Orange woman found guilty of manslaughter, gets 5 years probation after striking, killing sanitation worker in 2018

[bullets13]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[bullets13]

Thoughts?  Pretty obvious there was some distracted driving going on here, but the question is to what extent.  It was claimed in court that she wasn't impaired and wasn't on her phone.  I've heard there was some possible evidence she may have been doing her makeup while driving, while she claimed she was blinded by the sun, which I've heard could be possible where the accident occurred.  

[bullets13]

There was some weird stuff going on with the charges in this one.  Originally charged with intoxication manslaughter, those charges were dropped and changed to manslaughter, which holds the same penalty.  I'm curious why the charges were dropped, and what evidence was used to file those charges to begin with.  

[thetragichippy]

1 hour ago, bullets13 said:

There was some weird stuff going on with the charges in this one.  Originally charged with intoxication manslaughter, those charges were dropped and changed to manslaughter, which holds the same penalty.  I'm curious why the charges were dropped, and what evidence was used to file those charges to begin with.  

I posted this on a few Facebook post for the people that want her to spend many years in jail. 

We have all been distracted behind the wheel, from looking at a CD, to picking something up off the floor, to looking in the backseat yelling at kids. Unless we want all at fault fatal accidents to be manslaughter, we better be careful how we charge folks. We are all one spit second wrong decision away from having a bad accident. 

My thoughts are the cops may have thought she was intoxicated, charged her, and had to back peddle when her results came in.....or maybe she refused to blow and the charged her.......I have not found any articles that clarify.  

[bullets13]

it's a weird situation.  I see a major difference between someone who gets distracted pushing a button on the radio vs. someone who chooses to do their makeup.  I see a major difference between someone who kills someone driving while doing their makeup vs. someone who is driving drunk or high.  It's tough.  At what point is an accident just an accident, and at what point is it negligence?  Racial undertones aside, did this girl really do something that made her deserve prison time?  Or was it just a tragic accident?  I honestly don't know, and would be very interested to hear some of the evidence presented at court.  

[thetragichippy]

4 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

it's a weird situation.  I see a major difference between someone who gets distracted pushing a button on the radio vs. someone who chooses to do their makeup.  I see a major difference between someone who kills someone driving while doing their makeup vs. someone who is driving drunk or high.  It's tough.  At what point is an accident just an accident, and at what point is it negligence?  Racial undertones aside, did this girl really do something that made her deserve prison time?  Or was it just a tragic accident?  I honestly don't know, and would be very interested to hear some of the evidence presented at court.  

That is a great question. If it is not illegal to do something while driving, and you do it but get in an accident...........does it then become illegal and the cause? 

If I'm driving and day dreaming and miss a stop sign and kill someone.......accident or negligence?

If I'm eating and run that same stop sign with same result......accident or negligence?

I honestly have mixed feelings about the answer...

[CardinalBacker]

Honestly, the answer is pretty muddy.... we're at a point in America where you could be charged with a hate crime based on the color of the victim's skin and some old internet posts that you've made... even if you were just putting on your makeup. 

 

[tvc184]

4 hours ago, bullets13 said:

There was some weird stuff going on with the charges in this one.  Originally charged with intoxication manslaughter, those charges were dropped and changed to manslaughter, which holds the same penalty.  I'm curious why the charges were dropped, and what evidence was used to file those charges to begin with.  

 

2 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

That is a great question. If it is not illegal to do something while driving, and you do it but get in an accident...........does it then become illegal and the cause? 

If I'm driving and day dreaming and miss a stop sign and kill someone.......accident or negligence?

If I'm eating and run that same stop sign with same result......accident or negligence?

I honestly have mixed feelings about the answer...

Is it just an accident or is it negligence or recklessness and a crime? Negligence and recklessness by definition are accidents. 

 

Is it illegal to do something while you were driving? You are correct that the law does not say you can’t change your radio station, you can’t take a sip of coffee, etc. The law does say that you will maintain control of your vehicle however. I remember a wreck from maybe 20 years ago where a guy was putting a cd into his car radio and drop it on the floor. He was just leaving work and was in no way intoxicated and probably wasn’t speeding but he reached to the passenger’s floor board to pick up the CD and cause an accident that killing someone. Reaching for something is not a crime, putting your head below the dashboard is not paying attention and causing an accident is.

If our actions cause no injury or damage, there likely is no crime or a very reduced crime like a traffic citation. If our actions cause such damage, it may be a crime.

