On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:50:22 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:46:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

I would say he was either lying or a fool, but as the DA's all across
the country have shown it does not meet the requirement for 1st degree
murder.

First degree murder charge can't be justified in cases where a drunk
driver kills a pedestrian or another driver/passenger by reason of
definition

Murder, as opposed to homicide, is defined as the act of killing a
person by intentional, purposeful, malicious, premeditated, and/or
wanton action. That's the definition.

The key is malicious. Deaths that occur by extreme recklessness or
during certain serious crimes are considered to be express malice
murders.

Drunk driving certainly qualifies as an extreme reckless behavior.

The hitch is in how First Degree Murder is defined by the state. Most
states define it as an unlawful killing that is both willful and
premeditated.

Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as an intentional killing
that is not premeditated or planned or a killing caused by dangerous
conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life.

That's how they can get them on a Second Degree murder charge if t hey
choose. But it's easier to plead out to involuntary manslaughter than
the expense, time and effort for a Murder in the Second charge.

I wonder if premeditated is defined as having a specific target, or does
"I'm going to kill someone tonight for sure, I just don't know who yet"
qualify?

Don't know - I'm not a trial lawyer and I don't play one on TV.

I'm sure if you could prove that any individual who intended to get
drunk and purposly drive into somebody intending to kill them, then
you could get a First Degree Murder charge.

It would be hard to do though.