Prof's conviction tossed in crash with cyclist
State court says juror instructions flawed; prosecutors vow appeal
12:00 AM CDT on Tuesday, August 1, 2006
By ROBERT THARP / The Dallas Morning News
A state appeals court has overturned the June 2005 conviction of an SMU
law professor accused of intentionally hitting a bicyclist with her car
near White Rock Lake.
A three-judge panel concluded that the instructions given to jurors in
Jane Dolkart's aggravated assault trial were flawed.
Jurors were instructed that they could find Ms. Dolkart guilty of
either aggravated assault by threat or by action. The appellate judges
said jurors should have been instructed to unanimously agree on guilt
or innocence for either charge.
Instead, the jury found Ms. Dolkart guilty, but without being clear
whether the guilt was unanimous for aggravated assault by threat, or
aggravated assault by action.
Ms. Dolkart's attorney, Mike Gibson, praised the court's ruling.
"She is very pleased with the reversal and the opportunity to have
another trial in front of another jury to establish her innocence," Mr.
Gibson said.
Prosecutors vowed to appeal the ruling. They said that if the decision
is upheld, they would retry her.
While the jury found her guilty of intentionally running down bicyclist
Tommy Thomas in May 2004, they sentenced her to the lightest possible
punishment - two years in prison with a recommendation that she be
given probation and fined $1,000. The judge hearing the case sentenced
her to five years' probation.
Witnesses in the trial testified that Ms. Dolkart became enraged
because Mr. Thomas and another cyclist were pedaling slowly along West
Lawther Drive near Mockingbird Lane in Lakewood and blocking her way.
Mr. Thomas testified that Ms. Dolkart honked, gestured and yelled, then
followed him as he made a U-turn and struck his bike's rear wheel,
pushing him under the car.
As Mr. Thomas got up from the collision, he said, Ms. Dolkart told him
that he had been in her way and drove off.
Ms. Dolkart, who is on a leave of absence from SMU, denied during the
trial that she intended to strike Mr. Thomas and said it occurred
because he stopped suddenly in front of her.