Man who saved women's life faces multiple charges.

[black booty lover]

So this guys saves this women's life, but turns out he's driving impaired. Should he get a "get out of jail free" card?

Kind of a tough one.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...ver-who-ran-over-man-to-save-womans-life.html

 

[sempel]

Definitely tough. I would still charge him because one has no relation to another. Had he not been involved with the incident to save the woman, he was still driving drunk and would be charged for that. What it comes down to is sentencing which is what you are hinting at. Maybe parole and/or community service? Gotta say he may have been legally over the limit but he had the clarity to recognize a situation and act (although who knows what he was thinking at the time).

This is one of those tough ethical questions. Suppose it was discovered that Mother Theresa secretly killed somebody. Would all her good be erased? That's the extreme - perhaps she assaulted someone, or perhaps she stole something.

 

[rev]

If he was sober would he have made the same choices? Guy has a knife so you run him down? I think he could have done something else.That being said I was not there and he saved a life so should be on the low end of any punishment.

 

[rhuarc29]

Very interesting case. I certainly wouldn't charge him with manslaughter, because it was apparently a conscious decision to run the man down. The choice is between murder and nothing. If definitive proof exists that the man he killed was indeed attacking the woman with a knife, possibly attempting murder, I'd drop all charges against Kiss except the impaired driving charge. The impaired driving charge sticks because it's unrelated.

 

[shack]

I can see charging him and if found guilty, there should be an extenuating circumstances provision, such that the penalty is much milder than would normally be handed out.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

This has to be one of the strangest things I've ever heard

 

[HEYHEY]

Give him a medal and let him go, no charges.
This man reacted better to that situation than 99% of people would have reacted sober, most of them standing around with a camera, screaming like retards or ignoring the whole situation.
But this is canada where common sense is dead, and liberal retardation has taken over, therefore he will be charged and convicted of something. Meanwhile idiots who wouldnt have done a thing will discuss all the other "possible" things this guy could have done

 

[black booty lover]

I’m with HEYHEY on this one. Considering the amount of impaired driving charges that are thrown out or won on technicalities every year in Ontario , this should be tossed, saving the court time and not let another pending case get tossed on an 11B (right to be tried within a reasonable amount of time). Not to mention, this guy could have just said “fuck it! Let this nut job stab this lady to death. I’m over the limit and if I intervene to help, I’m gonna put myself in a very stressful situation”. It’s definitely a rare and bizarre case which is I posted the thread, cause I was curious to see different points of view, but I let this guy walk.

 

[mandrill]

He has the common law defence of "necessity" to the charge. It was necessary that he drive drunk to save the woman's life and the good done far outweighs his legal infraction.

He should walk at trial.

 

[K Douglas]

He should be charged with impaired driving but not manslaughter. His actions, if sober, would not have been a chargeable offence. He saved the lady's life.

 

[sempel]

I say change this up (the scenario).

Suppose you mow over an innocent kid on your way to a scene where you save a bunch of people. Or my Mother Theresa example. Or you are sexually assaulting a woman in a hotel when a shooter comes in so you stop and somehow taken the shooter down? These are all independent things and treating them separately makes the most sense. I'm sure leniency will be shown for sentencing