Negligent Homicide (Did he fail to perceive the risks that led to…
Did he fail to perceive the risks that led to Jane's Death
He failed to perceive the risk that led to the Jane's death
Terry was speeding; we know this because experts at the scene claim he was going over 15-30 mph over the speed limit.
Speeding is dangerous
In 2011, speeding was a factor in more than half (52 percent) of fatal crashes with a teen behind the wheel, nearly the same percentage as in 2008.
Speeding increases the stopping distance required to avoid a collision even as it reduces the amount of time a driver needs to avoid a collision (called the 3-second rule). It also increases the likelihood that the crash will result in injury.
Among crashes attributed to a critical teen driver error, 21 percent of serious teen driver crashes were due to driving too fast for road conditions.
Terry's history of speeding indicates that he has taken a defensive driving class where he would have learned the dangers of speeding in pedestrian-prone zones,
If he was aware of the dangers then he should have perceived the risks associated but he failed to perceive this risk at the time of the accident since he was speeding again.
Terry owns a Suzuki Samurai which is a high rollover rate vehicle
There was a warning placed inside the car where it was visible to the owner on a daily basis.
Knowing the safety risks associated with the vehicle you own and drive on a regular basis is within a reasonable standard of care.
By not exercising more care when driving a known high rollover rate vehicle Terry was grossly deviating from the standard of care.
Connecticut Driving Handbook states that from the ages of 7-17 passengers are considered children therefore the driver is responsible for their safety.
Terry was therefore responsible for making sure that Jane was safe.
Terry had a driver's license which means he would have had to read the CT Handbook.
Since he read the CT Handbook then he would have been aware of his responsibility to ensure the passengers' safety.
Ensuring that all passengers are wearing their seat belts is a way to ensure that they are all safe.
Statistics show that seat belts save lives. When used correctly, wearing a seat belt reduces the risk of fatal injury to front seat passenger car occupants by 45%, and risk of moderate-to-critical injury by 50%.
Rear seat belts are 73% better at preventing fatalities
According to the CDC 87% of Connecticut's population wears seat belts which means it is common knowledge that seat belts makes riding in motor vehicles more safe.
Connecticut Law states that anyone riding in the front seat of a vehicle, regardless of the occupant's age, must wear a seat belt. All rear-seat passengers between 4 years old and 16 years old must be restrained by an appropriate safety system.
Jane was 15 years old therefore she should have been appropriately restrained by a safety system.
1 more item...
Were there intervening causes to warrant a misdemeanor charge?
The law states that if there are any intervening causes then he may be charged with a misdemeanor
Time that he had to make the decision; snap decision
Lack of school zone sign
Pedestrian crossing in a non-designated crosswalk
There is intervening causes therefore he should be charged with a misdemeanor and not a felony.