Criminal Law Questions

[travelingtexan 198]

I have a question because I am trying to understand a process I am not familiar with.

 

My step dad was hit by a kid Scottsdale where they live. They did a sobriety test and determined alcohol was not involved. He is still being indicted on manslaughter charges. Is this the normal process? Do they always take the perp to jail? Is it because they have a review process to determine if there were other foul play factors involved? I am just trying to understand the process a bit more since neither my mother nor I are familiar with the criminal law process, especially not for a situation like this. Thanks in advance.

[SDG 3,319]

Sounds like there may have been other factors involved like driving without a license or insurance.  

[travelingtexan 198]

16 minutes ago, SDG said:

Sounds like there may have been other factors involved like driving without a license or insurance.  

would they only indict someone immediately if there was in fact a foul play factor, or is it standard to put someone in the slammer until they have time to review everything?

[SDG 3,319]

It’s not normal so it sounds like there are other factors at play. 

[travelingtexan 198]

13 minutes ago, SDG said:

It’s not normal so it sounds like there are other factors at play. 

do you have any idea what the process is like for examining evidence? I dont really even know the right words to use. Do they drug test, confiscate phone, etc?

[SDG 3,319]

I don’t, but it sounds like they are at least collecting evidence Incase your mom decides to sue. 

[Gil Bang 25,506]

your stepdad died?

The lawyers may disagree, but when my BIL was murdered, the (Los Angeles) DA's office was very very helpful.  I probably spent well over an hour on the phone with an ADA at the beginning, and there were dozens more phone calls as the case progressed.  

I would wager that they have some sort of victim's outreach person there that you can contact. 

Edited July 18, 2018 by Gil Bang

[travelingtexan 198]

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

your stepdad died?

The lawyers may disagree, but when my BIL was murdered, the (Los Angeles) DA's office was very very helpful.  I probably spent well over an hour on the phone with an ADA at the beginning, and there were dozens more phone calls as the case progressed.  

I would wager that they have some sort of victim's outreach person there that you can contact. 

appreciate it, I am more so just curious as to the process. Found it strange they would indict him without there being clear evidence as to foul play, or maybe we just havent been made aware of said foulplay.

[Gil Bang 25,506]

Rereading OP,  I'm wondering if they suspect drug use. You can't do a breathalyzer for heroin. It takes  time to get drug tests processed.  I bet the cops thought the dude was under the influence of something.   I'm not a lawyer, but I can't believe that lack of a license or insurance would result in a manslaughter charge.

Was the guy speeding/driving like a dick maybe?

[TwiceHorn 30,715]

Manslaughter does not require "foul play" in the form of intoxication, or texting while driving or any of the other "foul play" factors, except, in AZ, recklessness.  AZ also has negligent homicide, which requires death by a negligent act.  Recklessness is negligence with an added degree of disregard for safety. Even though driving drunk or otherwise impaired usually satisfies recklessness, and certainly negligence, most states now have "intoxication manslaughter" crimes thanks to MADD and a stupid-ass trend in the 80's, 90's and oughts of creating new crimes to curry favor with a pearl-clutching and idiotic electorate.  Arizona does not have a separate intoxication manslaughter crime, good for them.

 

Procedurally, they cannot arrest and detain someone at the scene of an accident unless they have probable cause evidence of a crime, that is, the reckless or negligent act.

Generally speaking, no they can't just throw you in jail while they examine the evidence.  The kid might have gone to the hospital with a cop, who asked for a blood test and then made an arrest on that basis.  The accident investigation may have revealed something indicating some other form of recklessness (cell phone with frozen facetime image or some shit) and the kid might have been arrested while at the hospital.

So, if they have kept him in jail since the accident, they had some kind of evidence of recklessness or negligence (or intoxication) pretty near the time of the arrest.

Sometimes in these types of cases, later accident investigation, like talking to the witness who saw him doing 120 a half mile up the road, or tire skid marks or something of that nature might be evidence of recklessness, in which case they would indict and issue an arrest warrant.

