“This was not reckless driving. This was murder,” the judge said before she read out Mackenzie Shirilla’s verdict Monday afternoon.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
319 points

The reason why they say this was murder:

Two weeks before the crash, she allegedly threatened to crash her vehicle when she was driving with Russo because she was upset over a disagreement they had. Russo called his mother and asked to be picked up, and a friend ended up retrieving him. In a phone call with Russo, the friend allegedly overheard Shirilla say, “I will crash this car right now,” prosecutors said in court documents.

This isn’t a drunk driver, or a thrillseeker, this is someone with murderous intent.

permalink
report
reply
63 points

Considering she was unconscious as well, sounds like it was a murder/suicide attempt.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Sounds more like a mental health issue tbh…

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I agree 100 percent this is a child with some kind of inability to understand the consequences of her actions she should be placed in a care facility until she demonstrates the ability to make proper decision making ability

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Contrary to popular belief, people suffering from mental health issues are more likely to be the victim than perpetrator of violent crimes, more than their healthy counterpart. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.563860/full

She’s just a murderer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points
*

In most US jurisdictions if you’re “just” trying to commit a felony, like purposely crashing your car at 100+ MPH (160+ KPH) to cause grievous bodily harm to others, and someone dies as a result that’s automatically elevated to murder.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

It’ll depend on the jurisdiction. But ‘intent’ for murder does not mean “pre-planned”. Heat of the moment intention to do serious harm is enough for a murder conviction in the UK (and, I believe, the US).

In this case, the prosecution accused her of pre-planning as well as intent, and the jury agreed with one or both arguments.

Russo, the judge, delivered a scalding description of the case before she read out the verdict, saying Shirilla had a “mission” she executed with “precision” that fateful day — and “the mission was death.”

“The [crash] video clearly shows the purpose and intent of the defendant. She chose a course of death and destruction that day,” Russo said.

“She morphs from a responsible driver to literal hell on wheels as she makes her way down the street,” Russo said, saying Shirilla made a calculated decision to drive that morning, when not many people would be around, on an obscure route she did not routinely take.

Prosecutor Michael O’Malley told NBC affiliate WKYC of Cleveland that the crash video was damning, saying, “The intent was obvious upon seeing that video that there was only one goal.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I recently read that a 70mph accident is considered “unsurvivable.” Regrettably I don’t recall the source. Because people survive accidents that happen on 70mph speed limit highways all the time, I assume two things. 1. That the accident has to happen AT 70mph. And that 2, most people are able to slow down or perhaps the vehicle hits something first, glancing blow, that sort of thing, which brings the speed down, making it more survivable. So yeah, I think that makes 100mph suicide/murder.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Murder laws can vary by country.

She murdered two people with the intent to at least cause significant harm. That’s enough on the state she was in, thank God. She deserves life in prison.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-32 points

Sounds more like a suicide/self harm thing to me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
74 points
*

When you include an unconsenting person in the attempt, it is also murder.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Not a lawyer, but even if they consent isn’t it murder?

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

It sounds much more like an abusive relationship. She was trying to punish him, regardless of the risk to herself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-47 points

…no, no, no… only WOMEN can be in abusive relationships.

At least that is the utter bullshit you would believe if you listened to the feminist/white knight rhetoric out there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

If you attempt to kill yourself and take other people with you, it’s commonly called murder/suicide. Killing people with intent is usually murder.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

A woman kills family then kills self. Is it murder!!! Oh. No, just self-harm.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

That’s not exactly what has happened here and derailing it using emotional hyperbole won’t help either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

If you’re trying to kill others along with you, it’s not just suicide, it’s also murder.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-30 points

This is why suicidal people are dangerous, it’s a relatively small change from killing yourself, to killing others.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

This is why pastry chefs are dangerous, it’s a relatively small change from baking your bread, to baking others.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

@ryathal @agressivelyPassive

Have suicidal ideation is in no way, shape or form the same as being the perpetrator of a murder-suicide. Neither is being suicidal a lead-in to becoming a murderer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

What a ridiculous take.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

No there may be a small chance of collateral damage, such as this case. But suicidal thinking does not make you think of killing others. You’re clearly lucky enough to have never had suicidal ideation, but it never comes near the kind of thoughts that want to kill others

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

If you feel that way, you might be the dangerous one

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Now this is just plain stupidity

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I have a relative who was recently given a DUI.

They went to the store, sober, and bought a handle of vodka (1.75 liters) consumed the vast majority, and drove around.

He wanted to die in a head on collision. Selfish fuck.

I don’t have a problem with people having the freedom to decide enough is enough, but don’t harm others in the process, at least more so than the death would cause. Especially innocent unrelated people.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 524K

    Comments