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

[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 posted this before but will repeat it. Don’t hold your breath that this individual will get a long sentence. I know an adult who was very drunk and killed two people with their car and got just three years of jail time.

Three years seems probable for a plea agreement. But he’s taking this to a jury so I assume he’s risking five to ten.

An accident? He didn’t oops slip on a banana peel. He knowingly drove recklessly.
A judge would give only 3 years for killing 2 innocent victims?! No wonder people aren't afraid to speed. No real consequences. Shameful.

If your murder weapon is a car, it’s an automatic reduced sentence.

Good way of putting it. Recklessly fire a gun and you’ll get 20+, but drive a car at 81 past a school and no one cares as much.

Well, no, if you were firing a gun in target practice and not careful to clear the area first or something like that and killed someone as a result, you would not get 20 in that situation either. Let's remember this was an 18 year old without a fully developed frontal lobe. Not saying he does not deserve years in prison, but people talking about the death penalty and life in prison are crazy. It was an accident. A reckless accident for sure, but there was no intent to murder.

Exactly what is a person's intent when they drive 81 mph in a 35 mph zone? Unless he is intellectually challenged, he knew what could happen and did not care.

When I was just out of high school, a kid from my class was hit by a drunk driver as the kid was walking around his car to be the DD. The guy was charged with 2nd degree murder - when you drink as much as that guy did, you are knowingly brandishing a deadly weapon. I just googled and he ended up being convincted of involuntary manslaughter - he got 10 years in prison.

+1 as he should have...or more.

10 years for a non-criminal for an accident is more than enough. 10 years is not a joke. He could be raped or murdered in prison. Not a light sentence at all.

NP here
Non-criminal? YES! The person in that story was a criminal! Drinking and driving is a crime.

Actual career criminals who are not trying to get a college education get less than 10 years for violent and intentional attacks all the time. 10 years is serious time for an 18 year old.

So sentences should be based on a sliding scale of how old you are?

That’s preposterous! The sliding scale should only be wealth-based!

That does make more sense. The wealthy have more to contribute to society, so they should serve shorter sentences so that they are able to keep sharing their wealth and knowledge.

Silly optimist, the wealthy do not share their wealth - that's how they stay rich. I have never met such a group of selfish, gatekeeping people in my life, especially in DC.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:I posted this before but will repeat it. Don’t hold your breath that this individual will get a long sentence. I know an adult who was very drunk and killed two people with their car and got just three years of jail time.

Three years seems probable for a plea agreement. But he’s taking this to a jury so I assume he’s risking five to ten.

An accident? He didn’t oops slip on a banana peel. He knowingly drove recklessly.
A judge would give only 3 years for killing 2 innocent victims?! No wonder people aren't afraid to speed. No real consequences. Shameful.

If your murder weapon is a car, it’s an automatic reduced sentence.

Good way of putting it. Recklessly fire a gun and you’ll get 20+, but drive a car at 81 past a school and no one cares as much.

Well, no, if you were firing a gun in target practice and not careful to clear the area first or something like that and killed someone as a result, you would not get 20 in that situation either. Let's remember this was an 18 year old without a fully developed frontal lobe. Not saying he does not deserve years in prison, but people talking about the death penalty and life in prison are crazy. It was an accident. A reckless accident for sure, but there was no intent to murder.

Exactly what is a person's intent when they drive 81 mph in a 35 mph zone? Unless he is intellectually challenged, he knew what could happen and did not care.

When I was just out of high school, a kid from my class was hit by a drunk driver as the kid was walking around his car to be the DD. The guy was charged with 2nd degree murder - when you drink as much as that guy did, you are knowingly brandishing a deadly weapon. I just googled and he ended up being convincted of involuntary manslaughter - he got 10 years in prison.

+1 as he should have...or more.

10 years for a non-criminal for an accident is more than enough. 10 years is not a joke. He could be raped or murdered in prison. Not a light sentence at all.

NP here
Non-criminal? YES! The person in that story was a criminal! Drinking and driving is a crime.

Actual career criminals who are not trying to get a college education get less than 10 years for violent and intentional attacks all the time. 10 years is serious time for an 18 year old.

So sentences should be based on a sliding scale of how old you are?

That’s preposterous! The sliding scale should only be wealth-based!

That does make more sense. The wealthy have more to contribute to society, so they should serve shorter sentences so that they are able to keep sharing their wealth and knowledge.

Silly optimist, the wealthy do not share their wealth - that's how they stay rich. I have never met such a group of selfish, gatekeeping people in my life, especially in DC.

Only because the wrong kind of people might get access to wealth and power.

