# data[].attributes.headline
A Picture of a Vehicular Manslaughter Case

# data[].attributes.subject
A Picture of a Vehicular Manslaughter Case

# data[].attributes.body
SHE'S LITERALLY A MURDERER. CLEARLY NOT A GOOD THING FOR A MOTHER FIGURE TO BE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Vehicular manslaughter charges may be brought when someone is killed in an auto accident--even against someone other than the driver.

What is Vehicular Manslaughter?

Drivers who unintentionally cause accidents that result in the deaths of passengers, occupants of other cars, or pedestrians may find themselves charged with the crime of vehicular manslaughter (also known as vehicular homicide). Vehicular manslaughter charges are appropriate when the driver was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, or driving recklessly (or merely carelessly), or otherwise driving in an illegal manner-each state specifies the circumstances that will support charging this crime.

The crime of vehicular manslaughter is a relative newcomer to the list of homicide offenses. Before its appearance, these drivers were charged with manslaughter (unintentionally killing someone as a result of criminal negligence or recklessness). But juries were often reluctant to attach the onus of "manslaughter" to a traffic accident. "Vehicular manslaughter" addressed this reluctance by typically providing for lesser penalties than manslaughter itself.

Driving that Results in Vehicular Manslaughter Charges

In order to know whether a vehicular manslaughter charge is appropriate when a highway death results from an accident, you'll need to know exactly what kind of driving will trigger such a charge in your state. Here are the typical types of driving that state laws provide for.

Negligent driving

In many states, ordinary negligence, or carelessness, on the part of the driver will support a vehicular manslaughter charge. Ordinary negligence is inattention, or driving that lacks the care and prudence that an ordinarily careful person would exercise under the circumstances. For example, a driver who only briefly takes his eyes off of the road while reaching into his car's console can still be charged with vehicular manslaughter if his inattention results in a fatal accident.

"Criminal negligence," "culpable or gross negligence," "reckless disregard of others' safety"

In other states, the type of driving necessary to support a charge of vehicular manslaughter must be more egregious than simple negligence, explained above. Criminal, culpable, or gross negligence; and reckless disregard of others' safety are common benchmarks. For example, someone who drove at high speed with a high blood alcohol level, failed to heed flashing red lights, traveled on the other side of the road, and failed to apply the brakes is someone whose driving was beyond careless or negligent.

Driving while intoxicated

Showing that a driver was intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or drugs is a common way that prosecutors prove negligent or (depending on the state) reckless behavior. Intoxication can be proved by eyewitness testimony, self-incriminating statements, and chemical evidence, including blood, breath, or urine tests. In most states, prosecutors must show that the driving itself was careless-in other words, mere proof of legal intoxication is insufficient. Florida, however, is a notable exception-in that state, the prosecutor need only show that the defendant's driving caused a death, and that the driver was intoxicated. (Fl. Stat. Section 860.01.)

Defendants who have a blood alcohol level of 0.08 or higher are presumed to be driving under the influence (some states set lower thresholds for certain classes of drivers, such as underage drivers and drivers of commercial vehicles). But even if the reading is lower, prosecutors can meet the applicable negligence standard by providing evidence of the driving itself, in conjunction with the ingestion of drugs or alcohol.

Drivers who are under the influence of prescribed drugs may also be charged with vehicular manslaughter when their driving causes a highway death. Consider the driver who takes medicine after being warned by the doctor of its side effects, when the medicine container itself contained clear and obvious warnings not to drive, and when the driver had prior experience with the drug's effects-this driver has acted negligently at least, and possibly even recklessly.

Violating a safety or other statute

Vehicular manslaughter can also be charged when accidents happen after drivers violate a safety statute. For instance, many states require windshields to be clear. When a death results from the driver's inability to see through an obscured windshield, a manslaughter charge may follow. Passing vehicles in violation of "no passing" signs, driving beyond the posted speed limit, and performing illegal U-turns are similar examples.

States also single out specific violations of law that are not necessarily safety violations, but involve important interests. When a death results, vehicular manslaughter charges might result. Under Iowa law, for example, a sober driver who causes a death while passing a stopped school bus commits a felony, while deaths caused by other types of reckless driving not involving DUI are punished as misdemeanors. Other states punish as felonies deaths caused by drivers attempting to elude police.

