Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Los Angeles PD tracking to monitor cops
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA – After numerous delays, a computer system to track officer conduct — a key requirement of a federal consent decree — will be fully operational by mid-March, a Los Angeles police official said Tuesday.
The database, known as TEAMS II, will include the number of complaints filed against an officer, as well as list any shootings, pursuits and use-of-force arrests he or she has been involved in, along with commendations, assignments and records of arrests.
Part of the system was put into use in November, and is expected to be implemented department-wide by next month, according to Maggie Goodrich, commanding officer of the LAPD’s TEAMS II Development Bureau.
“The big picture means that we are on track,” Goodrich told the Los Angeles Police Commission. “All systems are running and will be in compliance with the consent decree requirement for TEAMS II.”
The TEAMS II tracking system will help the LAPD meet the requirements of a consent decree that the city agreed to in 2001 in the aftermath of the Rampart police scandal.
The agreement was reached to avoid a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit that would have alleged a “pattern and practice” of civil rights violations by LAPD officers.
Last May, U.S. District Judge Gary Feess extended the five-year consent decree for another three years because all the requirements had not been met, including implementation of the TEAMS II system.
Problems with the initial design of the TEAMS II computer system made it incompatible with the rest of the LAPD’s computer systems, delaying implementation.
The LAPD was supposed to convert its TEAMS I officer tracking system from a paperwork process to the computerized TEAMS II system by last fall, but the system was not considered to be “user friendly” and the implementation deadline was extended to June.
The department spent about $2 million to fix the problems.
http://technorati.com/tag/Bad+Cop+News
http//www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
The database, known as TEAMS II, will include the number of complaints filed against an officer, as well as list any shootings, pursuits and use-of-force arrests he or she has been involved in, along with commendations, assignments and records of arrests.
Part of the system was put into use in November, and is expected to be implemented department-wide by next month, according to Maggie Goodrich, commanding officer of the LAPD’s TEAMS II Development Bureau.
“The big picture means that we are on track,” Goodrich told the Los Angeles Police Commission. “All systems are running and will be in compliance with the consent decree requirement for TEAMS II.”
The TEAMS II tracking system will help the LAPD meet the requirements of a consent decree that the city agreed to in 2001 in the aftermath of the Rampart police scandal.
The agreement was reached to avoid a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit that would have alleged a “pattern and practice” of civil rights violations by LAPD officers.
Last May, U.S. District Judge Gary Feess extended the five-year consent decree for another three years because all the requirements had not been met, including implementation of the TEAMS II system.
Problems with the initial design of the TEAMS II computer system made it incompatible with the rest of the LAPD’s computer systems, delaying implementation.
The LAPD was supposed to convert its TEAMS I officer tracking system from a paperwork process to the computerized TEAMS II system by last fall, but the system was not considered to be “user friendly” and the implementation deadline was extended to June.
The department spent about $2 million to fix the problems.
http://technorati.com/tag/Bad+Cop+News
http//www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Jailed Drunken Driver Blames Employer For Fatal Crash
Jailed Drunken Driver Blames Employer For Fatal Crash
February 27, 2007
SAN DIEGO -- The man convicted in the drunken driving death of a Ramona woman said his former boss should also face criminal charges, NBC 7/39 reported.
Rafael Ramirez Perez admitted he made a huge mistake when he said he got drunk and drove his employer's work truck on state Route 67 and crashed into a car driven by 22-year-old Amy Kortlang, who was killed instantly.
Now Perez will have to spend at least 21 years in prison.
"I think alcohol is a disease and sometimes you can't deal with it, you know,” Perez said. "I want to tell the family, I'm sorry hopefully over time they will forgive me."
But Perez said he thinks his former employer, Mark Kackstetter, the owner of MK Concrete, should also be held responsible. Perez said his former boss never checked his background.
"He never asked me if I had a license," Perez said.
Perez has a suspended driver's license and four prior DUI convictions.
"I know I was driving the truck, and my history and everything, maybe if he would have taken the extra time he would have saved two lives from going down the hill," Perez said.
Perez said he wasn't the only illegal immigrant working at MK Concrete.
“I believe he should be checked for all of that and how long he's been doing this, because it's not fair," Perez said.
Kortlang’s family is suing both Perez and Kackstetter in her death. The family also wants Kackstetter to face criminal charges for hiring Perez, who is an undocumented immigrant.
http://www.
February 27, 2007
SAN DIEGO -- The man convicted in the drunken driving death of a Ramona woman said his former boss should also face criminal charges, NBC 7/39 reported.
Rafael Ramirez Perez admitted he made a huge mistake when he said he got drunk and drove his employer's work truck on state Route 67 and crashed into a car driven by 22-year-old Amy Kortlang, who was killed instantly.
Now Perez will have to spend at least 21 years in prison.
"I think alcohol is a disease and sometimes you can't deal with it, you know,” Perez said. "I want to tell the family, I'm sorry hopefully over time they will forgive me."
But Perez said he thinks his former employer, Mark Kackstetter, the owner of MK Concrete, should also be held responsible. Perez said his former boss never checked his background.
"He never asked me if I had a license," Perez said.
Perez has a suspended driver's license and four prior DUI convictions.
"I know I was driving the truck, and my history and everything, maybe if he would have taken the extra time he would have saved two lives from going down the hill," Perez said.
Perez said he wasn't the only illegal immigrant working at MK Concrete.
“I believe he should be checked for all of that and how long he's been doing this, because it's not fair," Perez said.
Kortlang’s family is suing both Perez and Kackstetter in her death. The family also wants Kackstetter to face criminal charges for hiring Perez, who is an undocumented immigrant.
http://www.
County Approves DUI Ankle Bracelet Trial
County Approves DUI Ankle Bracelet Trial
02-27-07
San Diego county will soon test a new DUI monitoring program on some of its worst offenders.
The Board of Supervisors has unanimously approved a one-year trial run of a new alcohol-detecting ankle bracelets.
Twenty repeat DUI offenders will be given the devices on April 1. If the program is successful, it could spread to anyone with three or more DUI convictions.
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
02-27-07
San Diego county will soon test a new DUI monitoring program on some of its worst offenders.
The Board of Supervisors has unanimously approved a one-year trial run of a new alcohol-detecting ankle bracelets.
Twenty repeat DUI offenders will be given the devices on April 1. If the program is successful, it could spread to anyone with three or more DUI convictions.
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
Monday, February 26, 2007
Drunk on a stationary bike
Rhonda Sue Solomon was going nowhere fast at the gym.
According to Rogersville police, Solomon was arrested after a drunken ride - on a stationary bike.
On Feb. 15, officers responded to a call about a women who "appeared very intoxicated" at a Gold Star Fitness gym, according to the police report.
When arresting officer James Hammonds arrived, he saw Solomon, 43, riding the bicycle. She "was very uncooperative and had an odor of alcohol about her," Hammonds said.
According to Hammonds, Solomon also "appeared to be having trouble pedaling."
He asked Solomon to step out to the front to speak with him.
"Upon exiting the bicycle she was observed very unsteady on her feet," the report said.
Hammonds said he then spoke to gym employees, who told him that several people had offered Solomon a ride home, but she refused.
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
According to Rogersville police, Solomon was arrested after a drunken ride - on a stationary bike.
On Feb. 15, officers responded to a call about a women who "appeared very intoxicated" at a Gold Star Fitness gym, according to the police report.
