Lake Park man found guilty of vehicular homicide

Full story: WDAY 19
A Becker County jury convicted a Lake Park man of criminal vehicular homicide. After 7 hours of deliberation jurors decided that Jeremy Nelson is guilty for causing an accident that killed another man back in August of 2008. Read more
laurie

Buffalo, MN

#1 Mar 9, 2010
Jeremy Nelson did not recieve a fair trial. Clay County prosecuter Brian Melton withheld DNA evidence and at least 10 other instances of evidence manipulation. Many witnesses were told what they could or could not say before raising their right hand and swearing to tell the truth. One witness that gave Chris Carlson a ride home and told him to stay there was told he could not say he appeared intoxicated, he was then asked how he appeared when he walked up to the house and was unable to tell the truth. Evidence of Carlsons Blood Alcohol level ,.15, was not disclosed to the jury. Also many witnesses that had said in earlier depositions Carlson was heavily intoxicated and acting wild and unstable were told they could not elude to that behavior in any way. Women who kicked him out of a moving van and were scared when he drove around their cabin on his four-wheeler were not allowed to testify. It is unclear if the family has ties to the judge or prosecuter but every measure was taken to convict an innocent man. Nelson was said to show no signs of impairment by the same witnesses, with a Blood Alcohol level of.05. Nelson encountered the four-wheeler in the middle of the road after rounding a ninety degree corner, he swerved to avoid hitting Carlson on the atv but Carlson then pulled in front of him in the ditch. Nelson had head injurys and serious shock and does not recall much after the crash. Any evidence of shock or trauma was not disclosed to the jury, witnesses that testified were not allowed to say the words shock, trauma,confused, or anything to that end. The jury had no choice but to convict with the evidence they were given. Nelson will be senteced on March 31 for an accident he risked his life to avoid.
Rocky

Tulsa, OK

#2 Mar 21, 2010
If what you say is true, this fellow surely did not get a fair trial. You can't leagally tell witness what they saw or heard of their own accord.
Witnesses take an oath to tell the truth.
Jen

Barnesville, MN

#3 Mar 22, 2010
Laurie, you couldn't of put it better. Jeremy does not deserve this guilty verdict. He could face up to 4 years in prison for something that is basically a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Chris Carlson was driving his ATV heavily intoxicated, illegally on a highway with his lights off. But yet the jury still found Jeremy guilty, for what?! Because he had a few drinks that night? In no way was he drunk. The officers who responded to the scene that night immediately said Jeremy had fled the scene. They didn't bother to look for Jeremy, who could have been laying in the corn field unconscious. But instead, they pointed everything to it being all his fault. Whether the family of the deceased has ties to the judge or not, this trial was wrong from the start. The public knows this, the families know this, and the judge knows this. Is this really what our judicial system has turned into? Are we really allowing jurys to convict and lock up people on their own personal feelings and not on facts? It breaks my heart... Jeremy will have to live with this the rest of his life. Will sending him to prison or jail make him a better man? The answer is no... we all just need to pray, cross our fingers that on March 31 Judge Irvine recognizes that the guilty verdict was pure 'speculation' and keeps Jeremy home! After everything he's been through, he deserves that much!
Charlie

Vergas, MN

#4 Mar 30, 2010
Apparently the deceased was related to the Becker County sheriff. Why was nothing of the victims negligence in being on the county road illegally, highly intoxicated and with no lights at 3A.M. allowed to be taken into consideration? The only scenario that seems at all reasonable is Jeremy rounded the corner and no differently than a deer jumping out of nowhere the ATV was there and he swerved to avoid an accident and the ATV swerved to the same side causing the tragedy.
Charlie

Vergas, MN

#5 Mar 30, 2010
I talked to two friends of jurors who had told them they were uncomfortable with the conclusion they were cornered into. Maybe if all the facts were disclosed the jurors would have reached a different decision. It was apparent the judge was biased to the victim by what he allowed or didnt allow to be brought up. There was at least one juror who felt like they maybe shouldnt have been on the jury in the first place because they knew the family. If another juror worked at same place as victim possibly he shouldnt have served either.
A new true friend

