Mallard gets 50 years for windshield death

Pliablemoose

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
25,195
0
56
Star Telegram

Mallard gets 50 years for windshield death

10 years assessed for evidence tampering

By Melody McDonald and Deanna Boyd

Fort Worth Star-Telegram

FORT WORTH _ Chante Mallard was sentenced this afternoon to 50 years in prison for hitting a homeless man on a freeway and then leaving him to die lodged in her windshield.

The jury that convicted her of murder in less than an hour Thursday deliberated about two hours and 45 minutes in recommending the punishment that Judge James Wilson accepted for the 27-year-old nurse's aide.

She also was sentenced to 10 years for her guilty plea for tampering with evidence. The sentence will run concurrently with the murder sentence.

Prosecutors in their closing arguments argued for the maximum life sentence while defense attorneys pleaded for compassion and mercy.

Prosecutor Christy Jack, who tried the case with Richard Alpert and Miles Brissette, urged jurors to sentence Mallard to the maximum, telling them that "killing Gregory Biggs was simply a bump in the road of her life."

She urged them not to buy into Mallard's claim that things would have been different had she not taken half a tablet of Ecstasy on that night in October 2001.

"It would be easy to say this was an Ecstasy-induced fluke; this was a one-time crime never to repeat itself," Jack said.

But what she did in the weeks and months after the killing spoke volumes, Jack said.

"She continued to drink, she continued to do drugs," Jack said. "Not just a little bit. All the time. Morning, noon and night she smoked dope. ... It was life as usual. When did she do the right thing? When did she call police? When did she do anything different? It was not the Ecstasy."

She asked the jury to imagine what Biggs was thinking as he lay in Mallard's car feeling the warm liquid of his blood.

"Do you think he wondered, 'What did I ever do in my whole life to deserve to die like this?'" Jack said.

In his final summation, defense attorney Jeff Kearney, who was working with Reagan Wynn, asked jurors not to give up on Mallard, but rather, administer "justice tempered with mercy."

He said Mallard was truly remorseful about her actions, accepted responsibility for killing Biggs and wanted to be punished.

He reminded jurors that she had been a good student and a hard worker who came from a supportive, loving family.

He said there is nothing in Mallard's background to suggest she would ever be a future danger to society.

"There is so much good left in her," Kearney said. "Yes, she did get off track in her life and, God knows, she is sorry for it."

He said the only dirt that prosecutors, with all of their power and money, could dig up on Mallard was that she smoked marijuana and drank.

"Smoking marijuana and possessing marijuana is a Class B Misdemeanor in this state," Kearney said, explaining that was only one step above a traffic ticket.

"There's a whole lot of people that we all know that have done that in their life and they're not horrible people," Kearney said.

Kearney reminded jurors about all of Mallard's family members, friends and acquaintances who testified that they were willing to look out for her and keep her life on track.

"I can tell you, and I think you know it, she will never, never, ever go down that path again," Kearney said. "She will not be in that situation again. She has so much support to catch her if you'll just let her be caught. Please don't destroy another life."

In his closing, prosecutor Alpert agreed that Mallard had a loving family who raised her well and with good values. But, he said, Mallard rejected them, entered a life of selfishness and almost got away with murder.

He told the jury to send a message so that no one will ever dare "gamble with another's life."

"Look within yourself and find the moral fiber that you have _ and she clearly lacks," Alpert said.

At least she'll be too old to make babies by the time she gets out, she must serve a minimum of 25 years of the sentence.
 

Pliablemoose

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
25,195
0
56
She asked the jury to imagine what Biggs was thinking as he lay in Mallard's car feeling the warm liquid of his blood.

"Do you think he wondered, 'What did I ever do in my whole life to deserve to die like this?'"

No sh1t...
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
She deserved to get punished but if she could have been an active member of society (good student) this seems a bit hard. She shouldnt' have taken drugs and should take responsibility but still, she was on ectasy. I think this is a bit too harsh. Ten years plus mandatory drug testing, etc would have been better.
 

Pliablemoose

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
25,195
0
56
Originally posted by: Infohawk
She deserved to get punished but if she could have been an active member of society (good student) this seems a bit hard. She shouldnt' have taken drugs and should take responsibility but still, she was on ectasy. I think this is a bit too harsh. Ten years plus mandatory drug testing, etc would have been better.

