>>>120241
>Short of a manifesto written in blood, I don’t think VA law will support conviction. Even manslaughter could be reduced to reckless driving, given EMTs actions caught on tape.
It's not that outrageous. Prosecutors always charge up as high as possible because of the concept of "lesser included offense," which means that the jury must consider every level of the type of crime under the highest charged offense. This is a homicide case (so-called), so when the homicide is charged as first degree, the jury must consider 2nd deg, vol man, invol man, criminally negligent homicide/extreme indifference (however VA code is written). Consider two strangers meeting, arguing, fighting, and one ends up dying. The fact that they were strangers precludes a first degree charge ipso facto - i.e., premeditation impossible. Short of that, however, so long as some fact pattern could demonstrate premeditation it's not misconduct to bring the charge.
>Proofing guy drove to VA with intent to kill protesters is a stretch. Not sure if evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt that his car hit her & caused injuries that resulted in her death. Defense would need just one expert to say EMTs or people on scene performed inappropriate first aid/CPR or video showing no impact from car.
Obviously it would need to be established that he hit her (I don't think he did, and I further don't think he was even behind the wheel of the car (patsy) - but that will never be discussed therefore I'm working on the mainstream version of events), but usually common law holds that if you cause the initial injury and that injury is foreseeably exacerbated by an intervening act of a third party, they initial party is culpable for the aggravation of the injuries.
That's my view as a non-VA attorney, but in states I have practiced these principles are fairly uniform.