Fargo, ND

#6 Mar 31, 2010
I just had the pleasure of meeting Jeremy and his mom and have heard many things that are distrubing to me about the whole case from others who have been watching it. I myself have a few friends that are officers and my dad. One thing they all have said is that Jeremy wasn't even given a chance in court. I do agree that it was one sided and no one wanted to hear his side "the truth". I also know that living in small communities people side with eachother and don't care who it hurts when the truth could kick them in the face. I am praying that someone will hear their plea for the truth and give Jeremy a chance to live outside of prison because he will live with this forever and thats enough of a sentence.
anyone

Saint Cloud, MN

#7 Mar 31, 2010
This is just a bad deal all around. I don't know as much about the case as others but I feel sorry for the families of both parties. Having known both idividuals, their roles that night could have easily been reversed. It sounds like they both made some bad decisions and unfortunately it resulted in the death of Chris. I do wonder why Jeremy waited so long to contact the police? If you were involved in an accident, or came upone one doesn't that seem like the logical thing to do? I also wonder if he would have plead guilty to a charge, would his sentence be less than the 4yrs he got? It's a terrible situation and I hope it doesn't tear the small town apart.
Robert

Felton, MN

#8 Apr 1, 2010
The verdict is in, and once again the judge has orchestrated the entire show including his own version of the events of the tragic accident. Which I felt was uncalled for. I listened to the same evidence as everyone else and cannot believe, or accept the outcome! Fair trial? I don't believe so.
There were so many unanswered questions. Why were witnesses being instructed on what they couldn't say? I thought they were to tell the whole truth! Why the time following the accident was not discussed.(2:50am-3:42am) Why no discussion of head trama and shock. Why no discussion of the vehicle proceeding on its own after impact? The evidence showed me the vehicle had a broken right front tie rod which 'steered' it back accross the road leaving the only skid marks shown by photos. It would have done that while the driver was unconsious from the airbag deployment blasting him "out of the saddle" and into the roof or center post!? Thus, no braking, no acceleration, no driving involved!? 90mph? Come on! He made a right hand turn on a righthand curve going downhill?!?
Beyond a reasonable doubt? I don't think so. Fair trial? I don't think so. Retrial or appeal? I think it's required.
Tracey

Fargo, ND

#9 Apr 1, 2010
Laurie's comments above were right on target --- I couldn't have said it better. It is so very unfortunate that this ACCIDENT happened or any accident happens for that matter. Every day people must face decisions in their lives that could change it forever. What I find to be completely ludicrous is how this trial was handled. My belief of the judicial system had always been "innocent until proven guilty", yet this statement is definitely lacking in the political legal arena from what I witnessed in attending this trial. I am still not quite sure how a jury can make an informed decision when they weren't provided with all the facts/evidence (e.g. Jeremy's shock, trauma; Chris' blood alcohol level as well as his prior events of the evening, etc., etc.). I guess it would be somewhat difficult to do this when the Judge has told the witnesses to exclude certain information from their testimony or they would be held in contempt of court. When sworn in don't we agree to "tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God?" It appeared the Judge took on the role of God. Yet, as I sat in the courtroom listening, I am still not sure how the jury reached their verdict when Mr. Carlson was also responsible for this accident by illegally driving an ATV on a main roadway without lights or reflective gear while highly intoxicated. There is no way that corner could have been driven at 80-90mph for this accident to unfold like it did. Not possible!!! Were you all sleeping (oh yeah there was one jury member who was sleeping)? This accident was definitely a no win situation for either family, but what I find as a parent, to be a thorn in my side, is the Carlson family condemning Jeremy for taking no responsibility or for not being accountable, yet they are taking NO "responsibility or accountability" for Chris' actions in this horrific accident. To "Anyone from St. Cloud" --- if all evidence would have been admissible in the courtroom and Jeremy's Psychologist allowed to testify, the answer to your question would have been answered. Unfortunately, this being a big key in how trauma unfolds (as everyone is different) this piece of the puzzle, as well as many others, were left in the box for speculation by others.
GLS

Wolverton, MN

#10 Apr 29, 2010
what good does it do,to try post the truth. the paper will not post it. I sure can understand,the importance for them to get the facts out. If your not going to post my opinion, i want my letter back.
GLS

Wolverton, MN

#11 Apr 29, 2010
the trial on Jeremy Nelson,was the worst trial,I know of. It was totally in favor of the plaintiff 1oo percent. The Preceding Judge Irving, would not allow any evidence from,or about the plaintiff. Your instructed to tell the truth,the hole truth,so help you, God. How is a fair trial accomplished when all evidence is withheld. It's a real SAD SAD situation. The word of this catastrophic trail, will be spread, as many places, as we can possibly cover.
amik