[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 posted this before but will repeat it. Don’t hold your breath that this individual will get a long sentence. I know an adult who was very drunk and killed two people with their car and got just three years of jail time.

Three years seems probable for a plea agreement. But he’s taking this to a jury so I assume he’s risking five to ten.

An accident? He didn’t oops slip on a banana peel. He knowingly drove recklessly.
A judge would give only 3 years for killing 2 innocent victims?! No wonder people aren't afraid to speed. No real consequences. Shameful.

If your murder weapon is a car, it’s an automatic reduced sentence.

Good way of putting it. Recklessly fire a gun and you’ll get 20+, but drive a car at 81 past a school and no one cares as much.

Well, no, if you were firing a gun in target practice and not careful to clear the area first or something like that and killed someone as a result, you would not get 20 in that situation either. Let's remember this was an 18 year old without a fully developed frontal lobe. Not saying he does not deserve years in prison, but people talking about the death penalty and life in prison are crazy. It was an accident. A reckless accident for sure, but there was no intent to murder.

Exactly what is a person's intent when they drive 81 mph in a 35 mph zone? Unless he is intellectually challenged, he knew what could happen and did not care.

When I was just out of high school, a kid from my class was hit by a drunk driver as the kid was walking around his car to be the DD. The guy was charged with 2nd degree murder - when you drink as much as that guy did, you are knowingly brandishing a deadly weapon. I just googled and he ended up being convincted of involuntary manslaughter - he got 10 years in prison.

Yet the drunk (rich) kid in McLean, who killed the other high school student only got house arrest.

I'm beginning to see why kids in the DC area have little fear of consequences for irresponsible and criminal behavior.

Fairfax Commonwealth Attorney office encourage this criminal behavior by not prosecuting these crimes. A half of the office are not even trial attorneys, just posters for the prosecutors. November is a chance to vote for an alternative.

Are you saying that half of FCA's office is made up of social media posters? Like 10 attorneys and 10 social media personnel? That doesn't make sense.

PP is a moron. Probably works for Youngkin's office.

Prosecutors are notoriously overworked. Government litigators, as a whole, are generally overworked, both at the state and Fed level. They cannot prosecute everything to the public's liking. It's just not possible. Saying they "encourage" it is offensive, ridiculous, and untrue.

You want a staffed up prosecutor's office, pony up the additional revenue so they can hire more people. But, let me guess, you don't want to pay more in taxes, right?

Money is not an issue in Fairfax commonwealth office as the pay is usually around $120k for start, plus benefits, while a lot of small private firms in this area pay around $60k a year for lawyers. Nevertheless, prosecutors quitting their job in FCA non-stop. They have someone quit the job on Friday before Monday murder trial. It is not about the money, it is the work environment that prevent them to hire more qualified people and no money in the world can buy it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per the Change.org petition, trial postponed until April 2024. This seems crazy and indefensible:

It has been one and half years since our daughters passed away. Victim families got a call from the victim service staff that the trial was postponed again to Apr. 15, 2024. It was the third time. Every announcement of the postponement of the trial was very right before the expected trial and was appointed the trial date moving so far out as far as possible. Looks like they tried to postpone the trial as long as they had a chance to do so, until the local public people and medias' interest faded and the witness's situation changed to not being able to stand at the court.

Let me guess...

When April 2024 rolls around, the defendant's attorneys will tell the court that the promising young lad (the defendant) is on the cusp of final exams for his very promising future, and it really wouldn't be fair for him to miss school and exams that would essentially cause him to fail the whole semester. So, you see judge ... it's very detrimental to the defendant to go forward, and the trial should be postponed until next fall.

Rinse and repeat.

I'm sure that the defense strategy is to delay, delay, delay so that there is more time for the defendant to appear to be a good, upstanding resident of the U.S. who has a promising future, and who can show that he really can stay out of trouble. Which is just lovely... except for the two dead bodies he left in his path. But never mind that!

I'm disappointed that the Commonwealth Attorney is allowing/accepting this. The victims deserve their day in court and the people of the Commonwealth deserve representation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per the Change.org petition, trial postponed until April 2024. This seems crazy and indefensible:

It has been one and half years since our daughters passed away. Victim families got a call from the victim service staff that the trial was postponed again to Apr. 15, 2024. It was the third time. Every announcement of the postponement of the trial was very right before the expected trial and was appointed the trial date moving so far out as far as possible. Looks like they tried to postpone the trial as long as they had a chance to do so, until the local public people and medias' interest faded and the witness's situation changed to not being able to stand at the court.

Let me guess...