So let’s play my favorite game, what if. What if you are walking down the road with a rifle that is loaded which is completely legal. The problem is that you don’t think it’s loaded and did not check. You start talking about the rifle to a friend. To demonstrate to your friend what a great rifle it is, your shoulder the weapon and pull the trigger while commenting how light in crisp the trigger is. Oops!!! You had loaded your gun a few days before and forgot about it. Fortunately the bullet went into the ground and no one was hit.  But what if… your bullet went down the street and killed a child? It is the exact same scenario with no difference except in this case a child happened to be in your line of fire. Any consequences? It’s just an accident?

Obviously you did not intend a gun to go off but it did by your direct and intentional actions. You did not accidentally pull the trigger. Obviously the last thing in the world you would want was a child to die because of your actions even if unintentional.

The legal question then becomes, does your negligence or your recklessness in causing the accident rise to the level of a crime? Under the definitions by the state of Texas (and in all states with maybe slightly different wording) both criminal negligence and recklessness are accidents. In both cases you did not intend the results.

I will put this in my opinion on what the law means. I teach this college course at the Police Academy and my umpteen years of police experience makes me think I’ve got a grasp on this. Criminal negligence is having your head up your butt when you should not have. You were in a position that you were legally bound to not do something stupid but you did so anyway. An example is you’re walking down the sidewalk texting and not paying attention and you step into a dip in the sidewalk and twist your ankle. Yes you were stupid and yes you should be paying attention but it does it rise to criminal negligence? It was a complete accident while you were not paying attention. Let’s go a step further and say that when you tripped, you bumped into someone else causing them slight pain. Pain is an injury by law so did you assault that person? After all you caused pain by not paying attention. Did stepping into a whole call such a gross deviation From expected care that you are responsible? I guess anyone could make that claim however with a jury feel that you not paying attention and twisting your own ankle, causing you to follow to someone else rise to a crime. I would say the answer is no however someone could obviously raise the question. could a prosecutor prove the gross deviation of twisting your own ankle was a crime beyond a reasonable doubt? I would say almost certainly the answer is no and there is your question, was it just an accident. 

Then let’s say you were driving a car going to speed limit at 50 miles an hour. The law says that you will pay attention while driving. Earlier in the day you had tossed a letter from your mailbox in the backseat and for some reason you were now curious to what it says. You look and reach in the backseat and try to find a letter and it takes you only about five seconds. At that speed you would have traveled about 400 feet. Considering the lag time by time you turned around and actually realize what was in front of you you would have gone about 600 feet or almost 200 yards in total. What was in front of you for that 200 yards? You completely gave up your responsibility to pay attention, even though it for just five seconds, you left a 3000 pound weapon going down the road for almost two city blocks without a clue of where you were steering. You would have just as well close your eyes for several seconds. What may have been in front of you for that distance? Unfortunately you swerved off the road and killed a mother and her child walking down the sidewalk. Just an accident? It was obviously an accident but do you have an obligation when getting behind the wheel of a vehicle to maintain control?

Remember that it is “criminal” negligence and not merely negligence. From the earlier example, stepping in a hole is negligence but probably not criminal negligence. Every time we look away while walking and likely every time we do anything, there is a potential for something to happen but when he is it (by law) a gross deviation of the standard of care they should be taken?

So what is recklessness by definition as opposed to criminal negligence? I call criminal negligence a head of your butt accident. Recklessness is an intentional accident. So how is an accident intentional? The answer is that the result is not intentional but your actions were. The definitions in the book appear to be practically identical except that recklessness says you are “aware” of a risk and criminal negative says you ”ought to be aware” of a risk.

Back to the scenario of firing the rifle. was pulling the trigger intentional? Yes. What is the result intentional? No. 

Therein lies your intentional accident.

Criminal negligence might be, you had the same rifle carried in a sling over your shoulder and accidentally left a safety off. You reached for your billfold and you bumped the trigger causing the shot. The bullet comes down and kills the same child. In both in my opinion there was a gross deviation in care. The difference is one was an accidental firing of the gun but with gross deviation of not knowing the gun was loaded and not having the safety on and one was an intentional act of pulling the trigger while not checking to see if they’re far almost loaded.

Whew!!!

That is great in discussion but who gets to decide that? In this case the law says a jury.