Driving while sleepy or falling asleep

Many traffic accidents happen when drivers have fallen asleep at the wheel, or are extremely drowsy. But when someone dies as a result, the driver won't necessarily face vehicular manslaughter charges. The question is whether the driver acted negligently (or recklessly, depending on the state's standard) when getting behind the wheel in such a condition. For instance, a manslaughter charge might be appropriate when someone chooses to stay up all night, works all day, and attempts to drive home after being awake for more than 36 hours. Voluntarily putting oneself in a position so that one cannot stay awake, and then driving, is negligent behavior and possibly even recklessness.

What About the Other Driver?

It's very common for each driver involved in a car accident to share some of the responsibility-perhaps one car was going too fast, but the other car was, too. When blame and damages are sorted out in a civil context-who pays for what-courts often apportion the blame using the theory of "contributory negligence." In other words, when you're partially responsible, you collect less.

In a criminal context, however, contributory negligence is rarely applied in vehicular manslaughter cases. For example, suppose the victim driver had a blood alcohol level above the legal limit, but the defendant instigated a drag racing manoeuver that resulted in the victim's death. Most judges would not allow the jury to hear evidence about the deceased's blood alcohol level.

Can a non-driver be charged with vehicular manslaughter?

In almost cases involving a vehicular homicide charge, the defendant is alleged to have been driving. In some instances, however, a prosecutor may charge a defendant with vehicular homicide even though it is undisputed that the defendant was not driving the vehicle involved in the victim's death. A recent vehicular homicide case received national press coverage because the defendant was not the driver of the vehicle but was a pedestrian. Raquel Nelson was charged with second-degree vehicular homicide after her four-year old son A.J. was struck and killed by a vehicle as Nelson, A.J., and Nelson's other children prepared to cross a Georgia highway in 2010.

A law enforcement investigation determined that A.J.'s death was caused by Nelson's act of attempting to cross the highway with A.J. under unsafe conditions. Nelson was charged with second-degree vehicular homicide and a pedestrian crossing violation. The driver of the vehicle that struck A.J. was charged with first-degree vehicular homicide after law enforcement determined that he was driving drunk at the time of the accident.

Georgia classifies second-degree vehicular homicide as a misdemeanor and defines the crime as unintentionally causing the death of another person by violating any one of the state's traffic laws, except for traffic laws pertaining to DUI/DWI, reckless driving, duties of drivers involved in an accident causing death or serious injury, duties of drivers approaching a stopped school bus, and fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer. The violation of the traffic law must be the legal cause of the death.

In Nelson's case, the second-degree vehicular homicide charge was based on her violation of the traffic law that requires a pedestrian outside of a crosswalk to yield to oncoming vehicles unless, under safe conditions, the pedestrian has already entered the roadway. Based on the police investigation, Nelson had violated this traffic provision by entering the roadway with her children under unsafe conditions, and that violation resulted in A.J.'s death. (Ga. Code § § 40-6-92, 40-6-393)

Nelson plead not guilty to the charges and proceeded to trial. A jury convicted her of both charges. At sentencing, the trial judge sentenced Nelson to 12 months of probation and 40 hours of community service. The judge then exercised her authority to grant a new trial by offering Nelson the choice of serving the sentence or having a new trial. Nelson chose the latter and then filed a motion to block her retrial, arguing that the evidence was legally insufficient to support her conviction at the first trial and that a retrial would therefore constitute double jeopardy. The trial judge denied Nelson's motion, and Nelson appealed the judge's ruling to Georgia's Court of Appeals.

In denying Nelson's double jeopardy motion, the Court of Appeals noted that the case was the first in the state where a pedestrian or parent of a child pedestrian was charged and convicted of second-degree vehicular homicide based on the victim being struck and killed while crossing a road in an unlawful manner. The Court also noted, however, that Georgia courts had previously ruled that a non-driver may be charged as a party to a traffic violation, pointing to a 2003 Georgia Court of Appeals case where the Court upheld the defendant's conviction for first-degree vehicular homicide based on the defendant having provided a teenage driver with alcohol (the intoxicated driver subsequently crashed the defendant's car into a tree, killing two passengers). After reviewing the evidence from the first trial, the Court of Appeals ruled that the evidence was legally sufficient to support the vehicular homicide conviction even though Nelson was not driving a vehicle, and therefore retrying Nelson did not constitute double jeopardy. ( Nelson v. State, 731 S.E.2d 770 (Ga. App. 2012))

Facing retrial on the same charges, Nelson agreed to plead no contest to the offense of jaywalking and pay a $200 fine in return for dismissal of the vehicular homicide and pedestrian crossing charges, thus ending the unusual and controversial prosecution.