When April 2024 rolls around, the defendant's attorneys will tell the court that the promising young lad (the defendant) is on the cusp of final exams for his very promising future, and it really wouldn't be fair for him to miss school and exams that would essentially cause him to fail the whole semester. So, you see judge ... it's very detrimental to the defendant to go forward, and the trial should be postponed until next fall.

Rinse and repeat.

I'm sure that the defense strategy is to delay, delay, delay so that there is more time for the defendant to appear to be a good, upstanding resident of the U.S. who has a promising future, and who can show that he really can stay out of trouble. Which is just lovely... except for the two dead bodies he left in his path. But never mind that!

I'm disappointed that the Commonwealth Attorney is allowing/accepting this. The victims deserve their day in court and the people of the Commonwealth deserve representation.

Yes, unless victims are hispanic. Descano doesn't give a f about them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per the Change.org petition, trial postponed until April 2024. This seems crazy and indefensible:

It has been one and half years since our daughters passed away. Victim families got a call from the victim service staff that the trial was postponed again to Apr. 15, 2024. It was the third time. Every announcement of the postponement of the trial was very right before the expected trial and was appointed the trial date moving so far out as far as possible. Looks like they tried to postpone the trial as long as they had a chance to do so, until the local public people and medias' interest faded and the witness's situation changed to not being able to stand at the court.

Let me guess...

When April 2024 rolls around, the defendant's attorneys will tell the court that the promising young lad (the defendant) is on the cusp of final exams for his very promising future, and it really wouldn't be fair for him to miss school and exams that would essentially cause him to fail the whole semester. So, you see judge ... it's very detrimental to the defendant to go forward, and the trial should be postponed until next fall.

Rinse and repeat.

I'm sure that the defense strategy is to delay, delay, delay so that there is more time for the defendant to appear to be a good, upstanding resident of the U.S. who has a promising future, and who can show that he really can stay out of trouble. Which is just lovely... except for the two dead bodies he left in his path. But never mind that!

I'm disappointed that the Commonwealth Attorney is allowing/accepting this. The victims deserve their day in court and the people of the Commonwealth deserve representation.

And that spoiled brat driver deserves to be incarcerated.

[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 posted this before but will repeat it. Don’t hold your breath that this individual will get a long sentence. I know an adult who was very drunk and killed two people with their car and got just three years of jail time.

Three years seems probable for a plea agreement. But he’s taking this to a jury so I assume he’s risking five to ten.

An accident? He didn’t oops slip on a banana peel. He knowingly drove recklessly.
A judge would give only 3 years for killing 2 innocent victims?! No wonder people aren't afraid to speed. No real consequences. Shameful.

If your murder weapon is a car, it’s an automatic reduced sentence.

Good way of putting it. Recklessly fire a gun and you’ll get 20+, but drive a car at 81 past a school and no one cares as much.

Well, no, if you were firing a gun in target practice and not careful to clear the area first or something like that and killed someone as a result, you would not get 20 in that situation either. Let's remember this was an 18 year old without a fully developed frontal lobe. Not saying he does not deserve years in prison, but people talking about the death penalty and life in prison are crazy. It was an accident. A reckless accident for sure, but there was no intent to murder.

Exactly what is a person's intent when they drive 81 mph in a 35 mph zone? Unless he is intellectually challenged, he knew what could happen and did not care.

When I was just out of high school, a kid from my class was hit by a drunk driver as the kid was walking around his car to be the DD. The guy was charged with 2nd degree murder - when you drink as much as that guy did, you are knowingly brandishing a deadly weapon. I just googled and he ended up being convincted of involuntary manslaughter - he got 10 years in prison.

+1 as he should have...or more.

10 years for a non-criminal for an accident is more than enough. 10 years is not a joke. He could be raped or murdered in prison. Not a light sentence at all.

NP here
Non-criminal? YES! The person in that story was a criminal! Drinking and driving is a crime.

Actual career criminals who are not trying to get a college education get less than 10 years for violent and intentional attacks all the time. 10 years is serious time for an 18 year old.

Good.

Unless he has to serve some amount of time, he will go on believing he did nothing wrong and is a victim himself. 🙄

He needs to spend some time behind bars before he graduates from college.

[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 posted this before but will repeat it. Don’t hold your breath that this individual will get a long sentence. I know an adult who was very drunk and killed two people with their car and got just three years of jail time.

Three years seems probable for a plea agreement. But he’s taking this to a jury so I assume he’s risking five to ten.

An accident? He didn’t oops slip on a banana peel. He knowingly drove recklessly.
A judge would give only 3 years for killing 2 innocent victims?! No wonder people aren't afraid to speed. No real consequences. Shameful.

