Why is Bruce Jenner not Arrested for Vehicular Manslaughter?

[jon_berzerk]

From wikipedia:

In the state of California, depending on the degree of recklessness and whether alcohol was involved, a person could be charged with progressively more serious offenses: vehicular manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, or second-degree murder. In any of these cases, the prosecution must prove that the driver committed some wrongful act (which could be a felony, a misdemeanor, an infraction, or a lawful act that might cause death) and that the wrongful act caused the collision and the death of the victim. Murder charges are usually reserved for the most egregious cases, such as a convicted DUI offender who drives recklessly while intoxicated and thereby causes a fatal collision.

What "wrongful act" by Jenner resulted in the accident?

Speeding and following too close, both stupid things that are known to be factors in crashes. Jenner is a bad driver.

If they had sufficient evidence to prove that he was doing either of those things, he'd likely be charged.

I believe they do and Jenner admitted as much. When you plow into the vehicle in front of you, it's either because you are going too fast, too close or you aren't paying attention. Jenner's vehicle was checked and brakes were fine. There were no slippery roads. It was Jenner's fault.

"Fault" and "criminally liable" are not the same thing.

liability without fault

the defendant is held criminally liable

for his actions even though criminal intent is absent

 

[skye]

From wikipedia:

In the state of California, depending on the degree of recklessness and whether alcohol was involved, a person could be charged with progressively more serious offenses: vehicular manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, or second-degree murder. In any of these cases, the prosecution must prove that the driver committed some wrongful act (which could be a felony, a misdemeanor, an infraction, or a lawful act that might cause death) and that the wrongful act caused the collision and the death of the victim. Murder charges are usually reserved for the most egregious cases, such as a convicted DUI offender who drives recklessly while intoxicated and thereby causes a fatal collision.

What "wrongful act" by Jenner resulted in the accident?

Speeding and following too close, both stupid things that are known to be factors in crashes. Jenner is a bad driver.

If they had sufficient evidence to prove that he was doing either of those things, he'd likely be charged.

I believe they do and Jenner admitted as much. When you plow into the vehicle in front of you, it's either because you are going too fast, too close or you aren't paying attention. Jenner's vehicle was checked and brakes were fine. There were no slippery roads. It was Jenner's fault.

"Fault" and "criminally liable" are not the same thing.

liability without fault

the defendant is held criminally liable

for his actions even though criminal intent is absent

I agree ..trasgender or whatever... the creature killed or hurt another human being.,....

so now trannies can kill and run away? with impunity?

may them be damned!!!! may Hussein be damned!!!!

 

[DarkFury]

When YOU CHOOSE to disobey a law is it fault or criminal?

 

[Gracie]

Could someone explain this to me?

He plowed into the back of another person's vehicle and pushed her into an oncoming Hummer. She died.

So Bruce wasn't texting, or distracted, or drunk. He still caused her death. What, nothing happens now?

Bruce Jenner will likely dodge manslaughter charge in crash - NY Daily News

Last I checked, if I were to plow into someone and push them into the path of an oncoming vehicle, and that person dies, I can be rightfully charged with vehicular manslaughter. Why does he get a pass? What if it were Trump, or anyone else, who did this?

What gives?

He is exempt because he is a hero now.

 

[jon_berzerk]

When YOU CHOOSE to disobey a law is it fault or criminal?

criminal if you know it is against the law

it may be criminal even if you didnt know it was against the law

 

[DarkFury]

When YOU CHOOSE to disobey a law is it fault or criminal?

criminal if you know it is against the law

it may be criminal even if you didnt know it was against the law

'It" admitted to speeding and that is criminal.
"It" admitted to tailgating and that is criminal.
BOTH were done by a person KNOWING they were ILLEGAL.
As a result someone DIED. If you remove one or both actions the death may not have been the result. "It" WAS negligent in choices that DID lead to death.

 

[Lumpy 1]

 

[SwimExpert]

What gives?

Warrants have to be specific.

 

[jon_berzerk]

When YOU CHOOSE to disobey a law is it fault or criminal?

criminal if you know it is against the law

it may be criminal even if you didnt know it was against the law

'It" admitted to speeding and that is criminal.
"It" admitted to tailgating and that is criminal.
BOTH were done by a person KNOWING they were ILLEGAL.
As a result someone DIED. If you remove one or both actions the death may not have been the result. "It" WAS negligent in choices that DID lead to death.

indeed

 

[Clementine]

"Fault" and "criminally liable" are not the same thing.

I know, and it's illogical the way some things are deemed criminal while others are dismissed as accidental.

If a person drinks or is texting while driving, they would be charged, even though they didn't set out to kill anyone. It's a matter of people making choices that increase the likelihood of an accident occurring. Choosing to drive fast and too close to the vehicle in front of you are also decisions that one makes even though they know an accident is more likely.

It's just as bad to choose to be an aggressive driver as it is to drink or text behind the wheel. The results of this accident are the same as if Jenner had chose to drink. A choice was made (that every teen driver knows creates risk of accidents) and the worst happened.

