In a million years, I don't know how you could differentiate between "kicking dirt" and hitting the gas to try to swerve away from the sudden appearance of an obstacle. Maybe you can't - I'm not an expert on the behavior of motor vehicles. My point was that the notion that he can't be prosecuted absent evidence of intent or because he wasn't on a traditional road is absolutely incorrect. I think you're talking about evidence of intent to kill him and others are talking evidence of intent to do anything wrong (i.e. anything other than race or try to avoid hitting a guy if he saw him) I can't imagine that he could be prosecuted for anything absent evidence of intent of ANY wrongdoing That's an interesting philosophical idea (no sarcasm intended). From a legal standpoint, he can argue that he didn't mean to do it, but if he did something negligent or reckless relative to "normal" operation of the vehicle, he is likely criminally culpable for the result.