BY DAVID GRANT LONG

Say you’re a high-spirited teenager who accelerates a pickup to 70 mph down a gravel county road at night trying to get airborne at a big bump.

"Watch this!" you tell your friend in the passenger seat.

But then just as you fly over the launching pad your headlights illuminate two deer in the borrow ditch. One heads for the road and you can’t stop.

"Oh, (expletive)!" you exclaim.

So the deer is mortally crushed with a front fender while the truck skids 200 feet, causing your passenger to duck down behind the dash because he fears it might come through the windshield.

Have you been driving recklessly, carelessly or only too fast?

Following a trial that gave new meaning to the term "speedy," a Montezuma County Court jury decided Thursday that 17-year-old Terry Pershing had acted "in a careless and imprudent manner" last October, but hadn’t displayed the "wanton or willful disregard"for the safety of people or property that is a critical element of the reckless-driving charge for which he was cited.

After finally coming to a stop along County Road P, Pershing did the right thing and used his cell phone to report the accident, defense attorney Kent Williamson pointed out, even though he could have as easily driven off.

And no alcohol or other drugs were involved, he added, only the foolish feeling of invulnerability that causes many adolescents to take risks. Not only that, Pershing gave a voluntary written statement to Colorado State Trooper David Van Bibber forthrightly detailing the incident, he said.

Besides, Williamson argued, the more appropriate charge would have been speeding, since both sides agreed that hitting the deer was unavoidable and shouldn’t be considered by the jury as a relavant factor.

But Deputy District Attorney Jim Preston, who asked the jury to convict Pershing of the more serious offense, argued that his driving did indeed qualify for the reckless charge, an 8-point violation rather than the 4 points for a careless conviction. (Violations that add up to 12 points mean the loss of a driver’s license.)

"This is really about the defendant’s driving — whether it constitutes something the community doesn’t want to occur on county roads late at night," Preston said during his closing argument. "The fact that another life was involved makes it reckless (driving)."