Family of Braylon Meade says justice was not served in deadly drunk driving incident

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Exactly. It’s fortunate we still have elected officials like Barbara Favola and Parisa who will do what’s right and consistent with settled law, rather than cater to the circle of hateful trash-talkers who’ve found a home here with the moderator’s permission (clearly the money from the additional clicks is outweighing any past concern about the impropriety of allowing posters to attack the behavior of minors online).

What? The “attack the behaviors of minors online?” People aren’t allowed to call the kid out for his disgusting, selfish behavior? Get out of here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

Yes, they are trying to excuse it. One obsessed poster, who most likely lives in McLean, keeps trying to tell people like me (DP who has driven that road and intersection every weekday for five years) that it’s normal for people to get up to 90+. There are 3 lights in pretty close proximity coming from Arlington to McLean that make it very hard to get up speeds like that. Once past that intersection you may be able to go faster though it’s still narrow and dark. They are also trying to tell us how normal it is for kids to drink, get high, and speed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

Yes, they are trying to excuse it. One obsessed poster, who most likely lives in McLean, keeps trying to tell people like me (DP who has driven that road and intersection every weekday for five years) that it’s normal for people to get up to 90+. There are 3 lights in pretty close proximity coming from Arlington to McLean that make it very hard to get up speeds like that. Once past that intersection you may be able to go faster though it’s still narrow and dark. They are also trying to tell us how normal it is for kids to drink, get high, and speed.

Are you the PP who sees u-turns at that intersection daily?

“Normal” does not mean acceptable. Or excusable.

[Anonymous]

Wow, 22 pages and the rage mongerers likely are neither going to get the sentence in this case changed nor get the public officials who did their jobs with a respect for the law unseated.

You must be proud of all the time you could have spent with your own families raging for nothing here. More money for the moderator, maybe, but you’re kind of a pathetic, hate-fueled lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

He behavior was terrible, but the PP is mischaracterizing it. It wasn’t premeditated.

I think we should have constructive, rational conversation about sentencing and prevention. Not doxxing and misdirecting anger.

Okay, anger police. I’m glad we have you moderating our opinions and reactions.

Are you an adult? You need to find another way to engage on public policy topics like this.

The topic at hand goes beyond mere public policy. It is also deeply personal, no matter how many posts want to reduce the conversation to the question of whether teens typically speed or if vehicular manslaughter is premeditated or what level of intent is required to bring certain charges. This was a horrible act and a lot of people are talking about that. They’re angry that someone went out in our community with a reckless indifference to life and killed one of our children. As long as posters keep jumping on here trying to persuade us that we should not view the circumstances so harshly, you’re going to get outraged responses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, 22 pages and the rage mongerers likely are neither going to get the sentence in this case changed nor get the public officials who did their jobs with a respect for the law unseated.

You must be proud of all the time you could have spent with your own families raging for nothing here. More money for the moderator, maybe, but you’re kind of a pathetic, hate-fueled lot.

You’re totally right, but if there is anything that is an even greater waste of time, it’s posting online to critique them. Lol. I mean, seriously, complaining about inadequately punished crime is one thing; complaining about people being Mad On The Internet is even less sensible.

Back in the real world, discussions of this nature are precisely what starts the process of political change, and you hate that idea because you are a soft-on-crime zealot. But you are right, venting online accomplishes nothing, those who want change need to organize and pressure politicians in a more consistent way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, 22 pages and the rage mongerers likely are neither going to get the sentence in this case changed nor get the public officials who did their jobs with a respect for the law unseated.

You must be proud of all the time you could have spent with your own families raging for nothing here. More money for the moderator, maybe, but you’re kind of a pathetic, hate-fueled lot.

You must be proud of defending drunk drivers who kill people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

He behavior was terrible, but the PP is mischaracterizing it. It wasn’t premeditated.

I think we should have constructive, rational conversation about sentencing and prevention. Not doxxing and misdirecting anger.

Okay, anger police. I’m glad we have you moderating our opinions and reactions.

Are you an adult? You need to find another way to engage on public policy topics like this.

The topic at hand goes beyond mere public policy. It is also deeply personal, no matter how many posts want to reduce the conversation to the question of whether teens typically speed or if vehicular manslaughter is premeditated or what level of intent is required to bring certain charges. This was a horrible act and a lot of people are talking about that. They’re angry that someone went out in our community with a reckless indifference to life and killed one of our children. As long as posters keep jumping on here trying to persuade us that we should not view the circumstances so harshly, you’re going to get outraged responses.

People who equate it to “shooting a gun into a crowd” are being ridiculous. If you post crazy stuff like that, people will call you out on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, 22 pages and the rage mongerers likely are neither going to get the sentence in this case changed nor get the public officials who did their jobs with a respect for the law unseated.

You must be proud of all the time you could have spent with your own families raging for nothing here. More money for the moderator, maybe, but you’re kind of a pathetic, hate-fueled lot.

You must be proud of defending drunk drivers who kill people?

PP isn’t defending the kid. No one is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, 22 pages and the rage mongerers likely are neither going to get the sentence in this case changed nor get the public officials who did their jobs with a respect for the law unseated.

