[s-cars] RE: diffs, donuts, and Johnny Law

[Kirby Smith]

Given that people lose control and kill people during normal driving,
and that this is a known fact to most aware persons, and that normal
driving is not considered reckless, there should be another fact
required to prove recklessness.  (At least I hope there is.)  I would be
interested in what this fact is.  Or is it some undefined difference in
perceived probability of hazard?  Even if NH doesn't have a standard,
other than the judge's opinion, there may be consensus on the
distinction in other districts.  Ray?

kirby

(and I like your proposed state motto)


ray at s-cars.org wrote:
> 
> "Reckless" means conscious disregard of a known fact, e.g., that I might lose control of my car and kill some innocent person standing at the gas pumps.  And yes, the NH courts have found that the statute encompasses the operation of a motor vehicle on a private drive, when the same is commonly and reasonably accessible to the public.
> 
> NH - where every case appears to be both precedent and non-binding, recorded or not.
> 
> >
> > From: Kirby Smith <kirby.a.smith at verizon.net>
> > Date: 2004/01/20 Tue PM 04:10:42 EST
> > To: ray at s-cars.org
> > CC: "Krasusky Paul (WQQ2PXK)" <WQQ2PXK at ups.com>,  s-car-list at audifans.com
> > Subject: Re: [s-cars] RE:  diffs, donuts, and Johnny Law
> >
> > Prima facie requires that the action be so described in the law, e.g.,
> > carrying a loaded rifle in a vehicle is prima facie evidence of deer
> > jacking in NH.  A pivot turn in a private lot seems like a stretch for
> > being written into NH law, and certainly wasn't mentioned in the Revised
> > Statutes Annotated when I reviewed them some years ago.  But maybe
> > bootleg turn was mentioned and I've forgotten.
> >
> > But in any case there is always case law, and judges in NH have a
> > history of deciding things without regard to either the state
> > constitition, the meaning of words used in the law as understood by the
> > law's writers, or common sense.  For example, recently someone who was
> > inebriated and slept in his shut-down car in a mall parking lot instead
> > of driving on the roads was convicted of operating a motor vehicle under
> > the influence, even though he wasn't operating and was on private
> > property.  This case went all the way to the state supreme court, who
> > found for the prosecution, adding to their state-wide reputation as a
> > laughing stock.
> >
> > kirby
> >
> >