As you might imagine, this case was controversial and generated considerable publicity.

Penalties and Sentencing

Many states recognize different degrees of vehicular manslaughter. Statutes typically authorize more severe punishment for vehicular manslaughter convictions involving drunk or drugged drivers, as opposed to convictions based on non-DUI traffic offenses. For example, in Georgia, a driver who causes a death while intoxicated can be charged with first-degree vehicular homicide, a felony carrying up to fifteen years in prison. But a driver who causes a death while committing a moving traffic offense (such as failure to maintain lane position), is guilty of second-degree vehicular homicide, a misdemeanor carrying a maximum of a year in jail.

Penalties for vehicular manslaughter (both misdemeanors and felonies) differ greatly from state to state. In Alabama, for example, a person convicted of vehicular manslaughter based on DUI faces a maximum of five years in prison, while a person in Minnesota convicted of the same offense faces up to thirty years' incarceration.

Possible Defenses to Vehicular Manslaughter

Common defense strategies in vehicular manslaughter cases include attempts to exclude incriminating evidence, such as test results showing that the defendant was driving with a blood-alcohol level above 0.08. A defense attorney may argue that such evidence should be excluded because it was obtained in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights, or because law enforcement did not comply with procedures established for collecting the evidence.

A defendant may also argue that his intoxication was not the legal cause of the accident resulting in death (not an available defense in Florida, however; see above). Instead, a defendant may argue that an independent intervening event outside of the defendant's control is the cause of the death instead of the defendant's intoxication. For example, in Washington state, a defendant may be acquitted of vehicular homicide where a jury or judge finds that an intervening act caused the death, but the intervening event must be one that is not reasonably foreseeable.

A defendant may also present evidence that his reckless driving or apparent intoxication is due not to alcohol or drugs, but because of a pre-existing medical condition or medical emergency. While evidence of a medical condition can undermine a prosecutor's claim that a defendant was under the influence of intoxicants, a person who chooses to drive despite a known medical condition may still be charged with vehicular homicide if that decision to drive is considered negligent or reckless.

Learn about the steps you need to take when Facing Criminal Charges.

See a Lawyer

If you are facing charges of vehicular manslaughter, it's important to consult with a lawyer as soon as possible. An experienced criminal defense attorney can evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence against you, explain possible defenses and help you develop evidence to support them, and set out the options open to you. These options might range from obtaining a dismissal to pleading guilty as charged in exchange for a specific sentence, negotiating a reduction in charges in exchange for a plea, or going to trial. Only someone who understands how prosecutors and judges in your courthouse tend to handle cases like yours can give you realistic and helpful advice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Vehicular Manslaughter: Sentencing, Laws and Penalties

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Vehicular manslaughter charges may be brought when someone is killed in an auto accident--even against someone other than the driver. Drivers who unintentionally cause accidents that result in the deaths of passengers, occupants of other cars, or pedestrians may find themselves charged with the crime of vehicular manslaughter (also known as vehicular homicide).

# data[].attributes.body
Daisy is a bad example for her child because she doesn't follow the law

# data[].attributes.body
This Article on Neglect shows that Daisy, who Neglects her child, is a Child Abuser

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution-which banned the manufacture, transportation and sale of intoxicating liquors-ushered in a period in American history known as Prohibition. Prohibition was ratified by the states on January 16, 1919 and officially went into effect on January 17, 1920, with the passage of the Volstead Act. Despite the new legislation, Prohibition was difficult to enforce. The increase of the illegal production and sale of liquor (known as "bootlegging"), the proliferation of speakeasies (illegal drinking spots) and the accompanying rise in gang violence and other crimes led to waning support for Prohibition by the end of the 1920s. In early 1933, Congress adopted a resolution proposing a 21st Amendment to the Constitution that would repeal the 18th. The 21st Amendment was ratified on December 5, 1933, ending Prohibition.