When arresting officer James Hammonds arrived, he saw Solomon, 43, riding the bicycle. She "was very uncooperative and had an odor of alcohol about her," Hammonds said.
According to Hammonds, Solomon also "appeared to be having trouble pedaling."
He asked Solomon to step out to the front to speak with him.
"Upon exiting the bicycle she was observed very unsteady on her feet," the report said.
Hammonds said he then spoke to gym employees, who told him that several people had offered Solomon a ride home, but she refused.
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Personnel files of Coronoado police officer sought in Foley DUI case
SAN DIEGO - A hearing on a bid by Chargers linebacker Steve Foley's attorneys to view the personnel file of a Coronado police officer who shot him during a DUI arrest will be held March 16, it was decided today.
Judge Charles Rogers set the date for the so-called Pitchess Motion during a short hearing with the prosecutor and attorneys for Foley and a woman with him during the incident, Lisa Maree Gaut.
The lawyers would need an order from a judge to view the personnel file of Officer Aaron Mansker, who followed the defendants to Foley's Poway home last Sept. 3 because he suspected the football player was intoxicated.
Mansker said he shot Foley, 31, in the hip and leg when he refused orders to stop.
Foley is charged with two misdemeanor driving under the influence counts and is scheduled to go to trial on May 7.
Gaut was charged with felony assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer for allegedly trying to run Mansker over. Her trial is set for April 2.
"It's the court's intention to hold to these (trial) dates," the judge said.
The judge also told Foley's lawyer, that his wife is involved with the San Diego chapter of the Huntington's Disease Society of America, which is supported by the San Diego Chargers.
"In this court's mind it doesn't create difficulties in being impartial," Rogers said. The attorney said he'd inform his client of the potential conflict.
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
Judge Charles Rogers set the date for the so-called Pitchess Motion during a short hearing with the prosecutor and attorneys for Foley and a woman with him during the incident, Lisa Maree Gaut.
The lawyers would need an order from a judge to view the personnel file of Officer Aaron Mansker, who followed the defendants to Foley's Poway home last Sept. 3 because he suspected the football player was intoxicated.
Mansker said he shot Foley, 31, in the hip and leg when he refused orders to stop.
Foley is charged with two misdemeanor driving under the influence counts and is scheduled to go to trial on May 7.
Gaut was charged with felony assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer for allegedly trying to run Mansker over. Her trial is set for April 2.
"It's the court's intention to hold to these (trial) dates," the judge said.
The judge also told Foley's lawyer, that his wife is involved with the San Diego chapter of the Huntington's Disease Society of America, which is supported by the San Diego Chargers.
"In this court's mind it doesn't create difficulties in being impartial," Rogers said. The attorney said he'd inform his client of the potential conflict.
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Airline CEO is going to jail as part of plea bargain
US Airways CEO pleads guilty to DUI; sentence includes fine and restrictions
US Airways CEO Doug Parker escaped the media glare Tuesday when he appeared at Scottsdale City Court a day earlier than planned and pleaded guilty to a DUI charge. But he may not be able to start his jail term out of the spotlight.
Parker's sentence includes 24 hours in the Scottsdale jail on March 15. That is the day after the Tempe airline's annual media day, which attracts reporters from around the country.
Unless a date change is requested and granted, Parker's DUI and looming jail stay would get even more national scrutiny. His mug shot was plastered all over major Internet news sites the day his Jan. 31 arrest became public earlier this month. advertisement
His sentence was widely covered Tuesday, with Forbes.com slapping this headline on its Internet story: "CEO's Wings Clipped."
Parker's attorney, well-known Phoenix defense attorney Larry Kazan, did not return calls seeking comment on the case.
The airline said in a brief note to employees Tuesday that Parker appeared in Scottsdale City Court on Tuesday morning, a day earlier than planned, "to accommodate his attorney's schedule."
It noted that he pleaded guilty against the advice of Kazan, whose previous DUI clients have included Glen Campbell and former Phoenix Suns star Stephon Marbury.
In addition to the 24-hour jail sentence, Parker, 45, was fined $1,645.25 for pleading guilty to one DUI offense, according to a court official. Another DUI charge, for having a blood-alcohol content over the legal limit, and a speeding charge were dismissed.
Parker also has to schedule an appointment with the Center for Recovering Families to be screened for any alcohol problems that might need treatment.
There will also be restrictions on his driving. A spokeswoman for the state Department of Motor Vehicles said it is typically 30 to 60 days for a first offense in Arizona.
Parker has not spoken publicly about the arrest and was not in his office Tuesday during a previously scheduled event with reporters.
He was charged with driving under the influence after he was pulled over for speeding after leaving the Birds Nest party tent at the FBR Open golf tournament.
The arresting officer noted that Parker's eyes were bloodshot and watery and that his speech was slurred.
Tests showed Parker's blood-alcohol content was 0.096 percent, above the legal limit of 0.08 percent.
This was Parker's third DUI offense. The other two were in Texas two decades ago.
In the statement to employees, the company said Parker accepted "full and total responsibility" for the incident.
"Doug knows he made a serious mistake and has apologized for his actions. He plans to adhere to all of the court-directed repercussions and restitutions that come about from this charge," it said.
"While he completes the judicial process, his focus, and ours, will remain on leading US Airways through its integration efforts and continuing to build a world-class airline."
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
US Airways CEO Doug Parker escaped the media glare Tuesday when he appeared at Scottsdale City Court a day earlier than planned and pleaded guilty to a DUI charge. But he may not be able to start his jail term out of the spotlight.
Parker's sentence includes 24 hours in the Scottsdale jail on March 15. That is the day after the Tempe airline's annual media day, which attracts reporters from around the country.
Unless a date change is requested and granted, Parker's DUI and looming jail stay would get even more national scrutiny. His mug shot was plastered all over major Internet news sites the day his Jan. 31 arrest became public earlier this month. advertisement
His sentence was widely covered Tuesday, with Forbes.com slapping this headline on its Internet story: "CEO's Wings Clipped."
Parker's attorney, well-known Phoenix defense attorney Larry Kazan, did not return calls seeking comment on the case.
The airline said in a brief note to employees Tuesday that Parker appeared in Scottsdale City Court on Tuesday morning, a day earlier than planned, "to accommodate his attorney's schedule."
It noted that he pleaded guilty against the advice of Kazan, whose previous DUI clients have included Glen Campbell and former Phoenix Suns star Stephon Marbury.
In addition to the 24-hour jail sentence, Parker, 45, was fined $1,645.25 for pleading guilty to one DUI offense, according to a court official. Another DUI charge, for having a blood-alcohol content over the legal limit, and a speeding charge were dismissed.
Parker also has to schedule an appointment with the Center for Recovering Families to be screened for any alcohol problems that might need treatment.
There will also be restrictions on his driving. A spokeswoman for the state Department of Motor Vehicles said it is typically 30 to 60 days for a first offense in Arizona.
Parker has not spoken publicly about the arrest and was not in his office Tuesday during a previously scheduled event with reporters.
He was charged with driving under the influence after he was pulled over for speeding after leaving the Birds Nest party tent at the FBR Open golf tournament.
The arresting officer noted that Parker's eyes were bloodshot and watery and that his speech was slurred.
Tests showed Parker's blood-alcohol content was 0.096 percent, above the legal limit of 0.08 percent.
