7/24/23 Trial of Usman Shahid -- driver who killed two Oakton teens

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He was underage and inexperienced. We let cold blooded killers off because their frontal lobe isn't developed, this is just an unfortunate accident. However, he should see consequences for his mistake of speeding and to be an example for other drivers.

That being said, if he was a different race and religion or just had a different name, people won't be so aggressive about this case. Just look at the title of this thread, his name specifically mentioned. I hope jury is fair and neutral and follows facts. He should face consequences of his actions for sure but not of his existence.

Unfortunate accident my a$$. He needs to go to jail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He was underage and inexperienced. We let cold blooded killers off because their frontal lobe isn't developed, this is just an unfortunate accident. However, he should see consequences for his mistake of speeding and to be an example for other drivers.

That being said, if he was a different race and religion or just had a different name, people won't be so aggressive about this case. Just look at the title of this thread, his name specifically mentioned. I hope jury is fair and neutral and follows facts. He should face consequences of his actions for sure but not of his existence.

No, we don't let cold blooded killers off even if their frontal lobe isn't working. All the people in this are minorities. Stop with trying to make this a racial issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He was underage and inexperienced. We let cold blooded killers off because their frontal lobe isn't developed, this is just an unfortunate accident. However, he should see consequences for his mistake of speeding and to be an example for other drivers.

That being said, if he was a different race and religion or just had a different name, people won't be so aggressive about this case. Just look at the title of this thread, his name specifically mentioned. I hope jury is fair and neutral and follows facts. He should face consequences of his actions for sure but not of his existence.

You’re crazy. He was an adult, driving a vehicle as an unlicensed driver, going dozens of miles over the speed limit. This wasn’t an unfortunate accident. He acted recklessly and it just slowly because of his actions that two innocent wives are lost. Pleasure Eyes for a second and think about you having teen family members who are walking across the street and they are hit by a driver of any age going 80 mph, relatively low mileage zone. Would you consider that to be an unfortunate accident?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He was underage and inexperienced. We let cold blooded killers off because their frontal lobe isn't developed, this is just an unfortunate accident. However, he should see consequences for his mistake of speeding and to be an example for other drivers.

That being said, if he was a different race and religion or just had a different name, people won't be so aggressive about this case. Just look at the title of this thread, his name specifically mentioned. I hope jury is fair and neutral and follows facts. He should face consequences of his actions for sure but not of his existence.

Underage? Do you mean under 21? He didn't buy alcohol so not sure how that's relevant.

This thread is not about his name or his race. It's about the speed he was driving and the two girls who died and the other girl who was injured. While they were walking on the sidewalk.

If you prefer the thread with a different title on the school forum, go there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He was underage and inexperienced. We let cold blooded killers off because their frontal lobe isn't developed, this is just an unfortunate accident. However, he should see consequences for his mistake of speeding and to be an example for other drivers.

That being said, if he was a different race and religion or just had a different name, people won't be so aggressive about this case. Just look at the title of this thread, his name specifically mentioned. I hope jury is fair and neutral and follows facts. He should face consequences of his actions for sure but not of his existence.

Nonsense. There was just as much outrage in the thread about the wealthy white 17-year old driver who killed Braylon Meade a couple years ago. Race has nothing to do with it. And why are you presuming to know that he's religious?

He's not going to be sentenced liked a murderer, nor should he be. But he's an adult and has to be held accountable for choosing to drive without a license and going 81 in a 35 near a school, causing him to go onto the sidewalk with enough force to knock down a telephone pole, killing two girls and severely injuring a third. Several years in jail is both appropriate and necessary to deter other people from engaging in similarly reckless conduct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feels premature to criticize the defense attorney's arguments before we have a verdict. Maybe they'll prevail. Moreover, it's unclear if any of the people on this thread actually attended the trial.

My guess is that he advised Shahid to plead guilty but Shahid refused. It seems like he had nothing to work with and so he did his best to argue the 4 Runner driver is responsible, which is Shahid's only path to a not guilty verdict.

Was the 4 runner driver also a student at that high school?

No; he's in his 50s I think.

No. He isn't not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are very few who know the conversation that occurred between Greenspun and his client (and parents who I assume are paying the bill)

But we can have a pretty good idea, if he's a high end defense atty whose main concern is not for the victims and their families...

The parents would not be privy to the conversations.

And, ethically, the defense attorney’s job is to be concerned with his client’s best interests and constitutional rights. That’s a foundational part of our country. The defendant has the right to counsel.

