Legal Nuance in Vehicular Homicide Cases: "So the jury said, look, we think the prosecutor has proved all the elements of drunk driving, meaning operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or operating the motor vehicle with a prohibited blood alcohol content. But we don't think that the prosecutor proved the actual homicide or the murder or the death component of it." - Steve Palmer

The Karen Reed case. It's a story that’s captured national attention and is even featured in a new Netflix series. I’ll break down the legal details behind the jury’s decision: why Karen Reed was acquitted of manslaughter but still found guilty of DUI. Drawing on my own experience as a defense attorney, I explain how “lesser included offenses” played a role and why this outcome is such a big win for the defense.

Whether you’re a legal enthusiast or just trying to get a handle on what actually happened, I walk you through the key elements of this fascinating, headline-making case.

My Key Takeaways:

• Lesser Included Offense Explained: The jury found Karen Reed guilty of drunk driving but not guilty of manslaughter. This distinction arose because, although the prosecution proved she was driving under the influence, they didn’t prove she caused the death—a classic application of the “lesser included offense” principle.
• Impact on Sentencing: Being acquitted of the more serious charge meant avoiding felony prison time, leaving only the DUI conviction, something far less severe from a sentencing standpoint.
• Jury Decision Dynamics: The outcome emphasizes how disputed evidence (such as whether the accused caused harm) and the prosecution’s burden of proof can result in nuanced verdicts that significantly change a client’s future.

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2025 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

Mentioned in this episode:

Circle 270 Media Podcast Consultants

Circle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

All right, Steve Palmer here, lawyer talk, breakdown of the Karen Reed case. I'm not going to totally break it down, but because I think there's been a lot of other attention to this. There's a whole Netflix series on the first trial. And of course, obviously they elected to retry her after a mistrial. But what I wanted to talk about today was the verdict itself and how it works and what happened. Because Karen Reid was acquitted, meaning found not guilty of manslaughter. And this was up in Boston, and under the code up there in Massachusetts, they would charge it as manslaughter. And the manslaughter was premised upon Reid's or the accusation that Reid, I think, was driving under the influence of alcohol, and that resulted in a manslaughter charge.

So here in Ohio, where I practice Palmer legal defense, check us out, we have something called ag vehicular manslaughter, aggravated vehicular assault. And basically what it is, you're driving a car, you cause somebody harm or damage, you hurt somebody or kill somebody while driving, if you're under the influence of alcohol or you have a prohibited blood alcohol content, meaning they take your blood and it's above the legal limit while you did that, that becomes an enhanced charge, as it should be, of course, and I don't think anybody would disagree with that. But this is sort of unique because what happens is Reid is accused of killing, I think, her. Then was it her fiance, boyfriend, whatever, while under the influence of alcohol and driving. And there was a lot of different dispute about whether she backed into this guy and ran him over, left him to die, whatever the scenario would have been, there was some disputed evidence there. And, you know, here's what's interesting. The jury actually found her guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol or the DUI component of it, but not guilty of the manslaughter component of it. And I read some of these articles and they're like some lesser version or lesser whatever.

And I thought I would just break this down because really what the jury did, they found her guilty of a lesser included offense. But it's sort of an odd scenario. So let's say the standard run of the mill vehicular homicide case with alcohol, you know, it's like you would see, you could maybe make an argument that my client. I could maybe make an argument my client wasn't under the influence at the time, for whatever reason, the prosecutor didn't prove it, and that component of the case would go out and the death component might still be there with a Different charge, but here it was sort of flipped around because I think there was an issue about whether she actually ran into this guy and actually killed this guy as a result of driving. So you had the homicide portion of it, and within that charge were the elements of a drunk driving case. And that is what we would call a lesser included offense. So the jury said, look, we think the prosecutor has proved all the elements of drunk driving, meaning operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or operating the motor vehicle with a prohibited blood alcohol content. But we don't think that the prosecutor proved the actual homicide or the murder or the death component of it.

So a lesser included offense technically works this way. A lesser included offense means all the elements of the lesser offense are contained in the bigger offense. And if they only prove those, well, you can find somebody guilty of that, but not the bigger one. And then sometimes what happens is we say it's a. A felonious assault case here in Ohio which says no person shall knowingly cause or attempt to cause serious physical harm to somebody else. There's other ways you can do it, but for our purposes, that's good enough. And I go to trial arguing, look, there's not serious physical harm, but only physical harm. So it was a simple assault.

So felonious assault in Ohio is a higher level felony. Regular assault is just a misdemeanor. And the misdemeanor variety in Ohio doesn't have this serious physical harm component. But. But all the other elements are the same. Therefore, if I go to trial and the prosecutor doesn't prove serious physical harm and only like a bruise or a black eye, well, my client could be convicted of the misdemeanor offense. That's the true lesser included offense. So it's sort of interesting how the jury came back with this.

They apparently said, look, we think Reid was drunk, we think Reed was driving, but we don't agree that the prosecutor proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she caused the death or actually committed the manslaughter case. So they acquitted her on just the drunk driving component. Reid is, of course, ecstatic. Why? Because that's hard. You know, that's a. I don't want to say that getting convicted of drunk driving is anything to celebrate, but if it's that or go to prison on felonies, it's a heck of a lot better. You know, in Ohio, you go to a three day program and you have a license suspension for a year and maybe a fine, but it's certainly not a felony, it's certainly not prison. Unless you do it a lot.

So Reed is celebrating. That's a big win for her. A big win for the defense team. Congratulations. I do defense work, so I get to say that. Anyway, lawyer talk podcast, breaking it down, Karen Reed style. Off the air, on the record, on the record, off the air till now.