This was Parker's third DUI offense. The other two were in Texas two decades ago.
In the statement to employees, the company said Parker accepted "full and total responsibility" for the incident.
"Doug knows he made a serious mistake and has apologized for his actions. He plans to adhere to all of the court-directed repercussions and restitutions that come about from this charge," it said.
"While he completes the judicial process, his focus, and ours, will remain on leading US Airways through its integration efforts and continuing to build a world-class airline."
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
Monday, February 19, 2007
Draeger Alcotest 7110 found scientifically reliable in New Jersey, subject to safeguards
A special master appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court has found the state's new drunken driving tester, the Draeger Alcotest 7110, is scientifically reliable and can be used subject to certain safeguards.
The master's findings in State v. Chun, No. 58,879, if adopted by the court, would allow Alcotest blood alcohol readings to be admitted in drunken driving cases without expert testimony.
"This court finds that the Alcotest 7110, NJ 3.11 version is and has been scientifically reliable, under the clear and convincing evidence standard, when the test protocol is carefully followed by the operator and the instrument is functioning properly," wrote Michael Patrick King, a former Appellate Division judge.
But King conditioned admission of the evidence on the presentation of certain foundational evidence.
The operator must testify that customary procedures were followed and produce his or her credentials.
Also, specified certificates and other documents must be provided by municipal prosecutors during discovery and, if kept in the normal course of business, can be admitted without formal proof in the judge's discretion. The documents must be placed in evidence where the defendant has no lawyer.
King found other changes called for, including:
• lowering the minimum flow rate for women over 60 from 1.5 liters to 1.2 liters; and
• setting up a telephone or Internet connection to allow automatic uploads of all Alcotest data in the state to a central server on a daily or weekly basis, with the data kept for at least 10 years.
King "strongly recommended" the state acquire a software program to manage the central database of Alcotest results.
Also strongly recommended was use of the breath-temperature sensor made by the Alcotest manufacturer, Draeger International of Durango, Colo. If the state does not do so, it must adjust all breath test results downward by 6.58 percent to reduce the margin of error. But King noted there was no good reason not to use the available technology, as Alabama now does, calling breath temperature variations "a biological variable which can and should be controlled."
King also agreed with an argument presented by defense lawyers that the tolerance standard for breath samples should be narrowed, to .005 for greater precision and accuracy.
But he declined to declare invalid test results obtained using the current standard, which is .01 percent or 10 percent of the difference between the highest and lowest of the four readings, whichever is greater. Those results "were not improper and inadmissible, but our recent recommendation is simply a better, tighter range for precision and accuracy," he wrote.
As for future Alcotest upgrades and modifications, the state plans to add administrative safeguards, King pointed out, saying those safeguards should include certain items such as:
• listing the temperature probe serial number and probe value on any report where relevant;
• publishing firmware revisions on the state police Web site and elsewhere; and
• continuing to restrict access to the firmware for purpose of making changes to it.
King's findings will be considered by the Supreme Court, which took jurisdiction of the 20 consolidated DWI cases raising challenges to Alcotest after Middlesex County Superior Court Judge Jane Cantor ruled there were justiciable issues concerning its reliability.
The report followed four months of hearings in which defense lawyers disputed the Alcotest's accuracy, with the State Bar Association and the New Jersey chapter of the Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as amici.
Defense attorneys disputed the Alcotest's accuracy, Draeger said the device's codes were trade secrets, and last year King threatened to take a negative inference against the Alcotest's reliability because of Draeger's nondisclosure. Draeger and the defense attorneys then agreed to the software company analysis to ensure no programming errors.
But it remains a sore issue.
One defense lawyer, Evan Levow, says King let the state and Draeger off too easily on that point.
"Every state's expert agrees, you can program the computer to say whatever you want it to say. Draeger simply says 'trust us.' Yet, ironically, Judge King says, the linchpin of future reliability rests on Draeger agreeing to have the source code analyzed by an independent reviewer. I'd say it's problematic," says Levow, who heads a firm in Cherry Hill, N.J.
And some defense attorneys are likely to ask the Supreme Court, which will decide whether to adopt King's report, to tweak the findings, according to Matthew Reisig, who heads a firm in Freehold.
One such area is King's decision to reduce the allowable gap in readings between two consecutive breath samples. King made it proactive while defense lawyers seek retroactive application.
The Attorney General's Office declined requests for interviews of its attorneys on the case, but issued a statement by Gregory Paw, director of the Division of Criminal Justice, addressing King's report:
"We are pleased Judge King has concluded that the Alcotest instrument is scientifically reliable and that its test results should be admissible in drunken driving prosecutions. The comprehensive report addresses all of the issues raised by the parties. We look forward to having this matter heard and decided by the Supreme Court," Paw said.
Deputy Attorney General Christine Hoffman was the lead attorney for the state, assisted by Deputy Attorneys General John Dell'Aquilo and Stephen Monson. Assistant Attorney General Jessica Oppenheim supervised the team.
The state wants to use the Alcotest to replace the antiquated Breathalyzer as the standard test of blood-alcohol level. The state says the Alcotest has been thoroughly tested and has numerous safeguards against inaccurate readings.
In the eyes of one defense attorney, who represented the amicus New Jersey State Bar Association in the case, King managed to balance the issues. The State Bar had asked King to find the Alcotest reliable with certain caveats.
"What [King] he is doing here is establishing the rules of the game," says Jeffrey Gold, of Gold & Laine in Cherry Hill. "There are a few more conditions I would have liked than what he gave, but he's on the right track."
Each side in the case has two weeks to submit briefs to the Supreme Court.
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
The master's findings in State v. Chun, No. 58,879, if adopted by the court, would allow Alcotest blood alcohol readings to be admitted in drunken driving cases without expert testimony.
"This court finds that the Alcotest 7110, NJ 3.11 version is and has been scientifically reliable, under the clear and convincing evidence standard, when the test protocol is carefully followed by the operator and the instrument is functioning properly," wrote Michael Patrick King, a former Appellate Division judge.
But King conditioned admission of the evidence on the presentation of certain foundational evidence.
The operator must testify that customary procedures were followed and produce his or her credentials.
Also, specified certificates and other documents must be provided by municipal prosecutors during discovery and, if kept in the normal course of business, can be admitted without formal proof in the judge's discretion. The documents must be placed in evidence where the defendant has no lawyer.
King found other changes called for, including:
• lowering the minimum flow rate for women over 60 from 1.5 liters to 1.2 liters; and
• setting up a telephone or Internet connection to allow automatic uploads of all Alcotest data in the state to a central server on a daily or weekly basis, with the data kept for at least 10 years.
King "strongly recommended" the state acquire a software program to manage the central database of Alcotest results.
Also strongly recommended was use of the breath-temperature sensor made by the Alcotest manufacturer, Draeger International of Durango, Colo. If the state does not do so, it must adjust all breath test results downward by 6.58 percent to reduce the margin of error. But King noted there was no good reason not to use the available technology, as Alabama now does, calling breath temperature variations "a biological variable which can and should be controlled."
King also agreed with an argument presented by defense lawyers that the tolerance standard for breath samples should be narrowed, to .005 for greater precision and accuracy.
But he declined to declare invalid test results obtained using the current standard, which is .01 percent or 10 percent of the difference between the highest and lowest of the four readings, whichever is greater. Those results "were not improper and inadmissible, but our recent recommendation is simply a better, tighter range for precision and accuracy," he wrote.