Detroit Lakes, MN

#12 May 11, 2010
Welcome to the lying Becker County Court House. From the police officers, prosecuting attorneys, and judges. Wow I hope one day somebody fills out forms to the State of Minnesota Court of appeals and gets them all in trouble. No juror can be put on the panel that knows family members. I hope Jeremy goes to the supreme courts with this. Yes, the victims alcohol level should have been in consideration. Prosecuting Attorneys should lose their bars, and Judges should too. This place is unbelievable when supposedly their is a fair trial.
amik

Detroit Lakes, MN

#13 May 11, 2010
Retrial for sure, fair hearing go for it. Somebody needs to get the transcript from the dates of the court hearing and send them to a civil rights laywer. A juror who knows the victim on the panel. Becker County as a whole needs a wake up call, suit the whole department of justice down there.
Robert wrote:
The verdict is in, and once again the judge has orchestrated the entire show including his own version of the events of the tragic accident. Which I felt was uncalled for. I listened to the same evidence as everyone else and cannot believe, or accept the outcome! Fair trial? I don't believe so.
There were so many unanswered questions. Why were witnesses being instructed on what they couldn't say? I thought they were to tell the whole truth! Why the time following the accident was not discussed.(2:50am-3:42am) Why no discussion of head trama and shock. Why no discussion of the vehicle proceeding on its own after impact? The evidence showed me the vehicle had a broken right front tie rod which 'steered' it back accross the road leaving the only skid marks shown by photos. It would have done that while the driver was unconsious from the airbag deployment blasting him "out of the saddle" and into the roof or center post!? Thus, no braking, no acceleration, no driving involved!? 90mph? Come on! He made a right hand turn on a righthand curve going downhill?!?
Beyond a reasonable doubt? I don't think so. Fair trial? I don't think so. Retrial or appeal? I think it's required.
amik

Detroit Lakes, MN

#14 May 11, 2010
Yes pleading guilty does give you less time. It is called a plea bargain. But also on your record for life. A person should go all the way. Guilty until proven guilty, Jeremy was not the whole fault of this incident. There is not enough evidence of who was at fault. Yes it is a bad deal one dead and one injured and sentenced to 4 years. Jeremy also has to live with the death of someone else, too. Accidents do happen. Today nobody can have an accident there always has to be somebody to blame.
anyone wrote:
This is just a bad deal all around. I don't know as much about the case as others but I feel sorry for the families of both parties. Having known both idividuals, their roles that night could have easily been reversed. It sounds like they both made some bad decisions and unfortunately it resulted in the death of Chris. I do wonder why Jeremy waited so long to contact the police? If you were involved in an accident, or came upone one doesn't that seem like the logical thing to do? I also wonder if he would have plead guilty to a charge, would his sentence be less than the 4yrs he got? It's a terrible situation and I hope it doesn't tear the small town apart.
amik

Detroit Lakes, MN

#15 May 11, 2010
good one. I hope it said Get rid of Judge Irving, a judge cannot withhold all the evidence from the jurors. He hasn't been going by the laws since he has been a judge.
GLS wrote:
what good does it do,to try post the truth. the paper will not post it. I sure can understand,the importance for them to get the facts out. If your not going to post my opinion, i want my letter back.
Fahq u

Detroit Lakes, MN

#16 Jan 19, 2011
He did it worthless drunk dont forget it I nm o jermey he was a piece of shit he got what he deserved
REPLY2SPELLINGWI ZZ

Moorhead, MN

#17 Jan 20, 2011
....this story drastically changed from when the state's investigator was out at the scene following the accident & stated he thought Nelson may've been driving 60-65 MPH. That's quite a jump from 60 to 90 MPH! The events that occurred after the impact are all speculation due to the fact that Nelson, due to trauma & shock, has no recollection of anything until waking up in a cornfield & finding the closest home to ask to use a phone, not knowing how he had arrived there. Nelson was immediately transported to the closest medical facility & contacted the local police in transit after being told of the accident. Nelson & family were told immediately, by legal council, to not discuss anything with anyone & to not have any contact with the Carlson family. Nelson asked to go to the funeral & was told, by legal council; not to. Nelson asked if he could at least send a card & was told by legal council; not to. Nelson asked to simply call Carlson's mother & father & was told by legal council; not to. Jeremy is a good person. Chris was also a good person. Jeremy will feel remorse for eternity. THIS WAS A TRAGIC ACCIDENT! Each member of the Carlson family stood up in the courtroom & blamed Jeremy for the entirety of this ACCIDENT,(it's too bad that they were not aware of the facts). WHAT FOOLS DO THEY LOOK LIKE NOW!
REPLY2SPELLINGWI ZZ

