Quote:
Originally Posted by pats fan
... Mr. Littlefield was found NOT guilty of being drunk. It can be your opinion that he was, but you should refrain from stating that he was drunk...
|
Out of sympathy and respect for the individuals and families affected by this collision I will refrain from comment about the original topic under discussion, except for offering my sincerest condolences.
As to your assertion quoted above, it is obvious that you have not read the original court transcript or the opinion of the NH Supreme Court which heard the Littlefield appeal.
I have covered this topic in the past, provided links to the transcripts and posted pertinent passages numerous times. The regular reader is clearly familiar with the evidence I have covered previously.
The jury found ample evidence of Littlefield's impairment by alcohol the night of his crime, and found that intoxication was one of the leading factors that led to his inability to maintain a proper lookout, with death resulting.
On appeal, the Justices of the NH Supreme Court acknowledged that the jury could consider, did consider and rightfully concluded from ample & credible testimony of Littlefield's impairment. That is a matter of fact, not opinion, clearly annotated in both Court decisions.
Littlefield was not found guilty of the higher of the two homicide charges simply because the coward fled the scene and verifiable evidence of the level of his intoxication could not be introduced, for obvious reasons.
Additionally, ample evidence of his intoxication played a significant factor in the awards given during the subsequent civil proceedings.
Mr. Littlefield was intoxicated, a coward and remains a convicted felon for the rest of his life.
Cowardice is the only subject up for debate, but clearly is indicative of my opinion then and now.
Finally, given what little is actually known about the tragedy that just occurred, it is highly inappropriate and extremely irresponsible to be drawing any conclusions or references between the two events.
Skip