Talk:Vehicular homicide

message: Attn: Uncle G or whoever else, here is a summary of Minnesota's Vehic. Homicide statute. --W.marsh 00:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  sources 

message: There's a whole load of source material about vehicular manslaughter and unborn children, and various courts' views of the matter, at:
* 
* 
However, much of the discussion in the literature is general, and not specific to vehicular manslaughter.  It includes discussion of murder, assault, and other offences and how they are construed with respect to unborn children.  There's probably a better place to discuss the subject of the "born alive" rule than here. Uncle G 12:46, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death of an unborn child 

message: I see nothing wrong with citing examples of "high-profile" people convicted of this crime (as well as "high-profile" people who managed to get off).  Your removal of this item from this page is no more than some odd version of being "politically correct".  So long as the cites are accurate, there is nothing wrong with making lists.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.15.105 (talk • contribs) 
Why is this notable, though? And it seems very politically motivated and biased to list people you think were guilty of it but "got off". There were also no citations, contrary to your claim above. --W.marsh 14:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find any reliable source for Kennedy having been charged with vehicular manslaughter. According to this conspiracy page (which is in itself obviously inappropriate as a source on Wikipedia), he was charged "only with leaving the scene of an accident after causing personal injury." Without a reliable source that he was charged with vehicular homicide, the text as it was may be interpreted as libelous. It's true that there has been wide public perception that Kennedy might have been involved, but "wide public perception" is really just another phrase for gossip, which doesn't belong in Wikipedia. I've removed Kennedy from the article. Please don't reinsert him without proper citations. (Speaking of which, I have added citations for the list of those convicted. This information is potentially quite controversial, and ready citations may be necessary to discourage editors from randomly inserting false accusations.) --Moonriddengirl 16:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples of People Convicted 

message: I changed the sentence, "In states with such statutes, defendants can still be charged with manslaughter or murder in some situations," to read "In states without such statutes…" This seems to be the intent of the paragraph. States have Vehicular Homicide laws to permit "easier conviction and more severe penalties," while those states that do not have such laws can still charge manslaughter or murder. --Mtd2006 (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  In states with versus without 

message: Please remove the section entitled "Famous people who were not convicted but should have been". The information it contains is unverifiable, and the source it references is an unreliable humor website.
Cubs133 (talk) 17:14, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Done elektrikSHOOS 17:33, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Cubs133, 2 October 2010 

message: From the article: A study by professors at Dartmouth College and Harvard University found that those convicted of vehicular homicide are given, on average, shorter sentees than those found unguilty of other types of homicide.
Is that correct? There is a large intersection set, namely those who are convicted of vehicular homicide but no other crime (thus unguilty of other types of homicide). However, if the intended wording was, "(...) those found guilty of other types of homicide", then the intersection set would be much smaller, almost negligibly small. User.Zero.Zero.Zero.One (talk) 09:21, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "Sentencing" section