As for future Alcotest upgrades and modifications, the state plans to add administrative safeguards, King pointed out, saying those safeguards should include certain items such as:
• listing the temperature probe serial number and probe value on any report where relevant;
• publishing firmware revisions on the state police Web site and elsewhere; and
• continuing to restrict access to the firmware for purpose of making changes to it.
King's findings will be considered by the Supreme Court, which took jurisdiction of the 20 consolidated DWI cases raising challenges to Alcotest after Middlesex County Superior Court Judge Jane Cantor ruled there were justiciable issues concerning its reliability.
The report followed four months of hearings in which defense lawyers disputed the Alcotest's accuracy, with the State Bar Association and the New Jersey chapter of the Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as amici.
Defense attorneys disputed the Alcotest's accuracy, Draeger said the device's codes were trade secrets, and last year King threatened to take a negative inference against the Alcotest's reliability because of Draeger's nondisclosure. Draeger and the defense attorneys then agreed to the software company analysis to ensure no programming errors.
But it remains a sore issue.
One defense lawyer, Evan Levow, says King let the state and Draeger off too easily on that point.
"Every state's expert agrees, you can program the computer to say whatever you want it to say. Draeger simply says 'trust us.' Yet, ironically, Judge King says, the linchpin of future reliability rests on Draeger agreeing to have the source code analyzed by an independent reviewer. I'd say it's problematic," says Levow, who heads a firm in Cherry Hill, N.J.
And some defense attorneys are likely to ask the Supreme Court, which will decide whether to adopt King's report, to tweak the findings, according to Matthew Reisig, who heads a firm in Freehold.
One such area is King's decision to reduce the allowable gap in readings between two consecutive breath samples. King made it proactive while defense lawyers seek retroactive application.
The Attorney General's Office declined requests for interviews of its attorneys on the case, but issued a statement by Gregory Paw, director of the Division of Criminal Justice, addressing King's report:
"We are pleased Judge King has concluded that the Alcotest instrument is scientifically reliable and that its test results should be admissible in drunken driving prosecutions. The comprehensive report addresses all of the issues raised by the parties. We look forward to having this matter heard and decided by the Supreme Court," Paw said.
Deputy Attorney General Christine Hoffman was the lead attorney for the state, assisted by Deputy Attorneys General John Dell'Aquilo and Stephen Monson. Assistant Attorney General Jessica Oppenheim supervised the team.
The state wants to use the Alcotest to replace the antiquated Breathalyzer as the standard test of blood-alcohol level. The state says the Alcotest has been thoroughly tested and has numerous safeguards against inaccurate readings.
In the eyes of one defense attorney, who represented the amicus New Jersey State Bar Association in the case, King managed to balance the issues. The State Bar had asked King to find the Alcotest reliable with certain caveats.
"What [King] he is doing here is establishing the rules of the game," says Jeffrey Gold, of Gold & Laine in Cherry Hill. "There are a few more conditions I would have liked than what he gave, but he's on the right track."
Each side in the case has two weeks to submit briefs to the Supreme Court.
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
Free DUI evaluation for San Diego DUI arrest
San Diego DUI Specialist Rick Mueller is the Top-Rated San Diego County Drunk Driving, DUI & DMV Defense attorney with over 22 years of experience.
Known as the "DMV Guru," Rick Mueller dedicates 100% of his law practice to aggressively defending those accused of driving under the influence of alcohol. He has successfully saved the driving privileges of many clients in the past year alone.
http://www.sandiegoduilawyer.com/
Complete the important Free San Diego County Drunk Driving Defense Survey to find out your best strategy and to protect your driving privileges in California.
http://www.sandiegoduilawyer.com/survey.html
Known as the "DMV Guru," Rick Mueller dedicates 100% of his law practice to aggressively defending those accused of driving under the influence of alcohol. He has successfully saved the driving privileges of many clients in the past year alone.
http://www.sandiegoduilawyer.com/
Complete the important Free San Diego County Drunk Driving Defense Survey to find out your best strategy and to protect your driving privileges in California.
http://www.sandiegoduilawyer.com/survey.html
Sunday, February 18, 2007
What is next? The Death Penalty for DUI ?
What's next on DUI? Death penalty?
Regarding a 30-day mandatory jail time for people convicted of driving under the influence and those people who are saying it isn't enough time:
Why should we treat drunk drivers that haven't killed someone as if they have?
If you kill someone while driving drunk, then you should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and spend a lot of time in prison. If you were just driving drunk, why should your life get completely screwed over for a mistake?
I got a DUI a year ago in Seattle. When the judge found out I was from Arizona, he told me "to be lucky I got my DUI there rather than in Arizona."
Not all drunk drivers are alcoholics. In Seattle, they send you to evaluators to determine whether or not you are an alcoholic in need of treatment.
If you are not deemed an alcoholic, you are required to attend two eight-hour alcohol classes. If you are deemed an alcoholic, you have to go to Alcoholics Anonymous for however long they recommend.
After spending $6,000 on that DUI, I have not driven drunk.
You don't have to completely mess up someone's life over to get him or her to stop driving drunk. People just jump all over any new legislation that makes tougher laws on DUIs, no matter how tough the laws are.
What? Are we going to have life sentences and the death penalty for DUIs pretty soon? - LF, Scottsdale
http://www.azcentra l.com/arizonarep ublic/viewpoints /articles/ 0211steffens0211 .html
http://www.azcentra l.com/arizonarep ublic/viewpoints /articles/ 0211garcia0211. html
http://www.azcentra l.com/arizonarep ublic/viewpoints /articles/ 0211waring0211. html
http://www.SanDiegoDUI.com
Regarding a 30-day mandatory jail time for people convicted of driving under the influence and those people who are saying it isn't enough time:
Why should we treat drunk drivers that haven't killed someone as if they have?
If you kill someone while driving drunk, then you should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and spend a lot of time in prison. If you were just driving drunk, why should your life get completely screwed over for a mistake?
I got a DUI a year ago in Seattle. When the judge found out I was from Arizona, he told me "to be lucky I got my DUI there rather than in Arizona."
Not all drunk drivers are alcoholics. In Seattle, they send you to evaluators to determine whether or not you are an alcoholic in need of treatment.
If you are not deemed an alcoholic, you are required to attend two eight-hour alcohol classes. If you are deemed an alcoholic, you have to go to Alcoholics Anonymous for however long they recommend.
After spending $6,000 on that DUI, I have not driven drunk.
You don't have to completely mess up someone's life over to get him or her to stop driving drunk. People just jump all over any new legislation that makes tougher laws on DUIs, no matter how tough the laws are.
What? Are we going to have life sentences and the death penalty for DUIs pretty soon? - LF, Scottsdale
http://www.azcentra l.com/arizonarep ublic/viewpoints /articles/ 0211steffens0211 .html
http://www.azcentra l.com/arizonarep ublic/viewpoints /articles/ 0211garcia0211. html
http://www.azcentra l.com/arizonarep ublic/viewpoints /articles/ 0211waring0211. html
http://www.SanDiegoDUI.com
Felony Conviction for Tossing Cup of Ice Into Car
'McMissile' Moment Lands Mom in Jail
Driver Gets Felony Conviction For Tossing Cup of Ice Into Car
Like the name, the details of it spill forth like a bad joke:
A woman is driving north on Interstate 95. Three kids squirm in the back seat, and her sister, six months pregnant and having early contractions, sits in the front. The stress starts to simmer. Traffic slows, then crawls, then creeps. More stress. A car cuts in front of her, then scoots away. A short time later, it darts in again. She can no longer take it. She veers onto the shoulder and speeds up. Wham! She tosses a large McDonald's cup filled with ice into the other car.
