Imagine the possibilities if young Timothy is successful with this defense.
Timothy Bakdash intends to argue he was intoxicated when prosecutors say he drove his car into a University of Minnesota student, his attorney said Thursday.
Bakdash 29, of Roseville, goes on trial Nov. 14 in the April hit-and-run death of Benjamin Van Handel, 23, of Appleton, Wis..
To win a conviction for first-degree murder, prosecutors must prove he intended to kill. But defense attorney Joe Tamburino said Bakdash had been drinking and lacked the ability to form the intent needed under the law to be convicted of the charge.
"The alcohol a person consumed affects their ability to form intent," he said.
The drunk driving defense:
"So sorry, occifer, but as you can clearly see I am drunk. Therefore, I lacked the ability to form the intent needed to be convicted of drunk driving."
The criminal mischief defense:
"I'm sorry, your honor. My friends and I were incredibly drunk when we tackled that Ronald McDonald statue, broke it off at the ankles, stuffed it in our trunk and paraded it around town. We lacked the ability to come to the reasonable conclusion that this was somewhat illegal...you know, because of all of the alcohol we drank."
On second thought, that last one could never happen...except, perhaps, in Canada.