 

If you are beyond curious about the "foul play," the indictment is a public record and would tell you what crime he is accused of and a brief summary of the evidence.

 

And sorry for your loss.

Edited July 18, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[travelingtexan 198]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Manslaughter does not require "foul play" in the form of intoxication, or texting while driving or any of the other "foul play" factors, except, in AZ, recklessness.  AZ also has negligent homicide, which requires death by a negligent act.  Recklessness is negligence with an added degree of disregard for safety. Even though driving drunk or otherwise impaired usually satisfies recklessness, and certainly negligence, most states now have "intoxication manslaughter" crimes thanks to MADD and a stupid-ass trend in the 80's, 90's and oughts of creating new crimes to curry favor with a pearl-clutching and idiotic electorate.  Arizona does not have a separate intoxication manslaughter crime, good for them.

 

Procedurally, they cannot arrest and detain someone at the scene of an accident unless they have probable cause evidence of a crime, that is, the reckless or negligent act.

Generally speaking, no they can't just throw you in jail while they examine the evidence.  The kid might have gone to the hospital with a cop, who asked for a blood test and then made an arrest on that basis.  The accident investigation may have revealed something indicating some other form of recklessness (cell phone with frozen facetime image or some shit) and the kid might have been arrested while at the hospital.

So, if they have kept him in jail since the accident, they had some kind of evidence of recklessness or negligence (or intoxication) pretty near the time of the arrest.

Sometimes in these types of cases, later accident investigation, like talking to the witness who saw him doing 120 a half mile up the road, or tire skid marks or something of that nature might be evidence of recklessness, in which case they would indict and issue an arrest warrant.

 

If you are beyond curious about the "foul play," the indictment is a public record and would tell you what crime he is accused of and a brief summary of the evidence.

 

And sorry for your loss.

thanks for the information

[TwiceHorn 30,715]

Also might add that it's pretty common for the prosecution to charge the worst offense (in this case manslaughter) that the evidence might support on the best day of trial, with the best/dumbest/most vengeful jury they can get and a drunk/sleeping defense attorney.  That is often done when most rational people would think that negligent homicide, or even reckless driving would be the most appropriate charge.

Part of this is that plea bargaining has almost completely taken the place of trial, so if you want a plea on the "right" crime, you have to charge the worse crime.  It's also runaway prosecutorial discretion and "tough-on-crime."

[Gil Bang 25,506]

I would recommend that OP lawyer up with a PI attorney. Do you disagree Twice?

[TwiceHorn 30,715]

16 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

I would recommend that OP lawyer up with a PI attorney. Do you disagree Twice?

Possibly.  I mean if they want to recover something, then yes.  I could also fully understand accepting that all you get out of this is money, and probably not a ton of that (auto policy limits, most likely), and that there is considerable merit to putting this unfortunate and tragic incident far in the rear view mirror.

 

I had a very wise colleague that lost an infant child to what he believed was blatant and easily proven obstetric malpractice, but he and his wife decided that any money recovered would be more than offset by rehashing the events.  The guy had a very practical spirituality that really let him exist in equanimity in such a way that you mostly see with recovering addicts.  He was also a Mormon.  I had tons of respect for the guy, for this and other reasons.

Edited July 19, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[DanRydell 799]

I would recommend that OP lawyer up with a PI attorney. Do you disagree Twice?

Unless it’s a high-limit insurance policy, they can probably get them to tender the policy without paying 1/3 to an attorney.

[travelingtexan 198]

I am reading a lot of this, and to be honest, there is some jargon that doesnt quite help me understand the points that are being made. I am not looking to go on a witchhunt. If the kid was drunk or on drugs, then yes, go after him and his family. however, I have sped, I have texted, I have been on spotfiy looking for the right song, all while driving. if those were the case, I cant hold that against the kid and imo that is just a freak accident. I just want to know about the process to understand what is going on.

Edited July 19, 2018 by travelingtexan

[52-80 18,962]

shouldve sprinkled some crack on him