Origins of Prohibition

In the 1820s and '30s, a wave of religious revivalism swept the United States, leading to increased calls for temperance, as well as other "perfectionist" movements such as the abolitionist movement to end slavery. In 1838, the state of Massachusetts passed a temperance law banning the sale of spirits in less than 15-gallon quantities; though the law was repealed two years later, it set a precedent for such legislation. Maine passed the first state prohibition laws in 1846, followed by a stricter law in 1851. A number of other states had followed suit by the time the Civil War began in 1861.

Did you know? In 1932, Franklin D. Roosevelt defeated the incumbent President Herbert Hoover, who once called Prohibition "the great social and economic experiment, noble in motive and far reaching in purpose." Some say FDR celebrated the repeal of Prohibition by enjoying a dirty martini, his preferred drink.

By the turn of the century, temperance societies were a common fixture in communities across the United States. Women played a strong role in the temperance movement, as alcohol was seen as a destructive force in families and marriages. In 1906, a new wave of attacks began on the sale of liquor, led by the Anti-Saloon League (established in 1893) and driven by a reaction to urban growth, as well as the rise of evangelical Protestantism and its view of saloon culture as corrupt and ungodly. In addition, many factory owners supported prohibition in their desire to prevent accidents and increase the efficiency of their workers in an era of increased industrial production and extended working hours.

READ MORE: See All the Crafty Ways Americans Hid Alcohol During Prohibition

Passage of the Prohibition Amendment

In 1917, after the United States entered World War I, President Woodrow Wilson instituted a temporary wartime prohibition in order to save grain for producing food. That same year, Congress submitted the 18th Amendment, which banned the manufacture, transportation and sale of intoxicating liquors, for state ratification. Though Congress had stipulated a seven-year time limit for the process, the amendment received the support of the necessary three-quarters of U.S. states in just 11 months.

Ratified on January 16, 1919, the 18th Amendment went into effect a year later, by which time no fewer than 33 states had already enacted their own prohibition legislation. In October 1919, Congress put forth the National Prohibition Act, which provided guidelines for the federal enforcement of Prohibition. Championed by Representative Andrew Volstead of Minnesota, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, the legislation was more commonly known as the Volstead Act.

Enforcement of Prohibition

Both federal and local government struggled to enforce Prohibition over the course of the 1920s. Enforcement was initially assigned to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and was later transferred to the Justice Department and the Bureau of Prohibition, or Prohibition Bureau. In general, Prohibition was enforced much more strongly in areas where the population was sympathetic to the legislation-mainly rural areas and small towns-and much more loosely in urban areas. Despite very early signs of success, including a decline in arrests for drunkenness and a reported 30 percent drop in alcohol consumption, those who wanted to keep drinking found ever-more inventive ways to do it. The illegal manufacturing and sale of liquor (known as "bootlegging") went on throughout the decade, along with the operation of " speakeasies " (stores or nightclubs selling alcohol), the smuggling of alcohol across state lines and the informal production of liquor ("moonshine" or "bathtub gin") in private homes.

In addition, the Prohibition era encouraged the rise of criminal activity associated with bootlegging. The most notorious example was the Chicago gangster Al Capone, who earned a staggering $60 million annually from bootleg operations and speakeasies. Such illegal operations fueled a corresponding rise in gang violence, including the St. Valentine's Day Massacre in Chicago in 1929, in which several men dressed as policemen (and believed to be have associated with Capone) shot and killed a group of men in an enemy gang.

Prohibition Comes to an End

The high price of bootleg liquor meant that the nation's working class and poor were far more restricted during Prohibition than middle or upper class Americans. Even as costs for law enforcement, jails and prisons spiraled upward, support for Prohibition was waning by the end of the 1920s. In addition, fundamentalist and nativist forces had gained more control over the temperance movement, alienating its more moderate members.

With the country mired in the Great Depression by 1932, creating jobs and revenue by legalizing the liquor industry had an undeniable appeal. Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt ran for president that year on a platform calling for Prohibition's repeal, and easily won victory over the incumbent President Herbert Hoover. FDR's victory meant the end for Prohibition, and in February 1933 Congress adopted a resolution proposing a 21st Amendment to the Constitution that would repeal the 18th. The amendment was submitted to the states, and in December 1933 Utah provided the 36th and final necessary vote for ratification. Though a few states continued to prohibit alcohol after Prohibition's end, all had abandoned the ban by 1966.