A Stafford County jury convicted Jessica Hall, 25, of maliciously throwing a missile into an occupied vehicle.
"From my side, I heard a whoomp," recalled the woman's sister, LaJeanna Porter, 27. "I was like, 'I know you didn't throw that cup.' She said, 'Yes I did.' "
Neither woman foresaw the seemingly supersize repercussions of that misguided moment July 2.
No one was injured, but the cup launcher, Jessica Hall, 25, of Jacksonville, N.C., was charged and convicted by a Stafford County jury of maliciously throwing a missile into an occupied vehicle, a felony in Virginia. The instructions given to the jury said that "any physical object can be considered a missile. A missile can be propelled by any force, including throwing."
Hall, a mother of three young children whose husband is serving his third tour in Iraq, has spent more than a month in jail.
The jury sentenced her to two years in prison, the minimum, and a judge will formally impose a sentence Wednesday. Under state law, the judge can only decrease the jury's sentence.
"We didn't think it would go this far," Hall said in an interview at the Rappahannock Regional Jail. "Two years! What did I do?"
There are two versions of what happened that day. The occupants of both cars agree on this: It was hot, the kind of hot in which legs stick to leather seats, and the traffic was barely moving, slowed by a fatal crash up the road in Prince William County.
In one car, driver Pete Ballin, 36, and girlfriend Eliza Fowle, 28, were heading home to the District after visiting her father in North Carolina. They said they were maneuvering through the stalled traffic, not even noticing Hall until the Mickey-D moment.
"I guess we inadvertently merged back in front of her," Fowle said. "She apparently took that as some sort of aggressive maneuver on our part."
The next thing they knew, Fowle said, Hall was pulling up in the emergency lane and "chucking a big, supersized McDonald's cup at us." It flew diagonally across Ballin and onto Fowle. "It was gross and sticky and got all over me and the front of our car, the dashboard and the windshield," Fowle said.
Hall, whose family was driving from North Carolina to New York for a family party, saw the situation differently. She said she had never driven that route and was trying to keep up with her father's truck when Ballin cut in front of her the second time, causing her to swerve onto the shoulder. She said she was worried because her sister's bulging belly almost slammed into the dashboard.
Hall's next move was wrong, she said, but she felt provoked.
A Stafford County jury convicted Jessica Hall, 25, of maliciously throwing a missile into an occupied vehicle.
"It was past me ignoring him. I'm not going to lie; I was cursing him," she said. "I took the McDonald's cup. I tossed it over my car."
She never fathomed that it would land her in jail for the first time in her life, wearing a standard-issue jumpsuit frayed up both legs and learning to curl her hair using toilet paper. Not even when she saw Ballin talking to the state trooper up the highway, or when she was arrested and released on her own recognizance, or even when a trial date was set for Jan. 3.
Even when Ballin testified, Hall said, "I'm thinking about what I'm going to cook when I get home."
"I passed out when they said guilty, two years," she added. "I became a convicted felon."
Fowle stands by the couple's decision to report the crime but concedes that even she and Ballin were surprised at the conviction.
"I think that this is way too much of a punishment for her actions. This is just to me absolutely ridiculous," Fowle said. Community service would have made more sense, she said. "It's something that's going to make someone realize I did screw up, and I'm going to remember this, and I'm not going to do something like this again."
Hall's attorney, public defender Terence Patton, did not return calls for comment. Nor did Commonwealth's Attorney Daniel M. Chichester or Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney George Elsasser, who handled the case.
Elsasser argued in court that had Ballin been hit by the drink, he might have gotten into a serious accident with injuries. Hall also was found guilty of reckless driving, assault against Ballin and assault and battery against Fowle. For her conviction on those charges, the jury recommended she be fined $1,000.
According to court documents, Hall is unemployed and, with her husband's salary, the couple takes in $30,384 a year. She receives $388 a month in food stamps.
"It doesn't seem right for her not to be around," said Porter, who is watching one of Hall's three children, ages 4, 6 and 8. The younger two are with their grandparents. "We just hope that whatever they do, don't let them keep her. Without her, I don't know what I'll do."
Hall said she has cried every day she has spent locked up and wakes most days to find clumps of hair on her pillow from the stress. She shares a cell with two other women and spends 19 hours a day in the cell, she said.
When Hall talks about the incident, she sometimes jokes about how she will only fly over Virginia from now on and says other inmates sometimes throw things in her direction and say, "Watch out McMissile."
But in other moments, when she talks about the reality of a felony conviction, her expression goes blank. She was supposed to start nursing school the day after she was sent to jail, and she wonders what job she will be able to get once potential employers do a background check.
"Now people are going to see me as an angry, road rage, convicted felon. And it really upsets me," she said. "I must have been wrong . . . but seriously, God. Lesson learned. Lesson learned is one hour in this place."
Hall, whose family was driving from North Carolina to New York for a family party, saw the situation differently. She said she had never driven that route and was trying to keep up with her father's truck when Ballin cut in front of her the second time, causing her to swerve onto the shoulder. She said she was worried because her sister's bulging belly almost slammed into the dashboard.
Hall's next move was wrong, she said, but she felt provoked.
"It was past me ignoring him. I'm not going to lie; I was cursing him," she said. "I took the McDonald's cup. I tossed it over my car."
She never fathomed that it would land her in jail for the first time in her life, wearing a standard-issue jumpsuit frayed up both legs and learning to curl her hair using toilet paper. Not even when she saw Ballin talking to the state trooper up the highway, or when she was arrested and released on her own recognizance, or even when a trial date was set for Jan. 3.
Even when Ballin testified, Hall said, "I'm thinking about what I'm going to cook when I get home."
"I passed out when they said guilty, two years," she added. "I became a convicted felon."
Fowle stands by the couple's decision to report the crime but concedes that even she and Ballin were surprised at the conviction.
"I think that this is way too much of a punishment for her actions. This is just to me absolutely ridiculous," Fowle said. Community service would have made more sense, she said. "It's something that's going to make someone realize I did screw up, and I'm going to remember this, and I'm not going to do something like this again."
Hall's attorney, public defender Terence Patton, did not return calls for comment. Nor did Commonwealth's Attorney Daniel M. Chichester or Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney George Elsasser, who handled the case.
Elsasser argued in court that had Ballin been hit by the drink, he might have gotten into a serious accident with injuries. Hall also was found guilty of reckless driving, assault against Ballin and assault and battery against Fowle. For her conviction on those charges, the jury recommended she be fined $1,000.
According to court documents, Hall is unemployed and, with her husband's salary, the couple takes in $30,384 a year. She receives $388 a month in food stamps.
"It doesn't seem right for her not to be around," said Porter, who is watching one of Hall's three children, ages 4, 6 and 8. The younger two are with their grandparents. "We just hope that whatever they do, don't let them keep her. Without her, I don't know what I'll do."
Hall said she has cried every day she has spent locked up and wakes most days to find clumps of hair on her pillow from the stress. She shares a cell with two other women and spends 19 hours a day in the cell, she said.