If we choose to drive fast, we are choosing to take risks that others may have to pay for as well. Anyone with half a brain knows that tailgating and speeding have caused many accidents. Jenner should have known it was even harder to stop quickly since he was hauling a trailer. Might as well have been texting or drinking because the stupidity is equal and it was a choice he made knowing the potential consequences. His choice to go fast led the accident. Should he have known that speed and distance are huge factors in the level of safety? I guess he'll get off the hook because the law considers the choice to drive stupidly not as bad as the choices to be distracted or drunk while driving. My point is that all those things are choices that we all know affect our ability to drive. When people chose to be unsafe, why shouldn't they be responsible for the consequences of their choice?

 

[I amso IR]

Civil suit perhaps? Or authorities are using the old stand by, if the victim had not been there, the victim would not be the victim. Her fault!

 

[Faun]

From wikipedia:

In the state of California, depending on the degree of recklessness and whether alcohol was involved, a person could be charged with progressively more serious offenses: vehicular manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, or second-degree murder. In any of these cases, the prosecution must prove that the driver committed some wrongful act (which could be a felony, a misdemeanor, an infraction, or a lawful act that might cause death) and that the wrongful act caused the collision and the death of the victim. Murder charges are usually reserved for the most egregious cases, such as a convicted DUI offender who drives recklessly while intoxicated and thereby causes a fatal collision.

What "wrongful act" by Jenner resulted in the accident?

Speeding and following too close, both stupid things that are known to be factors in crashes. Jenner is a bad driver.

If they had sufficient evidence to prove that he was doing either of those things, he'd likely be charged.

I believe they do and Jenner admitted as much. When you plow into the vehicle in front of you, it's either because you are going too fast, too close or you aren't paying attention. Jenner's vehicle was checked and brakes were fine. There were no slippery roads. It was Jenner's fault.

No one is saying it wasn't Jenner's fault. But not every accident is a felony. I don't see anyone here proving this one is.

 

[Sarah G]

Let's hope next time some of you have an accident, they don't just arbitrarily lock you up and throw away the key because you're Cons.

 

[Faun]

Let's hope next time some of you have an accident, they don't just arbitrarily lock you up and throw away the key because you're Cons.

There isn't even any evidence he was speeding at the time. The two cars in front of him slowed down and he couldn't brake hard enough to avoid hitting them. Plus, the evidence shows he was holding a cigarette in his hand, not his phone, when the accident occurred. He submitted to a field sobriety test which proved he wasn't under the influence. There is simply no evidence that he committed felony vehicular manslaughter; which is why he wasn't charged. Who knows why some are calling for it?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Any criticism of Jenner, no matter how justified, is seen as "transphobic".
Therefore someone else's death is meaningless if it imposes on the cause.

 

[Ernie S.]

View attachment 44746

I did business with him before he was a fruit-loop.

 

[Ernie S.]

"Fault" and "criminally liable" are not the same thing.

I know, and it's illogical the way some things are deemed criminal while others are dismissed as accidental.

If a person drinks or is texting while driving, they would be charged, even though they didn't set out to kill anyone. It's a matter of people making choices that increase the likelihood of an accident occurring. Choosing to drive fast and too close to the vehicle in front of you are also decisions that one makes even though they know an accident is more likely.

It's just as bad to choose to be an aggressive driver as it is to drink or text behind the wheel. The results of this accident are the same as if Jenner had chose to drink. A choice was made (that every teen driver knows creates risk of accidents) and the worst happened.

If we choose to drive fast, we are choosing to take risks that others may have to pay for as well. Anyone with half a brain knows that tailgating and speeding have caused many accidents. Jenner should have known it was even harder to stop quickly since he was hauling a trailer. Might as well have been texting or drinking because the stupidity is equal and it was a choice he made knowing the potential consequences. His choice to go fast led the accident. Should he have known that speed and distance are huge factors in the level of safety? I guess he'll get off the hook because the law considers the choice to drive stupidly not as bad as the choices to be distracted or drunk while driving. My point is that all those things are choices that we all know affect our ability to drive. When people chose to be unsafe, why shouldn't they be responsible for the consequences of their choice?

The civil suit award will be staggering.

 

[Faun]

Any criticism of Jenner, no matter how justified, is seen as "transphobic".
Therefore someone else's death is meaningless if it imposes on the cause.

Bruce Jenner's gender issues have nothing to do with it. His actions were not felonious according to California state law.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

That's not how I understand it. Jenner's driving was negligent and contributed to the death of an innocent.

 

[Wake]

So I'm seeing that in California if I end up killing someone in a car accident [without intent] I can get away with it without charges. People should be held responsible for their actions: someone is dead because of him yet it's apparently fine with some because he's a transsexual. Something tells me if a normal person went and killed someone in a car accident they wouldn't be treated nearly as highly as Bruce.