I agree that *can* happen, but it is also fairly common that two people are driving, have an accident where the passenger is incapacitated, usually just knocked out, and the driver bolts.
This is why I mentioned the importance of fingerprints (and DNA) on the steering wheel and keys. If it is just his, case closed. If it is someone else’s on top, perhaps a different story.
Then there is another potential twist about how he was shot. If he was shot at the angle of somebody outside the car, on either side, or if he was shot at the angle of somebody sitting in the driver’s seat.
I was rather mystified why none of this got mention during the trial, which solely focused on the father.
Because trials are not about finding the truth. They are a game that lawyers play at their clients expense. The prosecutor does not care about truth. He cares about his conviction record. The defense rarely cares about the client. He will get paid regardless of the outcome. Having no skin in the game means they can play the game risk free.
While our justice system may be the best there is, it fails the people in so many ways.
I agree with you. No witnesses or strong proof, you must acquit the father. Too many strange stories out there of how people got killed. Even fingerprints on a steering wheel aren't proof. Someone can wipe it down, and transfer an incapacitated person's hand to it. The father knows who was in the car after it hit his, so he would be able to confirm it was the single person in it who was later found shot and killed. Whether the father went back and killed the guy, the father isn't going to incriminate himself. You have to acquit. Maybe a transient did it, maybe a friend of the father, no one knows for sure.