Both drivers are at 100% fault in the situation. If someone tries to race you, and you respond by racing, you both now share 100% fault of whatever happens from that point on. If the 2 cars had started 100 feet further back, the other car may have hit the saturn. It was complete chance that that the one guy hit it. When you race someone, you intend to win, if you tell me you've never responded to someone pulling in front of you, cuting you off, or trying race you... you are lieing. You may not know it, but dont pull a holyier that thou routine and say it wouldnt have been you, because honestly, it probably woundnt have been you, but it could have. When someone drinks and drives, there judgment is badly impared, people all have different physiological reactions to alcohol so you cant really know what they're experienceing that made them drive. Granted its usually stupidity or ignorance, but not always. Realistically, If i was on the jury of a DUI case, i could only convict guilty for a repeat offender. The STATE sells the liquor! Then they punish people for a product they supply, seems like a bit of a scam. Again, im not saying drinking and driving is good, so dont think that. As for this case, manslaughter, clearly. Its the letter of the law, if you somehow are speeding and someone pulls out in front of you while your looking at the cd player and changing the cd, oh and you were speeding a bit too...would you say 2nd degree. Im sure ya wouldnt. As for this being a letter of the law case, that is usually not true. Prosecuters are out to make a name for themselves. Ive been to court, tried and the whole deal. They want blood, cause it looks good on their resume, but they will relent usually. This happens all the time sadly, just this time, they went for blood right off to make an example of this person who made a a very VERY stupid judgement call, and now someone has paid for it with a life.