When Hall talks about the incident, she sometimes jokes about how she will only fly over Virginia from now on and says other inmates sometimes throw things in her direction and say, "Watch out McMissile."
But in other moments, when she talks about the reality of a felony conviction, her expression goes blank. She was supposed to start nursing school the day after she was sent to jail, and she wonders what job she will be able to get once potential employers do a background check.
"Now people are going to see me as an angry, road rage, convicted felon. And it really upsets me," she said. "I must have been wrong . . . but seriously, God. Lesson learned. Lesson learned is one hour in this place."
http://www.sandiegodui.com
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
Driver Gets Felony Conviction For Tossing Cup of Ice Into Car
Like the name, the details of it spill forth like a bad joke:
A woman is driving north on Interstate 95. Three kids squirm in the back seat, and her sister, six months pregnant and having early contractions, sits in the front. The stress starts to simmer. Traffic slows, then crawls, then creeps. More stress. A car cuts in front of her, then scoots away. A short time later, it darts in again. She can no longer take it. She veers onto the shoulder and speeds up. Wham! She tosses a large McDonald's cup filled with ice into the other car.
A Stafford County jury convicted Jessica Hall, 25, of maliciously throwing a missile into an occupied vehicle.
"From my side, I heard a whoomp," recalled the woman's sister, LaJeanna Porter, 27. "I was like, 'I know you didn't throw that cup.' She said, 'Yes I did.' "
Neither woman foresaw the seemingly supersize repercussions of that misguided moment July 2.
No one was injured, but the cup launcher, Jessica Hall, 25, of Jacksonville, N.C., was charged and convicted by a Stafford County jury of maliciously throwing a missile into an occupied vehicle, a felony in Virginia. The instructions given to the jury said that "any physical object can be considered a missile. A missile can be propelled by any force, including throwing."
Hall, a mother of three young children whose husband is serving his third tour in Iraq, has spent more than a month in jail.
The jury sentenced her to two years in prison, the minimum, and a judge will formally impose a sentence Wednesday. Under state law, the judge can only decrease the jury's sentence.
"We didn't think it would go this far," Hall said in an interview at the Rappahannock Regional Jail. "Two years! What did I do?"
There are two versions of what happened that day. The occupants of both cars agree on this: It was hot, the kind of hot in which legs stick to leather seats, and the traffic was barely moving, slowed by a fatal crash up the road in Prince William County.
In one car, driver Pete Ballin, 36, and girlfriend Eliza Fowle, 28, were heading home to the District after visiting her father in North Carolina. They said they were maneuvering through the stalled traffic, not even noticing Hall until the Mickey-D moment.
"I guess we inadvertently merged back in front of her," Fowle said. "She apparently took that as some sort of aggressive maneuver on our part."
The next thing they knew, Fowle said, Hall was pulling up in the emergency lane and "chucking a big, supersized McDonald's cup at us." It flew diagonally across Ballin and onto Fowle. "It was gross and sticky and got all over me and the front of our car, the dashboard and the windshield," Fowle said.
Hall, whose family was driving from North Carolina to New York for a family party, saw the situation differently. She said she had never driven that route and was trying to keep up with her father's truck when Ballin cut in front of her the second time, causing her to swerve onto the shoulder. She said she was worried because her sister's bulging belly almost slammed into the dashboard.
Hall's next move was wrong, she said, but she felt provoked.
A Stafford County jury convicted Jessica Hall, 25, of maliciously throwing a missile into an occupied vehicle.
"It was past me ignoring him. I'm not going to lie; I was cursing him," she said. "I took the McDonald's cup. I tossed it over my car."
She never fathomed that it would land her in jail for the first time in her life, wearing a standard-issue jumpsuit frayed up both legs and learning to curl her hair using toilet paper. Not even when she saw Ballin talking to the state trooper up the highway, or when she was arrested and released on her own recognizance, or even when a trial date was set for Jan. 3.
Even when Ballin testified, Hall said, "I'm thinking about what I'm going to cook when I get home."
"I passed out when they said guilty, two years," she added. "I became a convicted felon."
Fowle stands by the couple's decision to report the crime but concedes that even she and Ballin were surprised at the conviction.
"I think that this is way too much of a punishment for her actions. This is just to me absolutely ridiculous," Fowle said. Community service would have made more sense, she said. "It's something that's going to make someone realize I did screw up, and I'm going to remember this, and I'm not going to do something like this again."
Hall's attorney, public defender Terence Patton, did not return calls for comment. Nor did Commonwealth's Attorney Daniel M. Chichester or Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney George Elsasser, who handled the case.
Elsasser argued in court that had Ballin been hit by the drink, he might have gotten into a serious accident with injuries. Hall also was found guilty of reckless driving, assault against Ballin and assault and battery against Fowle. For her conviction on those charges, the jury recommended she be fined $1,000.
According to court documents, Hall is unemployed and, with her husband's salary, the couple takes in $30,384 a year. She receives $388 a month in food stamps.
"It doesn't seem right for her not to be around," said Porter, who is watching one of Hall's three children, ages 4, 6 and 8. The younger two are with their grandparents. "We just hope that whatever they do, don't let them keep her. Without her, I don't know what I'll do."
Hall said she has cried every day she has spent locked up and wakes most days to find clumps of hair on her pillow from the stress. She shares a cell with two other women and spends 19 hours a day in the cell, she said.
When Hall talks about the incident, she sometimes jokes about how she will only fly over Virginia from now on and says other inmates sometimes throw things in her direction and say, "Watch out McMissile."
But in other moments, when she talks about the reality of a felony conviction, her expression goes blank. She was supposed to start nursing school the day after she was sent to jail, and she wonders what job she will be able to get once potential employers do a background check.
"Now people are going to see me as an angry, road rage, convicted felon. And it really upsets me," she said. "I must have been wrong . . . but seriously, God. Lesson learned. Lesson learned is one hour in this place."
Hall, whose family was driving from North Carolina to New York for a family party, saw the situation differently. She said she had never driven that route and was trying to keep up with her father's truck when Ballin cut in front of her the second time, causing her to swerve onto the shoulder. She said she was worried because her sister's bulging belly almost slammed into the dashboard.
Hall's next move was wrong, she said, but she felt provoked.
"It was past me ignoring him. I'm not going to lie; I was cursing him," she said. "I took the McDonald's cup. I tossed it over my car."
She never fathomed that it would land her in jail for the first time in her life, wearing a standard-issue jumpsuit frayed up both legs and learning to curl her hair using toilet paper. Not even when she saw Ballin talking to the state trooper up the highway, or when she was arrested and released on her own recognizance, or even when a trial date was set for Jan. 3.
Even when Ballin testified, Hall said, "I'm thinking about what I'm going to cook when I get home."
"I passed out when they said guilty, two years," she added. "I became a convicted felon."
Fowle stands by the couple's decision to report the crime but concedes that even she and Ballin were surprised at the conviction.
"I think that this is way too much of a punishment for her actions. This is just to me absolutely ridiculous," Fowle said. Community service would have made more sense, she said. "It's something that's going to make someone realize I did screw up, and I'm going to remember this, and I'm not going to do something like this again."
Hall's attorney, public defender Terence Patton, did not return calls for comment. Nor did Commonwealth's Attorney Daniel M. Chichester or Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney George Elsasser, who handled the case.
