Koua Fong Lee was convicted of vehicular homicide.  In 2006 Lee was exiting a freeway when he said his 1996 Toyota Camry accelerated even though he was applying the brake.  He hit the rear of a stopped vehicle, killing two people.  At the time of the impact, he was going between 70 and 90 miles per hour.

Vehicular homicide is a criminal offense.  To win that case, the prosecution was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Lee was at fault.  Lee always maintained that he applied the brakes and tried to stop but his car just wouldn’t stop.

The jury decided he was lying.  They convicted him and the judge sent him to prison for eight years.

Now that Toyota is recalling millions of vehicles, because of unwanted acceleration, his conviction was reviewed.  A judge recently overturned the conviction, letting him out of jail after serving two years.

As an attorney I find this case interesting.  The jury was told at the time to only convict him if they found no reasonable doubt that he was innocent.  He testified at trial that he properly applied the brake and the car accelerated anyway.  The jury obviously decided he was lying and convicted him.

I find this case interesting because the jury likely thought he was lying because he was trying not to be convicted of a crime.  Admittedly, many people will lie to avoid being convicted, especially criminals.  Another reason a person might testify that they are innocent is because they truly are innocent.

As an attorney, I’m convinced that most jurors ignore the judge’s instruction on reasonable doubt.  They figure the prosecutor wouldn’t take it that far unless the defendant truly were guilty.  It’s safer to convict someone than to let them off.

This case should be a wake up call to all jurors.  Each juror has a legal duty to apply the law to the case.  If there is reasonable doubt, the jurors should aquit the defendant, even when doing so may be uncomfortable.