N.J. v. Powell: Man tried for friend's DWI crash

Court TV ^ | Updated Sept. 18, 2002 | Court TV

[southern rock]

N.J. v. Powell: Man tried for friend's DWI crash

(Court TV) — He was nowhere near the scene of a tragic drunken driving accident that left two men dead and one woman seriously injured, but Kenneth Powell faced charges of manslaughter, vehicular homicide and aggravated assault in the deadly crash.

Prosecutors claimed Powell was guilty of those charges because he let his drunk friend, Michael Pangle, drive. Powell had picked up Pangle from police barracks after his friend was arrested on a DWI charge.

But the defense says police were just as much at fault, if not more, than Powell. After all, they handed Pangle's car keys back to Pangle — knowing he was still drunk — before he left the station.

The case was believed to be the first its kind and legal experts speculated it could set a precedent if the jury found the defendant criminally liable.

An edited version of the trial, which originally took place July 17 to August 9, is being aired on Court TV this week.

[southern rock]

Anybody else watching this on Court TV? This kind of crap makes me so angry. This is not America anymore. People being put on trial for the behavior of others? I really hate was is happening to my once free country.

Anyway, this is a taped trial, so the verdict is in.

The Verdict:

After 25 hours of deliberations, the jury cleared Powell of manslaughter, but were deadlocked on the remaining charges. Prosecutors have the option of retrying Powell for vehicular homicide and assault.

During a Sept. 12, 2002, hearing that followed, lawyers said that prosecutors offered Powell two plea deals, both of which he refused. The terms of the offers were not disclosed.

The judge encouraged the parties to continue negotiating, and set a plea cut-off date of October 4, which is when the next hearing in this case is scheduled. If no deal is reached, the retrial, as presently scheduled, will begin on Jan. 6, 2003.

The Elliotts say they support whatever decisions the prosecutors make, whether that means a plea deal or a retrial.

The Elliotts have civil suits pending against Kenneth Powell and the two bars that continued to serve drinks to a drunk Michael Pangle. The family is not suing the state police. The Hohenwarters have also sued Powell and the two bars.

[Bikers4Bush]

Pathetic.

[southern rock]

John's Law
Bill Elliott, son of a naval officer and proud father of John who had just graduated from Annapolis Naval Academy, was determined not to let his son's death go to waste. He made such a promise to his son and has been successful in having legislation passed and perhaps saving lives with his Hero Campaign.
Because of Bill Elliott's activism, New Jersey passed "John's Law." According to John's Law, police must impound the car of someone arrested for DWI for twelve hours. In addition, a person who picks up someone arrested for drunk driving must sign a paper stating his or her knowledge that letting the person drive could result in criminal or civil liability.
In addition, some say the possibility of criminal or civil liability would make people reluctant to pick up their drunk friends and family if they are given such a level of responsibility with grave consequences if something goes wrong.
Senator John Corzine of New Jersey is currently proposing that it become federal law.

It is this kind of John Walsh, Carolyn McCarthy, Sarah Brady, Million Mom syndrome nonsense that causes me to lose ALL sympathy for what should normally be very sympathetic people. They have suffered a loss, therefore they need to feel better by passing all sorts of laws that violate our rights and freedoms.

[widowithfoursons]

Personal responsibility has gone under. Now I'm in charge of my neighbor's actions? This goes far beyond being my brother's keeper.

[southern rock]

It is happening more and more. Prosecutors and victims want a fall guy. When the real perp is killed, freedom and rights go on trial in his place.

[southern rock]

Now I'm in charge of my neighbor's actions?

Apparantly so. Sigh!

[Wolfie]

If I were Powell, I'd sue the State Police (conspicuously left out of all other lawsuits).

[trebb]

"The case was believed to be the first its kind and legal experts speculated it could set a precedent if the jury found the defendant criminally liable."

Does this mean that juries can write/interpret law? I thought you could only convict a person if there was a standing law you could accuse him of breaking and that the law had to be presented to the jury so they understood "the letter" of it...

[Mr. Bird]

"Hi, I'm Troy McClure! You might remember me from such educational films as "Designated Drivers: Lifesaving Nerds!".

I just read the whole article and believe Powell got screwed. Don't New Jersey cops keep drunks in the tank overnight like most intelligent jurisdictions? If you put it to a vote, my guess is that most people would rather have it that way anyway. Who wants to get a call at 2am to pick up somebody?

Interestingly, no mention of whether John the Ensign had been drinking at mom's party before the accident. Charging Powell would be one way of avoiding an unpleasant fact such as that....

[jjm2111]

I'll say it one more time too.

Pathetic.

[southern rock]

I'll say it one more time too.

Pathetic.

Sure is. If I were Jewish, I would sit in shiva for America.

I'm watching this on court TV and the father of Ensign John is in full victim "I now need to change the world" mode, declaring that his son "will not have died in vein" I mean, I feel bad that I have very little sympathy for this man who lost his son, but it is his own fault. Grief is not meant to be a soapbox. This trial is a travesty.

[jjm2111]

I was at the Naval Academy a few months back doing my reserve time, and saw a little memorial to John Elliot.

[jjm2111]

Was John and his fiancee wearing their seatbelts?

[jjm2111]

Rather, were John and his fiancee wearing their seatbelts?

[southern rock]

Watch out! You are your brother's keeper.

[Area51]

I got the feeling on the little bit I saw yesterday that the State Trooper had had quite enough of the Boozer and his verbal abuse of the Cop. The Trooper Called his buddy to come get him out of his sight.

Remember this is the Same Trooper that said under oath, he threatened to shove the boozers teeth down his throat...

IMHO if the guy who came and got him is guilty then so is the Trooper that let him out.

[connectthedots]

I can't believe the family is not suing the state police. They have a great case against the state police; far better than against Powell.

[tpaine]

southern rock:
"The case was believed to be the first its kind and legal experts speculated it could set a precedent if the jury found the defendant criminally liable."


Does this mean that juries can write/interpret law? I thought you could only convict a person if there was a standing law you could accuse him of breaking and that the law had to be presented to the jury so they understood "the letter" of it...
8 - trebb
_________________________________

The jury 'instruction' system is at the heart of this travesty.
-- Jurys should hear ~unrestricted~ arguments as to both law & facts from both sides, & then be instructed by the judge as to their ability to nullify the strict application of law in the case at hand.
Instead, the constitutional right to an impartial jury is violated by instructions that claim they MUST follow the letter of the law.
This is NOT 'due process', just for starters.

[Imal]

This sort of nonsense is so shockingly out of touch with both common and constitutional law that it's hard to know where to begin.

It's more fallout from a trend of judicial legislation and activism that plagues the nation with theories being upheld in court that have no connection to sane reality. This is the same mentality that has had burglars suing property owners for injuries they sustain climbing through windows, and winning!

We need tort reform, and we need it about forty years ago.