Access hundreds of hours of historical video, commercial free, with HISTORY Vault. Start your free trial today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution-which banned the manufacture, transportation and sale of intoxicating liquors-ushered in a period in American history known as Prohibition. Prohibition was ratified by the states on January 16, 1919 and officially went into effect on January 17, 1920, with the passage of the Volstead Act.

# data[].attributes.headline
A Picture of People Enjoying Alcoholic Beverages

# data[].attributes.subject
A Picture of People Enjoying Alcoholic Beverages

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's a silent problem. While newspapers and TV news shows regularly highlight stories of child physical and sexual abuse, the companion problem, child neglect, hardly gets a mention. Neglect, unless accompanied by pictures of squalor or emaciated kids, is much harder to capture in a headline or sound bites. Abuse is active and often characterized by violence and exploitation. Neglect is passive and often characterized by depression and resignation. Abuse makes a better news story.

But neglect is the bigger problem. In 2005, almost 900,000 children were victims of maltreatment. More than half — 63 percent — were victims of neglect. Less than 12 percent of substantiated cases involved child sexual abuse. Further, while child abuse steadily declined from 1990 to 2005, the incidence of neglect didn't go down at all. Sadly, it is the youngest children who are most likely to be neglected.

Linda grew up as the oldest of eight kids in rural Connecticut. "My mother needed the kind of love that babies give. Once a kid started to be at all independent, she was done with him. Looking back, I know she was mentally ill. But at the time, I just thought that babies were mom's job and everyone else was mine. I give my dad some credit. At least he worked steady and supported us but he was either working or drinking so he was no help at home."

Although her parents brought home bags of groceries now and then, Linda and her siblings never had a meal prepared for them. They foraged in the cupboards. Mom did do some laundry but Linda can't remember ever having clean sheets or a clean house. While their mother rocked the current baby, the other kids were left on their own. The kids did what they wanted when they wanted. "It's a wonder we didn't get hurt more often," says Linda. "It was only when we all regularly showed up at school with head lice that protective services finally got involved."

I've been seeing Linda for therapy for several years. Never having had order or structure or basic necessities, she finds it difficult to organize her things, manage a schedule or maintain a healthy lifestyle. Never having had love or support from her parents, she finds it difficult to love, to trust, or to reciprocate in relationships.

Neglect is the failure of caregivers to provide needed age-appropriate care. In a family like Linda's, there is often both physical and psychological neglect. Physical neglect is the failure to provide the basic necessities of food, shelter and clothing. It also includes the failure to provide needed medical care or adequate supervision. As a result, the kids are at risk for malnutrition, illness, and physical harm. Having never experienced good care, they may become adults who often don't know how to care for themselves or others.

Psychological neglect, though less obvious, is just as serious. Children who are constantly ignored, rejected, threatened, or belittled grow up without the inner resources that everyone needs to cope with difficult times. When children get little or no affection and physical comfort, they are vulnerable to anyone who will give them attention. Often they become sitting ducks for people who exploit them.

Brett is trying to break a drug habit. "When did you start using?" I ask. "Oh, I think I was about eight," he replies.

"Eight?" After 35 years in this business, it takes a lot to surprise me but I still internally register some shock when I hear this kind of story.

"Yeah. My folks never looked out for us kids. They didn't like us much. We were expected to stay out of the house and out of their sight as long as it was light. The older guys in the neighborhood thought it was funny to get the younger kids stoned. We thought being included by the big guys was cool."

Brett is now 30 and trying to get his life together. Having been stoned for over 20 years, he lacks basic social skills, has low self-esteem, and can't shake a chronic depression. In many ways, his psychological development stopped at age 8.

Neglect: The Quieter Child Abuse

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
By Marie Hartwell-Walker, Ed.D. ~ 5 min read

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Neglect: The Quieter Child Abuse | Psych Central

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's a silent problem. While newspapers and TV news shows regularly highlight stories of child physical and sexual abuse, the companion problem, child neglect, hardly gets a mention. Neglect, unless accompanied by pictures of squalor or emaciated kids, is much harder to capture in a headline or sound bites.

# data[].attributes.headline
A Meme About Mothers Neglecting Their Kids

# data[].attributes.subject
A Meme About Mothers Neglecting Their Kids