There is criminal and there is civil. There's also an administrative
aspect of potentially having his license jerked. His last criminal
offense had the "inimical to public safety" label attached, and the
multiple DUIs are there, so there's a pattern with this offender.
Criminal aspects, I see potential for charges ranging from failing to
yield to pedestrians to assault with deadly weapon to reckless driving
(and some "road rage" type of offense?), to attempted homicide
(depending on his intent) and a wide range in between. Not my area, but
I'd sure want to throw the book at him. The video showing his _choice_
of going into the crowd, rather than wait like the vehicle in front of
him, rather than turn around like the vehicle behind him, or go to the
left and take a left on Lake like several other vehicles also there at
the time, is demonstrative of his choice -- pretty hard for him to argue
otherwise. They will probably consider those who came forward making
complaints too, which will take some time, and I hope those hit are
contacting the County Attorney's office. I'd guess that criminal
charges would incorporate something that would pull his license, and
when convicted, that sentencing include as a part of probation a
requirement of psych evaluation and anger management treatment. Victims
could/should push for this in their Victims Rights statements/requests
in discussions with prosecutor and to the judge.
Civil complaints could include as wide a range, such as assault, battery
(those he hit), intentional infliction of emotional distress, and
personal injury claims for harm and injuries if hit. While the intent is
at issue, negligence required in a civil case seems likely, it's a low
threshold.
Percentages, as below in Ed Fesler's comments, only come into play in
the civil complaints, where liability can divvied up between the
parties. Given he drove into the crowd, his choice, rather than go
around or turn back the other way, it's hard to see how any percentage
would be attached to the crowd. They were not illegally blocking
traffic, the city is on record in the STrib saying they did not need a
permit, and traffic must always yield to pedestrians.
I'm wondering how long the county can take for charges. Because it's
been referred to the County attorney, that means they're looking at more
than a slap on the wrist (which is all the City's jurisdiction would
allow). This is not rocket science thanks to KSTP's helicopter crew
(interesting role for KSTP this time around). It's been a while, though
there is a lot of investigating and documenting to do, and county
employees likely don't work the holiday and have a long weekend!
This will take some time.
Carol A. Overland
Red Wing, Minnesota, formerly Prestigious East Phillips
Rest of post
On 11/30/2014 3:36 PM, Anderson&Turpin wrote:
> On 11/30/2014 3:14 PM, Ed Fesler wrote:
>> Bulling a vehicle through a crowd is a reckless thing to do. Even if it
was deemed an accident, Jeffrey Rice would have eighty or ninety percent
liability, since both parties are obliged to avoid accidents. He should be
prosecuted.
>>
>> The protestors were illegally blocking trafffic, but that does not
excuse his action. As well as a traffic incident, it was a dangerous
escalation.