Ethics? Sure.

Yes. Ethics. Our system is set up so that each party has a lawyer representing their own interest. The jury considers all the information and decides. If one party has a lawyer concerned with the interest of more than just his party, then the system doesn't work correctly. The jury will get skewed information and will have difficulty deciding fairly.

I understand well about the need for a fair, robust defense. I completely disagree that defense lawyers should try to pin blame on others and/or get a light sentence for the client who has obviously committed a crime. Feel free to rationalize helping to get lighter sentences for those who commit crimes.

No, you don’t.

Hello, anonymous poster! Think what you wish!

DP. (That means different anonymous poster.). You don't understand. That's okay, you don't have to understand, and many people don't.

Exactly. She can’t, “understand well about the need for a fair, robust defense” and also “completely disagree that defense lawyers should try to pin blame on others and/or get a light sentence for the client who has obviously committed a crime.”

Defense lawyers HAVE to try and get the least punishment possible for their clients- which often means pinning the blame on others.

Which is why so many lawyers are not viewed as honest and ethical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was underage and inexperienced. We let cold blooded killers off because their frontal lobe isn't developed, this is just an unfortunate accident. However, he should see consequences for his mistake of speeding and to be an example for other drivers.

That being said, if he was a different race and religion or just had a different name, people won't be so aggressive about this case. Just look at the title of this thread, his name specifically mentioned. I hope jury is fair and neutral and follows facts. He should face consequences of his actions for sure but not of his existence.

Unfortunate accident my a$$. He needs to go to jail.

He will be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He was underage and inexperienced. We let cold blooded killers off because their frontal lobe isn't developed, this is just an unfortunate accident. However, he should see consequences for his mistake of speeding and to be an example for other drivers.

That being said, if he was a different race and religion or just had a different name, people won't be so aggressive about this case. Just look at the title of this thread, his name specifically mentioned. I hope jury is fair and neutral and follows facts. He should face consequences of his actions for sure but not of his existence.

Would you feel the same way if if were your child who had been killed because of his reckless behavior?

If he had taken a left turn and not seen pedestrians crossing, like the SUV, and hit the girls that way I would say it was an accident. But driving 81 in a 35 is no accident. Most people don't even hit 81 on the highway let alone a residential street.

I also think this case would be even bigger and received more press if the victims had been pretty white white girls.

[Anonymous]

How old was he at the time of this accident? I'm assuming underage as he only had a permit.

[Anonymous]

Eww don't try the race bullshit. Most people probably don't believe that he deserves a death sentence or something but you can not let things like this slid. Driving 80 miles in a 35 is absolutely beyond immature teenager. A reckless driving charge is 20 mph above the speed limit, this spoiled buffoon was going 50 mph above the speed limit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How old was he at the time of this accident? I'm assuming underage as he only had a permit.

He was 18. He had just graduated high school and the BMW was just given to him a week before, presumably as a graduation present. He only had a learner's permit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wasn’t the other driver charged?

because their actions weren't criminal

It could be argued that he was turning on a yellow and at that speed, should have stopped and not been in the intersection.

Still not criminal.

+1

He was working to safely clear the intersection. Not criminal.

But it wasn’t clear when he started turning. He should have waited until the pedestrians crossed before pulling into the lane of oncoming traffic. So dangerous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How old was he at the time of this accident? I'm assuming underage as he only had a permit.

He was 18. He still had his permit, yet his parents bought him a BMW just a few days before the cash and may have knowingly let him drive it in an unlawful manner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was underage and inexperienced. We let cold blooded killers off because their frontal lobe isn't developed, this is just an unfortunate accident. However, he should see consequences for his mistake of speeding and to be an example for other drivers.

That being said, if he was a different race and religion or just had a different name, people won't be so aggressive about this case. Just look at the title of this thread, his name specifically mentioned. I hope jury is fair and neutral and follows facts. He should face consequences of his actions for sure but not of his existence.

Would you feel the same way if if were your child who had been killed because of his reckless behavior?

If he had taken a left turn and not seen pedestrians crossing, like the SUV, and hit the girls that way I would say it was an accident. But driving 81 in a 35 is no accident. Most people don't even hit 81 on the highway let alone a residential street.

I also think this case would be even bigger and received more press if the victims had been pretty white white girls.

Hitting people is hitting people. Both drivers made errors that led to fatalities.