Moorhead, MN

#18 Jan 20, 2011
(Part 1. of previous statement)
MAYBE DO SOME RESEARCH OF THE ACCIDENT (PELICAN RAPIDS). But I am sure that you have done so, being as you must have quite a bit of extra time on your hands being as though it is quite apparent, by your spelling ability, that you couldn't possibly have a job! LEARN HOW TO SPELL, WHAT ARE YOU 12?
Let's start with the facts "That the jurors were not allowed to hear"... 1.Carlson's over-intoxication=blood alcohol level of 2.4 ! 2.Carlson having been consuming alcohol since 2:00P.M that aftn. 3.Carlson having been brought home afterwards b/c of his level of intoxication 4.Carlson proceeds to drive from home to Cormorant 5.Nelson having worked that entire day into the evening 6.Carlson being denied alcohol at the Pub 7.Carlson's keys being taken from him by the owner of the Pub 8.Carlson attempting to invite home multiple women from the bar 10.Carlson being given a ride from the Pub to the Roadhouse, b/c his friends realized he shouldn't be driving 11.Hearing the testimony of over 50 witnesses stating Nelson having been sober & Carlson drunk 12.Carlson attempting to jump into & falling out of, a moving van at the roadhouse, filled with women from GF, ND, staying on Turtle Lake (whom Carlson tries to visit later) 13.Carlson being given a ride from the roadhouse back home (for the 2nd time) 14.Carlson (after being taken home "AGAIN") decides to drive his 4-wheeler on Cty Rd#1, at 2:00 a.m., with no lights on, down to Turtle Lake to see these women & after being denied entry, turns around & heads further from home, to his friends place (the friend who had just brought him home for the 2nd time). He passes by another homeowner's residence who reported hearing the wheels of the 4-wheeler on the Cty Rd, heading North & South & reported the vehicle having no headlights on 15.Carlson heads to the friend's house, where Nelson has stopped as well. They see Carlson drive up with no lights & tell him to wait, as the homeowner went inside to get his keys, in order to drive Carlson home again, Carlson leaves the residence, on 4-wheeler with no lights on, before his friend returns with the keys 16.Nelson leaves approximately 15 min. after Carlson & heads towards home, in the same direction as Carlson.
<None of these previous facts were allowed in court>
<Keep in mind that each witness was told before testifying, that he/she was prohibitted from making any mention of Carlson's level of intoxication or his condition whatsoever. No mention of headlights or stopping at the cabin on Turtle Lake. When referring to Carlson, no witness was allowed to use the words "drunk, drinking, stumbling, slurring, not even could the friend that dropped him off at home indicate why he had given him a ride! Carlson's blood alcohol level was 2.4 remember, this was also prohibited from the courtroom "THROUGHOUT THE TRIAL"! As far as words allowed when referencing Nelson's condition prior to the accident, there were no restrictions. Hmmmmmm?? Fair Trial?? Witnesses were however, restricted from mentioning Nelson having any head injuries, being in any state of shock, even saying the word "shock", having any confusion or saying the word "confused". The witness who reported that Nelson had come back to the scene to check on Carlson was not even allowed to testify!>
What would your reaction be when rounding a (90 degree) corner, and having a 4-wheeler appear out of nowhere in front of you, on the Cty Rd, with no lights on? Would you swerve to avoid hitting the 4-wheeler? YES! AS DID NELSON! All photos introduced in trial by the prosecution & the defense proved this. The prosecution fabricated a story to indicate that the tracks showed Nelson swerved to "intentionally" hit Carlson. Brian Melton claimed that while driving 90 MPH into a 90 degree corner, heading NE, that Nelson intentionally swerved into the ditch on the south side & hit Carlson in the ditch.(& DIDN'T ROLL)?!HMMMMM?? LET'S RE-READ THAT!(continue 2 previous entry)...
REPLY2SPELLINGWI ZZ

