FirstAlerts

Woman Sentenced to 12 Years for Fatal Drunk Driving Crash on Highway 172

Laney Peters was sentenced to 12 years in prison after pleading no contest to charges stemming from a 2024 crash that killed two teens and injured another.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 25, 2026, 6:51 p.m. ET
A woman has been to 12 years in prison for a fatal crash that occurred on June 24, 2024, on near Oneida Street in , according to reports from Fox 11 and 1039 WVBO. The crash, which happened around 5:51 a.m., killed 18-year-old Emma Daniels and 19-year-old Mee-Mingwaa Phillips, and injured one other person, Fox 11 reported. Laney Peters pleaded no contest to two counts of homicide by intoxicated use of a vehicle and one count of injury by intoxicated use of a vehicle, according to both outlets. Peters admitted she had been drinking before the crash, and a blood draw revealed a blood alcohol concentration of .064, as reported by 1039 WVBO and Fox 11. The vehicle struck a tree and overturned, Fox 11 reported. The crash location was reported as by Fox 11 and as by 1039 WVBO. The cause of the crash has been , according to the reports. Peters was in a case that has been developing; the sentencing was reported by both outlets.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 125 Aug 2026, 22:51current

    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.