Originally Posted by
HawkOwl
Leaving the scene of an injury collision where the person dies is enough for second degree murder Since a piece of his truck was at the scene there is no doubt it and since he and witnesses put him in the truck that should be a slam dunk. In addition he reportedly confessed. Assuming the Troopers properly advised him of his rights, and they very seldom screw that up, he is toast on that charge.
What may or may not have been wise in his case doesn't matter. If reports are correct his BAC can be back tracked. Small, rural communities have an amazing amount of verifiable information about people like this. That will all come to play.
My disappointment is that very seldom, in any city or state, does someone get behind the wheel impaired without someone or someones knowing about it. Way too often citizens fall down on their duty to their fellow humans in letting an impaired person drive. People driving on prescription medications, alcohol, recreational drugs all are involved, sometimes with the same person. People in that person's community know it but do nothing until a disaster occurs. Then they wring their hands and complain.
I very much doubt leaving the scene is enough - by itself - to support a conviction for second degree murder but it's a big crazy world with some crazy laws.
I only read the first link, so I'm not sure of the additional information you are referring to. I didn't see where witnesses placed him in the truck at the time and place of the collision. The fact that he owns the truck is likely not in dispute.
His BAC at the time of the collision cannot be backtracked if he was drinking over several hours between the collision and his arrest. Of that I am fairly sure.
Yes, they can likely connect his truck to the scene and him to the truck, but not every collision is a crime, much less a murder. If there were no witnesses to the incident then it will be hard to prove much beyond the fact of the collision itself.
Of course if he confessed, that changes everything.