Moorhead, MN

#19 Jan 20, 2011
(Part 1 of previous statement)
Maybe do some research on the accident!
Let's start with the facts:"THAT THE JURORS WERE NOT ALLOWED TO HEAR"...1.Carlson's over-intoxication=blood alcohol level of 2.4! 2.Carlson having been consuming alcohol since 2:00p.m. that aftn 3.Carlson having been brought home afterwards because of his level of intoxication 4.Carlson proceeds to drive from home to Cormorant 5.Nelson having worked that day into the evening 6.Carlson being denied alcohol at The Pub 8.Carlson attempting to dance with any willing female 9.Carlson attempting to invite home multiple women from the bar 10.Carlson being given a ride from The Pub to the Roadhouse, b/c his friends realized he shouldn't be driving 11.Hearing the testimony of over 50 witnesses stating Nelson had been sober & Carlson drunk 12.Carlson attempting to jump into & falling out of, a moving van filled with women from GF, staying on Turtle Lake (whom Carlson visits later) 13.Carlson being given a ride from the Roadhouse back home (for the 2nd time) 14.Carlson (after being taken home "again") decides to drive his 4wheeler on Cty Rd#1, at 2 A.M., with no lights on, down to Turtle Lake to see these women, & after being denied entry, turns around & heads further from home, with no lights on, to his friends place (the friend who had just broght him home for the 2nd time). He passes another homeowner's residence where 3 people reported hearing the wheels of the wheeler, on the cty rd heading North&South & reported the vehicle having no lights each time 15.Carlson makes his way to the friends house, where Nelson has stopped as well. They see Carlson drive up with no lights & tell him to wait, as the homeowner went inside to get his keys, in order to drive Carlson home again, Carlson leaves the residence, on 4-wheeler with no lights on, before his friend returns with the keys 16.Nelson leaves approximately 15 minutes after Carlson & heads toward home, in the same direction.
<NONE OF THESE FACTS WERE ALLOWED IN COURT>
<Keep in mind that each witness was told before testifying, that he/she was prohibitted from making any mention of Carlson's level of intoxication or his condition whatsoever. No mention of headlights, or stopping at the cabin on Turtle Lake was allowed. When referring to Carlson, no witness was allowed to use the words "drunk, drinking, stumbling, slurring, ect. Even the friend that dropped him off could not say why he had given Carlson a ride! Remember Carlson's blood alcohol level was 2.4, this was also prohibited from the courtroom THROUGHOUT THE TRIAL! As far as words allowed when referencing Nelson's condition prior to the accident, there were NO restrictions. HMMMMMM?? FAIR TRIAL?? Witnesses were also restricted from mentioning Nelson having any head injuries, being in any state of shock, even saying the word "shock", having any confusion or saying the word "confused" or explaining the effects of trauma. The witness who reported that Nelson had come back to check on Carlson at the scene was not even allowed to testify!>
What would your reaction be when rounding a (90 degree) corner, & having a 4-wheeler appear out of nowhere in front of you, on the rd, with no lights on? Would you swerve to avoid hitting the 4-wheeler? YES! AS DID NELSON! All the photos introduced in trial by the prosecution & the defense proved this. The prosecution fabricated a story to indicate that the tracks showed Nelson swerved to "intentionally" hit Carlson. The defense lawyer claimed that while driving 90MPH into a 90 degree corner heading NE, that Nelson intentionally swerved into the ditch on the south side & hit carlson in the ditch. Let's RE-READ this! Hmmmmm??(Part 1.)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Becker County Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Lake Park mayor agrees to plead guilty to charg... (Apr '14) Apr '14 Dl Native 1
News Detroit Lakes man charged in fatal shooting aft... (Jan '13) Sep '13 81 supporter 6
News DFL endorses Dan Skogen for District 8 (Apr '12) Apr '12 Fact of the matte... 2
News Man beaten, bound, left in overturned Explorer (Feb '09) Oct '10 ill bill 4
Minnesota bounty hunters cracking down on stree... (Jun '10) Jun '10 robbie 3
News Osage liquor store gets OK (May '09) Jun '10 poop 2
News Cocaine Distributor on Indian Reservation Gets ... (Jan '07) Mar '10 billygoat1947 23
More from around the web