Did the girls actions rise to the level of criminal negligence or recklessness? Without knowing the facts of the case other than she was driving in a car is dead, I don’t know anything. I kind of thought they might get her for Criminal Negligent Homicide which is one step lower than manslaughter. The difference is one is a head up your butt accident the other is an intentional accident. With nothing to do with this case and just as an example, driving intoxicated is reckless. You intentionally got behind the wheel after drinking or doing drugs. driving down the road while texting is reckless in my opinion. You did not accidentally text. In both cases there is a specific law that you broke in driving while intoxicated or driving while texting. I suspect that what we do not know is that she probably made a statement to the police officers at the scene that very well might have been on camera, about what happened. I have seen the Facebook posts and comments that she was putting on make up. I do not know if that is true and maybe it’s just speculation but where I may that have come from? Did the police pull her aside after the accident and ask what happened and she said, I’m so sorry, I was putting on my make-up and did not see him? 

Let’s assume that is what happened. A jury is then asked for the evidence presented from the witness stand (which might have been video or merely testimony of a police officer saying that she made the statement), did that intentional action by her rise to the level of being reckless while driving down the road? If the answer is yes then she caused death by recklessness and by definition that is Manslaughter in Texas. Could the same jury have ruled that it was not reckless but it was criminally negligent? Yes they could have.

It goes by the definitions given to them by the judge as quoted by the Texas Penal Code, what the evidence was shown to them from the witness stand and after they spoke with each other, what their decision was as to her responsibility. Whatever they heard on the witness stand, they think she acted recklessly. 

Then after the conviction, the question goes to punishment. Texas law allows in the situation a minimum of two years in prison and a maximum of 20 years in prison. The jury could have given her anything in that range. They could have sent her to two years in prison and she could have gotten out in a few months on parole. They also had the option of giving her a sentence in that range but probating it. As the question was, was this an accident or a crime? The answer is both.

Probably because of the statement by the victim’s mother and probably because it was truly an accident, the jury decided to give her prison time which is required by law but to probate it.

As to the issue that I see on Facebook, that she got off scott free….

Probation is hardly scott free. I think the probation fees are about $400 a month so she will spend between $20,000 - $25,000 in probation fees. If she falls behind on payments, she can be sent to prison. Then probation sets a list of requirements and I have seen as many as about 20. There is a list of standard requirements that I have seen and the judges can check any or all and can have anything additional. I have seen the standard rules such as you cannot be out after midnight unless you were at work. You cannot drink in public, period. So we have such a person goes to a bar and has what is one single legal beer, it can result in prison time. Other requirements may be that you have to maintain a job, you have to take a random drug test at the discretion of your probation officer, you have to meet with your probation officer when requested, you have to submit to a search by the probation officer at their discretion, you have to attend mandatory classes such as alcohol awareness, anger management, AIDS awareness, etc., and sometimes even if those are not related to the particular crime a person is convicted of.

A violation of any of those during that time frame may result in prison time. Basically for the next five years she will have a burden hanging over her head. From my experience they usually get a couple of minor infractions with a warning. If she is caught drinking but not intoxicated then they might write her up. If the police stop her out at night but she’s not drinking, that will be in an infraction. Typically after between five and 10 such infractions, the person will go in front of the judge and have probation revoked and off to prison the person will go. Committing any such future crime will automatically revoke probation.

Probation is no easy task and for five years she will have that hanging over her head. If she is a party animal like many people claim on Facebook, she will end up in prison.

[tvc184]

Bear in mind that I type all of that on an iPhone so hopefully they’re not too many unintelligible sentences and/or tpyos.

[mat]

This is a weird story

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[tvc184]

7 minutes ago, mat said:

This is a weird story

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Which part?

[mat]

• It took well over a year for her to be charged with intoxication manslaughter.
• She was ordered to wear drug patch, failed, then arrested and held without bail.
• Three years after the accident she’s convicted of manslaughter with five years probation.

weird

[tvc184]

16 minutes ago, mat said:

• It took well over a year for her to be charged with intoxication manslaughter.
• She was ordered to wear drug patch, failed, then arrested and held without bail.
• Three years after the accident she’s convicted of manslaughter with five years probation.

weird

That seems pretty much routine. 

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

That seems pretty much routine. 

Then that’s weird.

[bullets13]

4 hours ago, mat said:

• It took well over a year for her to be charged with intoxication manslaughter.
• She was ordered to wear drug patch, failed, then arrested and held without bail.
• Three years after the accident she’s convicted of manslaughter with five years probation.

weird

If she’s been in jail for the past three years, that could very well explain the probation at this point.

[tvc184]

5 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Then that’s weird.

What may be weird is that what goes on dozens of times a week in this area, seems weird.

[mat]

12 hours ago, tvc184 said:

That seems pretty much routine. 

Why would it take over a year to come up with intoxication manslaughter if she had drugs in her system?

If she failed the drug patch requirement and was arrested again, how could that not further support intoxication manslaughter and support a negligent sentence?

