[Ratman83]

See 51,

[AnAmericanMother]

The DA couldn't go after the driver for DUI because there was no proof. Even if he admitted he had a drink that day, that's inadequate to show DUI. And it's even less adequate to show causation on a VH charge. What we're "pretty sure happened" doesn't satisfy the burden of proof. The DA got what he could. For the record, I practiced for years in Cobb and the DA is a pretty straight up guy and has good ADAs. I've worked with a couple of them in the past.

On the other hand, the mom put the kid in a position to dart out in the road and get run over. She's got 3 kids and only 2 hands, and that's if she's not carrying anything. It's near dark, speed limit's 45 or 50 on Austell Rd, drivers are moving at the limit nowhere near an intersection and a kid suddenly jumps off the median into traffic. A cold sober experienced driver would have no chance to react to that.

That's exactly the sort of conduct that merits a VH charge. And the fact that she's taking her case on the TV circuit tells me that she knows it and was just trying to reduce her sentence, which she probably did.

Unfortunately, losing a child is not the sort of punishment the court can take into consideration for leniency, since every child neglect and even child abuse defendant (at least the woman who stands by while her new boyfriend beats her child) would be pleading it.