You must be proud of all the time you could have spent with your own families raging for nothing here. More money for the moderator, maybe, but you’re kind of a pathetic, hate-fueled lot.

You must be proud of defending drunk drivers who kill people?

PP isn’t defending the kid. No one is.

Ok, I should have said “excusing the behavior of” rather than defending. Lots of posts telling us that it’s normal for kids to drive this fast and drink and drive and this was just a dumb accident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

He behavior was terrible, but the PP is mischaracterizing it. It wasn’t premeditated.

I think we should have constructive, rational conversation about sentencing and prevention. Not doxxing and misdirecting anger.

Okay, anger police. I’m glad we have you moderating our opinions and reactions.

Are you an adult? You need to find another way to engage on public policy topics like this.

The topic at hand goes beyond mere public policy. It is also deeply personal, no matter how many posts want to reduce the conversation to the question of whether teens typically speed or if vehicular manslaughter is premeditated or what level of intent is required to bring certain charges. This was a horrible act and a lot of people are talking about that. They’re angry that someone went out in our community with a reckless indifference to life and killed one of our children. As long as posters keep jumping on here trying to persuade us that we should not view the circumstances so harshly, you’re going to get outraged responses.

It’s deeply personal so of course you’ll go on an anonymous public web site and vent non-stop for days to no great effect.

In due course this thread like others on DCUM will just end up forgotten unless you find a way to make it about fried tuna.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, 22 pages and the rage mongerers likely are neither going to get the sentence in this case changed nor get the public officials who did their jobs with a respect for the law unseated.

You must be proud of all the time you could have spent with your own families raging for nothing here. More money for the moderator, maybe, but you’re kind of a pathetic, hate-fueled lot.

You must be proud of defending drunk drivers who kill people?

PP isn’t defending the kid. No one is.

Ok, I should have said “excusing the behavior of” rather than defending. Lots of posts telling us that it’s normal for kids to drive this fast and drink and drive and this was just a dumb accident.

That’s not excusing his behavior at all. It was putting it into context.

His actions were wrong and he should be punished appropriately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

He behavior was terrible, but the PP is mischaracterizing it. It wasn’t premeditated.

I think we should have constructive, rational conversation about sentencing and prevention. Not doxxing and misdirecting anger.

Okay, anger police. I’m glad we have you moderating our opinions and reactions.

Are you an adult? You need to find another way to engage on public policy topics like this.

The topic at hand goes beyond mere public policy. It is also deeply personal, no matter how many posts want to reduce the conversation to the question of whether teens typically speed or if vehicular manslaughter is premeditated or what level of intent is required to bring certain charges. This was a horrible act and a lot of people are talking about that. They’re angry that someone went out in our community with a reckless indifference to life and killed one of our children. As long as posters keep jumping on here trying to persuade us that we should not view the circumstances so harshly, you’re going to get outraged responses.

It’s deeply personal so of course you’ll go on an anonymous public web site and vent non-stop for days to no great effect.

In due course this thread like others on DCUM will just end up forgotten unless you find a way to make it about fried tuna.

If that’s what you think, why do you care? Why are you still here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, 22 pages and the rage mongerers likely are neither going to get the sentence in this case changed nor get the public officials who did their jobs with a respect for the law unseated.

You must be proud of all the time you could have spent with your own families raging for nothing here. More money for the moderator, maybe, but you’re kind of a pathetic, hate-fueled lot.

You must be proud of defending drunk drivers who kill people?

PP isn’t defending the kid. No one is.

Ok, I should have said “excusing the behavior of” rather than defending. Lots of posts telling us that it’s normal for kids to drive this fast and drink and drive and this was just a dumb accident.

That’s not excusing his behavior at all. It was putting it into context.
His actions were wrong and he should be punished appropriately.

There was an 18-year-old driver from Arlington who struck and killed a woman near W-L in 2011 and even though he was 18 and charged as an adult he still got a one-year suspended sentence and apparently never served a day in jail or prison.

https://www.arlnow.com/2011/09/20/teen-pleads-to-reckless-driving-in-fatal-crash/

The punishment is the Meade case was consistent with other juvenile offenses. The prosecutor and the judge followed the law and relevant precedent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow, 22 pages and the rage mongerers likely are neither going to get the sentence in this case changed nor get the public officials who did their jobs with a respect for the law unseated.

You must be proud of all the time you could have spent with your own families raging for nothing here. More money for the moderator, maybe, but you’re kind of a pathetic, hate-fueled lot.

This is a local forum and many posters here know the families involved or live in the community/travel the road this accident happened on. So this is an incident of local public interest. 22 pages is not even that many for a topic like this, especially considering how many trivial topics get discussed for well over 22 pages. I have no idea why you’re so upset about people discussing this topic and feeling negatively toward someone who made a series of poor choices that resulted in an innocent teenager being killed. Why do you care so much, and you know what they say about glass houses in accusing other people of wasting time.

For how personally you are invested in the negative comments, I have to guess you are somehow related to the defendant’s family or you yourself (or your kids) engage in this sort of reckless behavior, which you’re insistent on normalizing. Or you’re a totally bizarre third party hellbent on criticizing anyone who disagrees with you with personal insults over any sort of coherent discussion.

If you think this discussion is so “pathetic” then why in the world are you a part of it?