After both incidents, why was she not tried for intoxication manslaughter?

How did it go from intoxication to putting on makeup?

If this is a common process, why would it be an acceptable norm?

I could understand a family's or community's frustration and even a "race" claim for his type of scenario. I hope the young lady can learn and grow from this.

 

[TxHoops]

Something happened with her blood at the lab.  The blood presented was not her actual blood.  Prosecutor had no choice but to pivot.  

[CardinalBacker]

16 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Bear in mind that I type all of that on an iPhone so hopefully they’re not too many unintelligible sentences and/or tpyos.

I was hoping that you weren't about to drive anywhere, lol... that post would strongly indicate impairment. 

[bullets13]

5 hours ago, TxHoops said:

Something happened with her blood at the lab.  The blood presented was not her actual blood.  Prosecutor had no choice but to pivot.  

Only explanation that I've heard that would make much sense.  

[tvc184]

6 hours ago, mat said:

Why would it take over a year to come up with intoxication manslaughter if she had drugs in her system?

I don’t know the timeframe but they dropped the intoxication manslaughter charge. When I used to send evidence to the lab to be used in a case, it might take 6 to 9 months to return. It might take longer now. It is easy on television. It is not so easy in the real world. I would get a DWI with blood drawn in the case we go back in the file cabinet for half a year or more. The case could not be investigated and completed until the DPS lab in Austin returned my samples. I know now there are certain kinds of crimes and situations that they will not even do DNA because there is just not enough time and laboratories.

If she failed the drug patch requirement and was arrested again, how could that not further support intoxication manslaughter and support a negligent sentence?

The drug patch means almost nothing as far as the case. She was involved in an accident and several weeks or several months later she was found to use something illegal. That is meaningless as far as a criminal charge that happened previously. If that was valid then if a cop could stopped you for speeding today,  he could write you 30 tickets for last year. When you ask why he could just say well you were speeding today so you must’ve been speeding then. That is what you were saying about this girl. If she got in a wreck in January and in March she smoked marijuana that means she must have smoked marijuana in January. Uhhhhhh…… no. 

After both incidents, why was she not tried for intoxication manslaughter?

I don’t know but I’m guessing that the original evidence they thought they had did not turn out not like they believed. And I like just mentioned, the second interview means nothing. Maybe the test came back negative or maybe if they took blood with a warrant, the warrant was later found invalid or maybe the warrant was good and the test was good but somebody along the line messed up the chain of custody. If anything is messed up or a mistake is made along the way, the evidence is lost. 

How did it go from intoxication to putting on makeup?

Like I just mentioned, they probably thought they could prove intoxication and for some reason that did not play out. That does not mean another crime was not committed however. Just because they could not prove DWI (requirement for Intoxication Manslaughter) does not mean they couldn’t prove another crime.  I am going to just guess that when the office responded to the saying and ask her what happened, she probably made some fairly incriminating statements. If they could prove intoxication that would’ve been a more slam dunk case however if that evidence did not turn out like expected, they would have to go another route and likely did. They could likely also have tried her for aggravated assault. That crime in Texas says you caused serious bodily injury by being reckless. 

If this is a common process, why would it be an acceptable norm?

That is simple. It is the safeguards guaranteed in the United States Constitution and we can start with the Fourth  Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Eighth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment. It is a process that the state must go through to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt. 

I could understand a family's or community's frustration and even a "race" claim for his type of scenario. I hope the young lady can learn and grow from this.

The community always shows frustration and if there is race involved , you can bet that will be brought up in forums. I see some of the most ridiculous comments. I’m one of the local news media Facebook pages they were talking about the Jussie Smollett case. There were comments about he should get no more than probation because of the case in Orange.  What has a girl on trial for a crime in Orange, Texas got anything to do with someone being charged with crimes in Chicago, Illinois? Also, the mother got up in front of Ijury and said she for gave the girl for killing her son and then she went up and hugged her after her statement to the jury. I think that went a long way to her getting probation. It seems like the mother is not outraged but the community wants to be outraged. It is my personal belief that the victim’s  mother is just a good Christian woman who has forgiven the person who trespass against her. 

 

 

[tvc184]

7 hours ago, TxHoops said:

Something happened with her blood at the lab.  The blood presented was not her actual blood.  Prosecutor had no choice but to pivot.  

I did not see your post before responding to another but pretty much said that. I know nothing about this case but thought that maybe the evidence was tainted so they had to go a different direction.

As you know they could have charged her with the Intoxication Manslaughter, Manslaughter, Intoxication Assault, Aggravated Assault and maybe some other felonies.