JACKSON, Minn. (AP) — A judge in southern Minnesota has acquitted a woman of vehicular homicide, ruling prosecutors failed to prove she was behind the wheel in the fatal crash.

The attorney for Lacey Marie White argued the state’s case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence and conjecture and that prosecutors failed to prove she was driving the pickup truck that crashed in Jackson County in October 2007 and killed Michael Unger. Witnesses testified Unger took White’s keys at the Hotel Whiskey near Heron Lake because she was intoxicated.

Jackson County District Attorney Robert O’Connor argued the every person who responded to the scene of the crash saw White behind the wheel. .

The Worthington Daily Globe says District Judge Linda Titus granted the defense motion for acquittal Thursday and dismissed the jury.

(© Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)

Comments (10)
  1. Cache says:

    “every person who responded to the scene of the crash saw White behind the wheel.” This is not a competent real judge this is foolish idiot impersonator…That’s the ticket all witnesses are liars… what does the judge have for brains… Oatmeal?

  2. shirley says:

    Why are there more judges coming back with “prosecutors failed”? I’m sure it makes their job easier, but I can’t help but think about our law enforcement men & women who did their job and ususally the first to arrive at the scene, how this makes them feel? and I question if the judge’s decision would have been deffirent, or if she would have taken a little more time, if Michael Unger were a member of her family?????

  3. 2 Crimes = An Aquittal says:

    Obviously the judge has more respect for the person who took a life than for the person who lost a life. What a shame there is no penalty for taking another’s life.

  4. Roger Wilson says:

    In spite of the afore mentioned comments – the judge does have a point.
    Just because a person is behind the wheel when the vehicle is not moving does not prove beyound a doubt that the same person was behind the wheel when the vehicle was moving.
    One can believe that that is the case, but it has not been proven beyound a shadow of a doubt.
    That is really what the judge has to consider.

  5. wondering says:

    I agree with both of these above comments, but can’t help but think we are missing A LOT of information here.

  6. Chris says:

    The lady that hit the school bus in Cottonwood used the same argument. Even had the passenger dna on the steering wheel. She lost. I think old lady justice’s blindfold may have fallen off.

  7. Pat says:

    the woman who hit the school bus was actually seen driving the van, just before it struck the bus no one needed to wonder afterward. I have been in an accident where the driver and passenger ended up on opposite sides, I thnk the Judge had to let the woman go.

  8. Victim Du Jour says:

    Sounds like Judicial Misconduct, especially with so many witnesses.

    Perhaps it’s bra burner feminist thing, like Ku Klux Klan judges back in the day.

  9. Jake says:

    Maybe she ended up on that side during the crash?

  10. bob says:

    You naysayers need to research the case before you play armchair commentators before you post moronic comments. When you speak it leads one to believe the gene pool needs some to be chlorinated.


    “All witnesses” who saw her at the scene saw her sitting unbuckeled and sideways behind the wheel with her legs and body facing the passenger door.

    In Criminal Court you only need reasonable doubt to have to acquit. There was more than enough in this case. Witnesses testified that he was a responsible person. Who would believe a responibsle, and allegedly sober person, would give HIS keys to an obviously intoxicated person to drive HIS vehicle. It amazing the case made it to trial. Also, HE was the last person seen driving the vehicle

    The death of Michael Unger is a tradegy, There is no doubt abou it. But throwing someone in jail or prison when there is insufficient evidence and/or reasonable doubt is pointless and irresponible.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Watch & Listen LIVE