Unfair car accident.

The link goes to the second page of the article.

I might be more believing of the author's viewpoint and analysis of events if he wasn't so blatantly biased and unprofessional (I assume this is a professional journalist, right?).

I have a feeling there's more going on here. Just because one driver is drunk doesn't mean another driver can't be at fault for the accident. I find the reference to myspace "bikini" photos to representing irrelevant grandstanding.

I was hoping for something more along the lines of "18-Wheeler Disintegrates Mini-Cooper!"

Kinda hard to be objective when a dude is facing 21 years in prison for this shit while the girl is facing no charges at all.

Yeah, the guy fled the scene and therefore shouldn't be let off with a slap on his wrist, but even disregarding everything else we've heard about this case Hyundai vs SUV (driven by really drunk rich white girl) coming from behind and failing to stop, and dude in the Hyundai is totally at fault seems very far fetched.

Add to it that this girl has a previous offense on her record for causing an accident because she failed to stop (which recently preceding this accident), not to mention the statistics on drunken teenagers in this country causing accidents, along with everything else and I can totally understand why one wouldn't want to be objective in an article talking about what the author feels is a travesty of justice.

Biased or not, his story seems believable. It would be nice to see some more reporting on this though. Maybe there's evidence about how this guy has, on several occasions, baited drunk rich white girls into rear ending him.

The fact that it's "hard to be objective" is exactly why professionals need to try really hard.

You have not read the police reports. You are not an accident reconstructionist. You have no idea where fault lies. There is no reason for you to jump to conclusions. When someone tells you should be upset, do you automatically become upset?

Largely irrelevant. This is not a case about trustworthiness. The entire accident has probably been forensically reconstructed.

Totally irrelevant.

The fact that you can "totally understand" tells me more about you than it does about the case.

Of course it seems believable. His complete failure to cite concrete facts or police research leaves you no conclusion but to believe him.

Neither have you. Are you sure the author of that article has not? Maybe she has perfectly good reason to be biased, ya know cause' maybe the driver of that other vehicle was in fact a stupid spoiled drunken rich 17 year old girl.

Or maybe not.

I'm not saying I believe the guy is completely innocent...he's not, he fled the scene of an accident, that's reason enough to bring charges against him. 21 years in prison just seems very extreme for an accident in which he could very well not have been at all responsible.

You want objectivity, and yet you're clearly showing your own biases here.

And maybe you can enlighten me, but I fail to see how the driver's previous record is completely irrelevant here, and how statistics are completely irrelevant in the issue of what's believable.

Also, you'd think you would hear comment from the girl's parents and the Sheriff's department if the case was as solid as you think it is. Strange that this one article is all there seems to be.

This Pheonix New Times is an independent, and free publication. Their writer's have apparently "won the Arizona Press Club’s Journalist of the Year award eight out of the past eleven years" if that means anything. You read LA Weekly? I dunno about you, but I never once read LA Weekly expecting objective, un-biased news. They print editorials.

Oh and there's tons of controversy involving the Sheriff of Maricopa County, so it's not just this one biased report.

So yeah, consider me more or less on the side of the biased and unprofessional reporter.