If your murder weapon is a car, it’s an automatic reduced sentence.

Good way of putting it. Recklessly fire a gun and you’ll get 20+, but drive a car at 81 past a school and no one cares as much.

Well, no, if you were firing a gun in target practice and not careful to clear the area first or something like that and killed someone as a result, you would not get 20 in that situation either. Let's remember this was an 18 year old without a fully developed frontal lobe. Not saying he does not deserve years in prison, but people talking about the death penalty and life in prison are crazy. It was an accident. A reckless accident for sure, but there was no intent to murder.

Exactly what is a person's intent when they drive 81 mph in a 35 mph zone? Unless he is intellectually challenged, he knew what could happen and did not care.

When I was just out of high school, a kid from my class was hit by a drunk driver as the kid was walking around his car to be the DD. The guy was charged with 2nd degree murder - when you drink as much as that guy did, you are knowingly brandishing a deadly weapon. I just googled and he ended up being convincted of involuntary manslaughter - he got 10 years in prison.

Yet the drunk (rich) kid in McLean, who killed the other high school student only got house arrest.

I'm beginning to see why kids in the DC area have little fear of consequences for irresponsible and criminal behavior.

Fairfax Commonwealth Attorney office encourage this criminal behavior by not prosecuting these crimes. A half of the office are not even trial attorneys, just posters for the prosecutors. November is a chance to vote for an alternative.

Are you saying that half of FCA's office is made up of social media posters? Like 10 attorneys and 10 social media personnel? That doesn't make sense.

PP is a moron. Probably works for Youngkin's office.

Prosecutors are notoriously overworked. Government litigators, as a whole, are generally overworked, both at the state and Fed level. They cannot prosecute everything to the public's liking. It's just not possible. Saying they "encourage" it is offensive, ridiculous, and untrue.

You want a staffed up prosecutor's office, pony up the additional revenue so they can hire more people. But, let me guess, you don't want to pay more in taxes, right?

Money is not an issue in Fairfax commonwealth office as the pay is usually around $120k for start, plus benefits, while a lot of small private firms in this area pay around $60k a year for lawyers. Nevertheless, prosecutors quitting their job in FCA non-stop. They have someone quit the job on Friday before Monday murder trial. It is not about the money, it is the work environment that prevent them to hire more qualified people and no money in the world can buy it.

LMAO at the starting salary in a county prosecutor’s office being 120k. You don’t see that type of money in a county office until you have decades of experience and/or are in a management role.

[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 posted this before but will repeat it. Don’t hold your breath that this individual will get a long sentence. I know an adult who was very drunk and killed two people with their car and got just three years of jail time.

Three years seems probable for a plea agreement. But he’s taking this to a jury so I assume he’s risking five to ten.

An accident? He didn’t oops slip on a banana peel. He knowingly drove recklessly.
A judge would give only 3 years for killing 2 innocent victims?! No wonder people aren't afraid to speed. No real consequences. Shameful.

If your murder weapon is a car, it’s an automatic reduced sentence.

Good way of putting it. Recklessly fire a gun and you’ll get 20+, but drive a car at 81 past a school and no one cares as much.

Well, no, if you were firing a gun in target practice and not careful to clear the area first or something like that and killed someone as a result, you would not get 20 in that situation either. Let's remember this was an 18 year old without a fully developed frontal lobe. Not saying he does not deserve years in prison, but people talking about the death penalty and life in prison are crazy. It was an accident. A reckless accident for sure, but there was no intent to murder.

Exactly what is a person's intent when they drive 81 mph in a 35 mph zone? Unless he is intellectually challenged, he knew what could happen and did not care.

When I was just out of high school, a kid from my class was hit by a drunk driver as the kid was walking around his car to be the DD. The guy was charged with 2nd degree murder - when you drink as much as that guy did, you are knowingly brandishing a deadly weapon. I just googled and he ended up being convincted of involuntary manslaughter - he got 10 years in prison.

+1 as he should have...or more.

10 years for a non-criminal for an accident is more than enough. 10 years is not a joke. He could be raped or murdered in prison. Not a light sentence at all.

NP here
Non-criminal? YES! The person in that story was a criminal! Drinking and driving is a crime.

Actual career criminals who are not trying to get a college education get less than 10 years for violent and intentional attacks all the time. 10 years is serious time for an 18 year old.

Good.

Unless he has to serve some amount of time, he will go on believing he did nothing wrong and is a victim himself. 🙄

He needs to spend some time behind bars before he graduates from college.

I don’t see why everyone on here is so anxious about this guys trial. So many other cases and victims deserve your attention.

