That's why they're called accidents rather than murders.

Graham

It really depends on the circumstances, although if your a senator
from massachusetts, you can get away with murder scott-free.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gsd-t1twGTJHRenBPW5reS5tTmHA

Former Yankees hero charged with manslaughter
16 hours ago

MIAMI (AFP) — Jim Leyritz, a 10-year Major League Baseball veteran who
sparked the New York Yankees to a 1996 World Series victory, faces
manslaughter driving while intoxicated charges after a fatal crash
Friday.

Former major league catcher Leyritz, who turned 44 on Thursday, posted
11,000 dollars bond and was released from jail after being arrested
following the early morning incident in a bar district at nearby Fort
Lauderdale.

The Miami Herald and Miami TV stations reported that Leyritz refused a
drunk driving test and that a passenger in the car struck by Leyritz's
vehicle, a 30-year-old woman, was knocked out of the car and died at
the scene.

"Officers on scene observed Leyritz to have red, watery eyes, a
flushed face and an odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from his
person," Fort Lauderdale police detective Kathy Collins said.

Leyritz, who also faces a property damage charge, faces up to 15 years
in prison and a 10,000-dollar fine if convicted of vehicular homicide,
a second degree felony in Florida. He would also lose his driver's
license for life.

Leyritz played for the Yankees, Anaheim, Boston, San Diego and Los
Angeles in his decade among baseball's elite, his most celebrated
moment coming in 1996 when he smashed a three-run home run off Atlanta
relief pitcher Mark Wohlers in game four of the World Series.

The Yankees lost the first two games of that Series but after
Leyritz's homer managed to level the best-of-seven showdown with a
game-four triumph and went on to capture the crown in six games.

He has since worked as a television commentator.

dacconverter:

<< snip article >>

That's why they are called accidents. Right, Sen. Kennedy?

Though, by the time the lawyers get through with, "Brandy," or whatever
the hell her name is, she won't have a pot to piss in which might be a
worse punishment.

How can manslaughter ever be a misdemeanor anyway??

You apparently missed the "insufficient evidence" bit.  It happens all
the time, even in outright murders by violence.  If the PA doesn't
have a reasonable chance to prove the case, he won't prosecute.

As for getting jail time for being involved in a fatal accident.  Do
you really advocate going to jail for a fatal accident where you
weren't at fault?  Note that that does not relate to the Brandy case
but it is a direct read off your first sentence.

Harry K

In article
<c842a9ba-366e-4ff8-9303-ee8a532e6d2c@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,

It happens all the time. If its a first accident and there's no
negligence involved, chances are, no legal prosecution will happen at
all to the driver. Accidents happen, and sometime they are fatal. That's
just the reality of life.

In this particular story that you cited, it clearly says ...

 "Spokesman Nick Velasquez said there is "insufficient evidence" for a
  jury to find the 28-year-old actress-singer guilty of misdemeanor
  vehicular manslaughter beyond a reasonable doubt."

So unless Brandy was drunk, using a cell phone, or something like that
and there was proof of her negligence, she wouldn't be found guilty in
court, so it makes no sense to spend tens of thousands dollars of tax
payers' money on a trial that would not result in a conviction when
there are murderers, robbers, and rapists running around who should be
caught, tried, convicted, and locked up.

Got to love that line.  Apparently it's the Land Rover's fault... it had
a mind of it's own and nothing could stop it after it decided it was
going to hit the Honda.  Also love the fact that apparently we're all on
a first name basis with "Brandy".

The line should have read: "Ms Norwood was driving on a Los Angeles
freeway when traffic in front of her slowed.  Ms Norwood failed to slow
her Land Rover, and collided with a Honda driven by 38 year old Awatef
Aboudihaj.  Mr Aboudihaj died from injuries sustained in the collision."

What are they trying to say here?  Mr Aboudihaj had recently had several
other unrelated collisions and was a bad driver?  Or after being hit
from behind Mr Aboudihaj's vehicle was forced into other vehicles?

Why was Mr Aboudihaj's vehicle involved in "collisions", yet Ms Norwood
had an "accident"?

Very poor journalism.