If you were on this jury, would you vote Guilty or Not Guilty?
"If convicted, he could face life in prison. Criminal defense attorney Diana Aizman told Shepard Smith that whoever the jury panel is made up of will determine the outcome in this case".
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Not guilty.
Not guilty, plus state should pay for lawyer's fee and bullets.
GUILTY!...of doing the right thing. For his punishment, he should be given the key to the city and having a day named in honor of this boys.
Looks like the jury agreed, not guilty verdict.
Funny, while I think the guy would have gotten off with a light sentence for basically murder I cannot agree. Who is to determine if he the crash was caused because he was drunk or had he just been drinking and slightly over the limit etc. I am a right and wrong type of but we are a nation of laws. I think laws should be changed to include murder etc for fatalities concerning drunk driving and texting but not execution before a trial.
I close with the prosecution would have to had made the case that he did it without a doubt also. Just saying the father did it without proving it does not get it.
Well, no weapon, no gun shot residue on the father, no witnesses, no physical evidence, but you'd still call him guilty? Pretty sure the first accounts say the accident was caused because the man was drunk, and that it wasn't the first time he had driven drunk.
Also, another news source reports he was over twice the legal limit for ETOH. Is there a parent among us who would not return the same verdict?
Funny, while I think the guy would have gotten off with a light sentence for basically murder I cannot agree. Who is to determine if he the crash was caused because he was drunk or had he just been drinking and slightly over the limit etc. I am a right and wrong type of but we are a nation of laws. I think laws should be changed to include murder etc for fatalities concerning drunk driving and texting but not execution before a trial.
I close with the prosecution would have to had made the case that he did it without a doubt also. Just saying the father did it without proving it does not get it.
Funny what I really meant was if he did it I did not think it was right, not that I would have voted to convict with the evidence the prosecutor presented. Been up to long to type a coherent sentence. Likewise if the guy was stumbling drunk things change for me also, very situational.
A jury has acquitted him! 
I don't know what would have happened if they'd found a gun, or a witness had seen him, or he'd even confessed. I can't believe anyone would want him in jail, except the drunk driver's family. Another case of family outrage when something happens to the drunk, but nothing done to prevent the drunk from driving. There were members of the drunk's family at the scene. They fled after the accident. Now we hear that the drunk driver had a child, and his family thinks he should have been allowed to raise that child. Why wasn't he at home raising that child instead of out driving drunk and killing two of another father's children?
