be. We dunno what you're looking for.

jclarkdawe
04-20-2014, 04:47 PM
Weaselfire -- Don't forget about civil liability. As you say, for criminal liability the government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you were under the influence when the accident happened.

Civilly, however, the plaintiff (victim) only has to prove that it is more likely then not you were under the influence to get a much larger jury verdict. Also, if the cops think you were under the influence, but can't prove it, can seek to get the results through something like a reckless operation conviction.

Leaving the scene to avoid a DUI conviction can be a very high risk approach.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

apgambrell
04-20-2014, 05:43 PM
If you want to prove he intended to hit her, you can. If you want it to be ambiguous, it can be. We dunno what you're looking for.

No, he intentionally hit her. He did while she was trying to escape from him after he assaulted her and was trying to keep her from getting away.

He could try to argue it was an accident but my MCs have already found enough evidence to make his story look like a lie.