Elsasser argued in court that had Ballin been hit by the drink, he might have gotten into a serious accident with injuries. Hall also was found guilty of reckless driving, assault against Ballin and assault and battery against Fowle. For her conviction on those charges, the jury recommended she be fined $1,000.
According to court documents, Hall is unemployed and, with her husband's salary, the couple takes in $30,384 a year. She receives $388 a month in food stamps.
"It doesn't seem right for her not to be around," said Porter, who is watching one of Hall's three children, ages 4, 6 and 8. The younger two are with their grandparents. "We just hope that whatever they do, don't let them keep her. Without her, I don't know what I'll do."
Hall said she has cried every day she has spent locked up and wakes most days to find clumps of hair on her pillow from the stress. She shares a cell with two other women and spends 19 hours a day in the cell, she said.
When Hall talks about the incident, she sometimes jokes about how she will only fly over Virginia from now on and says other inmates sometimes throw things in her direction and say, "Watch out McMissile."
But in other moments, when she talks about the reality of a felony conviction, her expression goes blank. She was supposed to start nursing school the day after she was sent to jail, and she wonders what job she will be able to get once potential employers do a background check.
"Now people are going to see me as an angry, road rage, convicted felon. And it really upsets me," she said. "I must have been wrong . . . but seriously, God. Lesson learned. Lesson learned is one hour in this place."
http://www.sandiegodui.com
http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Honorable Judge resigns over excessive marijuana laws
Judge Resigns Over Lafayette Marijuana Ordinance
LAFAYETTE, CO: Judge Resigns Over Lafayette Marijuana Ordinance
LAFAYETTE, Colo. — A Boulder criminal-defense lawyer who has been serving as an associate municipal court judge in Lafayette for eight years has resigned to protest the city’s tough new penalties for marijuana possession.
Leonard Frieling said that he is unwilling to enforce the ordinance that increases the maximum penalty for possession of small amounts of pot from a $100 fine to a $1,000 fine and a year in jail. And he said since he doesn’t want to enforce it, he’s morally and ethically unable to serve as a municipal judge.
Lafayette’s City Council gave tentative approval to the stricter penalties last week, and a final vote is scheduled next week.
Frieling said he doesn’t think marijuana should be illegal for adults who are allowed to drink alcohol, but he said he was willing to enforce the current $100 fine — which matches the state penalty for possession of small amounts of the drug.
Lafayette Mayor Chris Berry said the new penalties are part of a plan designed to give judges more flexibility when sentencing marijuana offenders.
http://www.sandiegodui.com/survey.html
LAFAYETTE, CO: Judge Resigns Over Lafayette Marijuana Ordinance
LAFAYETTE, Colo. — A Boulder criminal-defense lawyer who has been serving as an associate municipal court judge in Lafayette for eight years has resigned to protest the city’s tough new penalties for marijuana possession.
Leonard Frieling said that he is unwilling to enforce the ordinance that increases the maximum penalty for possession of small amounts of pot from a $100 fine to a $1,000 fine and a year in jail. And he said since he doesn’t want to enforce it, he’s morally and ethically unable to serve as a municipal judge.
Lafayette’s City Council gave tentative approval to the stricter penalties last week, and a final vote is scheduled next week.
Frieling said he doesn’t think marijuana should be illegal for adults who are allowed to drink alcohol, but he said he was willing to enforce the current $100 fine — which matches the state penalty for possession of small amounts of the drug.
Lafayette Mayor Chris Berry said the new penalties are part of a plan designed to give judges more flexibility when sentencing marijuana offenders.
http://www.sandiegodui.com/survey.html
DUI arrest video of Cooper City commissioner released
The State Attorney's Office on Wednesday released a videotape of the drunken driving arrest last November of Cooper City commissioner Bartlett "Bart" Roper.
Roper, a two-term commissioner, was found Nov. 28 asleep in his Chevrolet truck, which was parked in the 5700 block of South Pine Island Road in Davie. The truck had a flat tire and its keys were in the ignition but the engine wasn't running.
Roper, 69, made an obscene gesture when confronted, said the paramedics who awakened him. The video depicts Officer J.R. Arndt asking Roper to walk a white line in the road. Roper failed and stumbled, and was charged with driving under the influence, a misdemeanor which carries a maximum jail sentence of six months. The case is still pending.
http://www.sandiegoduihelp.com/survey.html
Roper, a two-term commissioner, was found Nov. 28 asleep in his Chevrolet truck, which was parked in the 5700 block of South Pine Island Road in Davie. The truck had a flat tire and its keys were in the ignition but the engine wasn't running.
Roper, 69, made an obscene gesture when confronted, said the paramedics who awakened him. The video depicts Officer J.R. Arndt asking Roper to walk a white line in the road. Roper failed and stumbled, and was charged with driving under the influence, a misdemeanor which carries a maximum jail sentence of six months. The case is still pending.
http://www.sandiegoduihelp.com/survey.html
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Orange County cop ejaculates on stopped stripper
Illegally Park-ed - An Irvine cop ejaculates on a motorist but escapes criminal liability
Officer Park: put your hands behind my back
No one disputes that an on-duty Irvine police officer got an erection and ejaculated on a motorist during an early-morning traffic stop in Laguna Beach. The female driver reported it, DNA testing confirmed it and officer David Alex Park finally admitted it.
When the case went to trial, however, defense attorney Al Stokke argued that Park wasn’t responsible for making sticky all over the woman’s sweater. He insisted that she made the married patrolman make the mess—after all, she was on her way home from work as a dancer at Captain Cream Cabaret.
“She got what she wanted,” said Stokke. “She’s an overtly sexual person.”
A jury of one woman and 11 men—many white and in their 50s or 60s—agreed with Stokke. On Feb. 2, after a half-day of deliberations, they found Park not guilty of three felony charges that he’d used his badge to win sexual favors during the December 2004 traffic stop.
Park, 31, was red-faced and unable to control his twitching foot in the moments before the verdict was announced; if convicted, he would have faced prison. When he was found not guilty, he briefly embraced Stokke. In the public seating section, tears flowed from his gray-haired mother’s face. His father, a mechanic, closed his eyes and threw his head back. Outside the courtroom, surrounded by his family, a smiling Park said he felt vindicated.
Veteran sex crimes prosecutor Shaddi Kamiabipour—who’d called Park “a predator” during the nine-day trial—said she was disappointed with the verdicts. She also dismissed Stokke’s contention that the Orange County District Attorney’s office had overcharged the case. At stake, Kamiabipour said, was the principle that no one—not even a horny cop who’d once won honors for community service—is above the law.
Keep Reading
“Park didn’t pick a housewife or a 17-year-old girl,” Kamiabipour said in her closing argument. “He picked a stripper. He picked the perfect victim.”
* * *
In the wee hours of Dec. 15, 2004, Lucy (only her first name was used during the trial) finished her final shift at Captain Cream in Lake Forest, not far from the Irvine Spectrum. Management had let her go after an incident involving a female customer in a bathroom stall. According to court records, there had been a small amount of cocaine, kissing and breast fondling.
Meanwhile, Park was on patrol in the southwest portion of Irvine. Prosecutors believe he was craving a sexual rendezvous, and so he watched for Lucy’s white BMW to leave the strip club parking lot, then tailed her, waiting for an excuse for a stop. Park insisted he’d been cruising on the 405 north and coincidentally saw Lucy’s vehicle weave and speed.
