Is "too intoxicated" to know the difference between right and wrong really a legitimate defense?
That is what one court is trying to determine in the case of three people already convicted of murder.
One case which is being determined is that of Martin Heidgen, formerly of Valley Stream, who was convicted in 2006 of driving the wrong way, while drunk, on the Meadowbrook Parkway, killing a limousine driver and one of the passengers in the limousine, and injuring five others. He is currently serving 19 year to life in prison.
The other two cases being considered by New York's highest court are another man, who drove drunk on Long Island's Southern State Parkway, and a woman from Staten Island. All three cases resulted in a death.
Defenders of the three may argue that the convicted did not realize that they were either driving the wrong way, or a danger to anyone else. However, we all make choices, most of which do not have deadly consequences.
These three made some very bad choices, which caused other people to lose their lives. "Too intoxicated" is not an excuse for their actions. They have already been convicted, and those convictions should be left standing.
What do you think of the "too intoxicated" defense?