Originally Posted by
Danno
You're not reading the same posts I am.
That is not entirely true. For example, commercial vehicles have different licensing requirements than do autos, which have different licensing requirements than bikes. Precisely because we expect the operators of each to have different knowledge bases and act differently. But generally speaking, yes, they do follow the same basic traffic rules. And your last sentence here is not a given, it is precisely what we are discussing.
You never answered my question above about if the deceased had been a pedestrian. Is your position that regardless of who died and what their mode of transport was (walking, biking, broken down car on the shoulder), if we can't demonstrate that the driver was intoxicated or acting under a very precise set of recognized "distracted driving" conditions (ie texting or playing with her phone), she is not negligent or criminally liable?
Also, you are trying to add in punishment, as in she shouldn't be charged because she's suffered enough. Punishment is entirely separate. In fact, juries typically are not allowed to know what the punishment for a crime is before deliberating, because of the risk of prejudice, that they won't strictly evaluate the elements of a crime and instead will decide whether the defendant "deserves the punishment". She either is or is not guilty of a crime; prosecutors may have discretion to consider exigent circumstances when pursuing the case, and judges may have the same discretion when sentencing after a conviction. But neither has anything to do with whether she was criminally negligent, and whether that negligence led to someone's death.
I'm not calling for "blood", and think it's quite likely that she doesn't deserve jail time. But based on the facts I have seen, she should be charged with a crime.