Midland Man Charged in Fatal Drunk-Driving Crash
Malcolm Hatter, 27, faces charges including second-degree murder in a crash that killed a 79-year-old woman, according to a report.
3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 10, 2026, 7:22 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 10, 2026, 7:52 a.m. ET
Midland Man Charged with Second-Degree Murder in Fatal Drunk-Driving Crash
Malcolm Hatter, a 27-year-old man from Midland, has been charged with second-degree murder in connection with a fatal crash, according to kisswtlz.com. He also faces charges of operating while intoxicated causing death and reckless driving causing death, the outlet reported.
The government alleges that Hatter drove a gray 2026 Chevrolet Trailblazer while intoxicated, passed a witness in the turn lane, ran a red light, and crashed into a Ford Focus at high speed, killing the 79-year-old female driver, kisswtlz.com reported. The case was brought by the Midland County Prosecutor's Office.
Hatter has not been tried or convicted. He is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. The matter remains pending and undecided.
Sep 10, 2026, 7:22 a.m. ETFirst report
Midland Man Charged With Second-Degree Murder in Fatal Crash
Malcolm Hatter, a 27-year-old man from Midland, has been charged with second-degree murder, operating while intoxicated causing death, and reckless driving causing death, according to kisswtlz.com. The Midland County Prosecutor's Office brought the charges, and the case is at the charging stage.
The government alleges Hatter drove a gray 2026 Chevrolet Trailblazer while intoxicated, passed a witness in the turn lane, ran a red light, and crashed into a Ford Focus at high speed, killing the 79-year-old female driver, kisswtlz.com reported.
The charges are allegations. Hatter has not been tried, and he is presumed innocent. The case remains pending and undecided; no trial has been held and no verdict or resolution has been reached.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 11:52current
First published.
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 11:22current
First published.
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 12:25current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.