[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 posted this before but will repeat it. Don’t hold your breath that this individual will get a long sentence. I know an adult who was very drunk and killed two people with their car and got just three years of jail time.

Three years seems probable for a plea agreement. But he’s taking this to a jury so I assume he’s risking five to ten.

An accident? He didn’t oops slip on a banana peel. He knowingly drove recklessly.
A judge would give only 3 years for killing 2 innocent victims?! No wonder people aren't afraid to speed. No real consequences. Shameful.

If your murder weapon is a car, it’s an automatic reduced sentence.

Good way of putting it. Recklessly fire a gun and you’ll get 20+, but drive a car at 81 past a school and no one cares as much.

Well, no, if you were firing a gun in target practice and not careful to clear the area first or something like that and killed someone as a result, you would not get 20 in that situation either. Let's remember this was an 18 year old without a fully developed frontal lobe. Not saying he does not deserve years in prison, but people talking about the death penalty and life in prison are crazy. It was an accident. A reckless accident for sure, but there was no intent to murder.

Exactly what is a person's intent when they drive 81 mph in a 35 mph zone? Unless he is intellectually challenged, he knew what could happen and did not care.

When I was just out of high school, a kid from my class was hit by a drunk driver as the kid was walking around his car to be the DD. The guy was charged with 2nd degree murder - when you drink as much as that guy did, you are knowingly brandishing a deadly weapon. I just googled and he ended up being convincted of involuntary manslaughter - he got 10 years in prison.

+1 as he should have...or more.

10 years for a non-criminal for an accident is more than enough. 10 years is not a joke. He could be raped or murdered in prison. Not a light sentence at all.

NP here
Non-criminal? YES! The person in that story was a criminal! Drinking and driving is a crime.

Actual career criminals who are not trying to get a college education get less than 10 years for violent and intentional attacks all the time. 10 years is serious time for an 18 year old.

Good.

Unless he has to serve some amount of time, he will go on believing he did nothing wrong and is a victim himself. 🙄

He needs to spend some time behind bars before he graduates from college.

I don’t see why everyone on here is so anxious about this guys trial. So many other cases and victims deserve your attention.

I'm anxious for any killers to be behind bars.

[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 posted this before but will repeat it. Don’t hold your breath that this individual will get a long sentence. I know an adult who was very drunk and killed two people with their car and got just three years of jail time.

Three years seems probable for a plea agreement. But he’s taking this to a jury so I assume he’s risking five to ten.

An accident? He didn’t oops slip on a banana peel. He knowingly drove recklessly.
A judge would give only 3 years for killing 2 innocent victims?! No wonder people aren't afraid to speed. No real consequences. Shameful.

If your murder weapon is a car, it’s an automatic reduced sentence.

Good way of putting it. Recklessly fire a gun and you’ll get 20+, but drive a car at 81 past a school and no one cares as much.

Well, no, if you were firing a gun in target practice and not careful to clear the area first or something like that and killed someone as a result, you would not get 20 in that situation either. Let's remember this was an 18 year old without a fully developed frontal lobe. Not saying he does not deserve years in prison, but people talking about the death penalty and life in prison are crazy. It was an accident. A reckless accident for sure, but there was no intent to murder.

Exactly what is a person's intent when they drive 81 mph in a 35 mph zone? Unless he is intellectually challenged, he knew what could happen and did not care.

When I was just out of high school, a kid from my class was hit by a drunk driver as the kid was walking around his car to be the DD. The guy was charged with 2nd degree murder - when you drink as much as that guy did, you are knowingly brandishing a deadly weapon. I just googled and he ended up being convincted of involuntary manslaughter - he got 10 years in prison.

+1 as he should have...or more.

10 years for a non-criminal for an accident is more than enough. 10 years is not a joke. He could be raped or murdered in prison. Not a light sentence at all.

NP here
Non-criminal? YES! The person in that story was a criminal! Drinking and driving is a crime.

Actual career criminals who are not trying to get a college education get less than 10 years for violent and intentional attacks all the time. 10 years is serious time for an 18 year old.

Good.

Unless he has to serve some amount of time, he will go on believing he did nothing wrong and is a victim himself. 🙄

He needs to spend some time behind bars before he graduates from college.

I don’t see why everyone on here is so anxious about this guys trial. So many other cases and victims deserve your attention.

Because people don't want a killer walking free in their neighborhood? How is that for a reason?

[Anonymous]

Did they at least take his drivers license away?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did they at least take his drivers license away?

How would he get around at college?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did they at least take his drivers license away?

Why? He is not found guilty yet.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone have an update on what’s going on with his case? As far as I know it keeps getting delayed or something.