She hit a guy, left him in the windshield, allowed him to die in her garage, then covered up the crime?

The reason she got such a stiff sentence wasn't so much that it happened, but what she did to conceal it. Had she pulled over and waited for EMS/police she would have gotten a wrist slap, and the victim may not have died.

I want you on my jury.
 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
She deserved to get punished but if she could have been an active member of society (good student) this seems a bit hard. She shouldnt' have taken drugs and should take responsibility but still, she was on ectasy. I think this is a bit too harsh. Ten years plus mandatory drug testing, etc would have been better.

Complete BS. She should have gotten life.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Was she still on drugs when she did all that?

And she got 50 years for the death; and 10 years for the coverup. I'm thinking she deserved less for the death (given the intoxication). It just seems like she wouldn't be a repeat offender and could contribute to society.
 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Was she still on drugs when she did all that?

And she got 50 years for the death; and 10 years for the coverup. I'm thinking she deserved less for the death (given the intoxication). It just seems like she wouldn't be a repeat offender and could contribute to society.

So she shouldn't get a stronger penility because she used drugs. Does that also go for DWI? I mean I was drunk how was I supposed to know I ran over a person and he is installed in my windshield.
 

BigJ

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
21,330
1
81
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Was she still on drugs when she did all that?

And she got 50 years for the death; and 10 years for the coverup. I'm thinking she deserved less for the death (given the intoxication). It just seems like she wouldn't be a repeat offender and could contribute to society.

The article said she continued to smoke and drink heavily after the incident. Also she got 10 years for tampering with evidence, which was only part of the covering up. Not letting anyone know about it for months and getting high and drunk all the time doesn't seem like contributing much to society, nor making an active effort to right her wrongs.

Should we have lighter sentences for drunk drivers that kill people also?
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Killing someone while driving under the influence should get a smaller penalty than just plain old killing someone.
 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Killing someone while driving under the influence should get a smaller penalty than just plain old killing someone.

And she did get a lighter sentance then other types of murder.
 

BigJ

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
21,330
1
81
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Killing someone while driving under the influence should get a smaller penalty than just plain old killing someone.

To a certain degree, yes. For example, pre-meditated murder should carry a harsher sentence then under the influence. But for example, if you kill someone accidentally not under the influence (i.e. manslaughter), it should not have a harsher penalty

You make an active decision to put yourself under the influence of drugs/alcohol and know that you should be responsible when using them. If you're that irresponsible to put yourself behind the wheel of a car, an extremely deadly weapon, and then kill someone as a result of it, you are no longer fit to have a place in society.

Would she have killed the man if she had never taken the tablet of E? Probably not.

Personally I don't care if you drop acid, E, shoot up, whatever. At least be responsible in doing so.
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,060
1
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Killing someone while driving under the influence should get a smaller penalty than just plain old killing someone.


This was an accident after all, she just reacted very poorly. :(

id give her manslughter, criminal negligence, and whatever you can slap her with for the coverup. I would say that 10-15 years would be fair, plus mandatory drug testing for life.

I don't think 50 + 10 is fair for something that was not malicious.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Infohawk
She deserved to get punished but if she could have been an active member of society (good student) this seems a bit hard. She shouldnt' have taken drugs and should take responsibility but still, she was on ectasy. I think this is a bit too harsh. Ten years plus mandatory drug testing, etc would have been better.

Jeez man, this whacko Druggie is a menace to not just Society but herself as well.

Let's see if she is debilitated enough in some 30 years down the road but I doubt it, once a druggie usually stay a druggie. Same with cigarettes etc, there are some exceptions but it is not the rule.

 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
This was an accident after all, she just reacted very poorly. :(

id give her manslughter, criminal negligence, and whatever you can slap her with for the coverup. I would say that 10-15 years would be fair, plus mandatory drug testing for life.

I don't think 50 + 10 is fair for something that was not malicious.

Right. And if she reacted very poorly based on her intoxication I think it's even less malicious.

I'm all for throwing the key away for repeat offenders and people that display a certain heinousness (and I'm talking child rape / torture -- not covering up a crime). But this case seems to a large degree to be a really bad mistake that's worth 10 years of her life. That would definitely teach her a lesson.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Infohawk
She deserved to get punished but if she could have been an active member of society (good student) this seems a bit hard. She shouldnt' have taken drugs and should take responsibility but still, she was on ectasy. I think this is a bit too harsh. Ten years plus mandatory drug testing, etc would have been better.

Jeez man, this whacko Druggie is a menace to not just Society but herself as well.

Let's see if she is debilitated enough in some 30 years down the road but I doubt it, once a druggie usually stay a druggie. Same with cigarettes etc, there are some exceptions but it is not the rule.

This is going to come off as a bit classist / racist but lots of kids take e these days and it's not like it's heroine. I don't know much about the case but it struck me more as a youthful intoxication than as a hardcore drug addict.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Infohawk
She deserved to get punished but if she could have been an active member of society (good student) this seems a bit hard. She shouldnt' have taken drugs and should take responsibility but still, she was on ectasy. I think this is a bit too harsh. Ten years plus mandatory drug testing, etc would have been better.

Jeez man, this whacko Druggie is a menace to not just Society but herself as well.

Let's see if she is debilitated enough in some 30 years down the road but I doubt it, once a druggie usually stay a druggie. Same with cigarettes etc, there are some exceptions but it is not the rule.

This is going to come off as a bit classist / racist but lots of kids take e these days and it's not like it's heroine. I don't know much about the case but it struck me more as a youthful intoxication than as a hardcore drug addict.

I'm against the wasteful War on Drugs, it does not work just like the Nanny State approach to most things, however if Drug Users see the consequences of other idiots actions maybe they would keep more to themselves and be less of a threat to Society.

In other words, fine, this girl could do her drugs but she never should gotten behind the wheel.


 

Pliablemoose

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
25,195
0
56
Originally posted by: miketheidiot

I don't think 50 + 10 is fair for something that was not malicious.

The malicious components were:

Leaving the scene of the accident with a live, talking human jammed in her windshield
Opening her garage door
driving the car in
closing the garage door
allowing a mortally wounded person to die in her garage
having friends help her dispose of the body

 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
And during which one of those events was she intoxicated and not knowing what she was doing?
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
And during which one of those events was she intoxicated and not knowing what she was doing?

She already got a reduced sentence for the intoxication excuse (notice that intoxication is not a defense).

What more do you want?
 

Aegeon

Golden Member
Nov 2, 2004
1,809
125
106
Originally posted by: Infohawk
And during which one of those events was she intoxicated and not knowing what she was doing?

This is a big question. The key is that evidence from the case that I saw showed that the guy didn't die immediately. As far as I have read, there were hours in which she could have sought medical attention for the man and probably saved him. In other words there hours in which the drug and the alchohol could start to wear off, and she still didn't seek medical attention for the man during this period. Its not as simple as saying she couldn't reason on what to do due to the drugs.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: Infohawk
And during which one of those events was she intoxicated and not knowing what she was doing?

She already got a reduced sentence for the intoxication excuse (notice that intoxication is not a defense).

What more do you want?

Like I said, a shorter sentence.


Aegeon, how long does it take for ecstasy to wear off?
 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: Infohawk
And during which one of those events was she intoxicated and not knowing what she was doing?

She already got a reduced sentence for the intoxication excuse (notice that intoxication is not a defense).

What more do you want?

Like I said, a shorter sentence.


Aegeon, how long does it take for ecstasy to wear off?

Are you sure. Maybe we should tell her to just say no and stop next time she runs down a bum. How about just let her go with a fine?
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Originally posted by: Spencer278
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: Infohawk
And during which one of those events was she intoxicated and not knowing what she was doing?

She already got a reduced sentence for the intoxication excuse (notice that intoxication is not a defense).

What more do you want?

Like I said, a shorter sentence.


Aegeon, how long does it take for ecstasy to wear off?

Are you sure. Maybe we should tell her to just say no and stop next time she runs down a bum. How about just let her go with a fine?

:roll: Yes, because I said I think she deserves a shorter sentence I really mean I want her to be let off the hook completely.