Kamiabipour, the prosecutor, shook her head in disbelief. She knew the facts—that the officer had waited at least eight or nine minutes before stopping the stripper on a secluded section of a highway that was out of his jurisdiction.
“He was stalking her,” she said.
Four months earlier, Park had stopped Lucy under similar circumstances. That time, he’d ignored a plastic drug baggie he’d found in her car and her suspended license. But the stop wasn’t a waste of time. After friendly chit-chat, the officer had scored Lucy’s phone number. Telephone records show that Park called the stripper the next morning. She told him she was too busy to meet.
On the witness stand, Park explained that he’d called Lucy out of concern for a citizen’s safety. He also shrugged his shoulders when Kamiabipour slowly listed the first names of nine Captain Cream female employees—Annette, Denise, Rashele, Marlia, Brandi, Andrea, Deborah, Laura and Shannon—whose license plates he’d run through the DMV computer in the weeks prior to his sexual encounter with Lucy. (Another coincidence, according to Stokke.) Jurors also learned that Irvine Police Sgt. Michael Hallinan had previously warned Park as they left work to stay away from the strippers.
Park, who works in construction nowadays, conceded that he’d been given the warning but claimed that he had no clue it was Lucy in the vehicle or that she had an invalid driver’s license, even as he approached her car window.
Kamiabipour believed she’d caught the 6-foot-3 cop in a lie. Records show he ran the bosomy, 5-foot, 110-pound dancer’s license plate before the stop, did not call for backup despite the potential for an arrest and failed to tell his supervisor or dispatch that he was leaving Irvine. Several Irvine officers testified that Park’s behavior that night was odd.
“[Park’s] testimony was just incredible,” said Kamiabipour. Irvine city officials must have doubted his story, too. After an exhaustive police internal affairs investigation, they felt it was prudent to give Lucy $400,000 to make her civil lawsuit go away—for fear a jury might give her much more.
In a secretly-recorded phone call to Laguna Beach police shortly after the incident, Lucy recalled that she’d told Park she had no license. Park began “rubbing himself up against me,” she said. “Then, he said, ‘What are we going to do here, Lucy?’”
Park unzipped his pants, took his penis out and got an erection, she explained. “Basically, the officer made me give [him] a freaking hand job and he let me go. I’m so freaked out about it.”
(Lucy also told police, prosecutors and the jury that Park had also fingered her vagina and fondled her breasts before he ejaculated on her.)
“I was confused,” she told the Laguna Beach dispatcher. “He called me afterwards. I’m scared, you know . . . What’s an Irvine cop doing hanging out at a strip club in Lake Forest?”
Telephone records prove that Park made a 19-minute call to Lucy shortly after their encounter. The officer—who told the woman he was “Joe Stephens,” an Orange County Sheriff’s Department deputy who had died months earlier—said it was a friendly call to make sure she’d arrived home safely. The stripper said he told her to keep her mouth shut.
And then Kamiabipour introduced the bombshell evidence from a high-ranking Irvine police officer: on the night Park tailed Lucy out of the city, the global positioning system in his patrol car had been disconnected without authorization.
“I checked and [the GPS] was not working,” said Lt. Henry Boggs.
An unexplainable coincidence, Park’s defense countered.
* * *
For all his boneheaded mistakes, Park madea sharp decision picking his legal counsel. Stokke (and John Barnett, Paul Myer and Jennifer Keller) is among the elite of the local defense bar. His fine suits and mastery of courtroom procedures compliment the folksy, grandfatherly style he uses to charm juries. And there was this unspoken advantage over the prosecution: longtime courthouse observers have no memory of an Orange County jury convicting a police officer of a felony.
It wasn’t a surprise that Stokke put the woman and her part-time occupation on trial. In his opening argument, he made it The Good Cop versus The Slutty Stripper. He pointed out that she’d once had a violent fight with a boyfriend in San Diego. He mocked her inability to keep a driver’s license. He accused her of purposefully “weakening” Park so that he became “a man,” not a cop during the traffic stop. He called her a liar angling for easy lawsuit cash. He called her a whore without saying the word.
“You dance around a pole, don’t you?” Stokke asked.
Superior Court Judge William Evans ruled the question irrelevant.
Stokke saw he was scoring points with the jury.
“Do you place a pole between your legs and go up and down?” he asked.
“No,” said Lucy before the judge interrupted.
“You do the dancing to get men to do what you what them to do,” said Stokke. “And the same thing happened out there on that highway [in Laguna Beach]. You wanted [Park] to take some sex!”
Lucy said, “No sir,” the sex wasn’t consensual. Stokke—usually a mellow fellow with a nasally, monotone voice—gripped his fists, stood upright, clenched his jaws and then thundered, “You had a buzz on [that night], didn’t you?”
As if watching a volley in tennis, the heads of the male-dominated jury spun from Stokke back to Lucy, who sat in the witness box. She said no, but it was hopeless. Jurors stared at her without a hint of sympathy.
In his closing argument, Stokke pounced. He called Lucy one of those “girls who have learned the art of the tease, getting what they want . . . they’ve learned to separate men from their money.”
Kamiabipour wasn’t amused. “Dancer or not, sexually promiscuous nor not, she had the right not to consent,” she told jurors. “[Park] doesn’t get a freebie just because of who she is . . . He used her like an object.”
http://www.sandiegoduihelp.com
Officer Park: put your hands behind my back
No one disputes that an on-duty Irvine police officer got an erection and ejaculated on a motorist during an early-morning traffic stop in Laguna Beach. The female driver reported it, DNA testing confirmed it and officer David Alex Park finally admitted it.
When the case went to trial, however, defense attorney Al Stokke argued that Park wasn’t responsible for making sticky all over the woman’s sweater. He insisted that she made the married patrolman make the mess—after all, she was on her way home from work as a dancer at Captain Cream Cabaret.
“She got what she wanted,” said Stokke. “She’s an overtly sexual person.”
A jury of one woman and 11 men—many white and in their 50s or 60s—agreed with Stokke. On Feb. 2, after a half-day of deliberations, they found Park not guilty of three felony charges that he’d used his badge to win sexual favors during the December 2004 traffic stop.
Park, 31, was red-faced and unable to control his twitching foot in the moments before the verdict was announced; if convicted, he would have faced prison. When he was found not guilty, he briefly embraced Stokke. In the public seating section, tears flowed from his gray-haired mother’s face. His father, a mechanic, closed his eyes and threw his head back. Outside the courtroom, surrounded by his family, a smiling Park said he felt vindicated.
Veteran sex crimes prosecutor Shaddi Kamiabipour—who’d called Park “a predator” during the nine-day trial—said she was disappointed with the verdicts. She also dismissed Stokke’s contention that the Orange County District Attorney’s office had overcharged the case. At stake, Kamiabipour said, was the principle that no one—not even a horny cop who’d once won honors for community service—is above the law.
Keep Reading
“Park didn’t pick a housewife or a 17-year-old girl,” Kamiabipour said in her closing argument. “He picked a stripper. He picked the perfect victim.”
* * *
In the wee hours of Dec. 15, 2004, Lucy (only her first name was used during the trial) finished her final shift at Captain Cream in Lake Forest, not far from the Irvine Spectrum. Management had let her go after an incident involving a female customer in a bathroom stall. According to court records, there had been a small amount of cocaine, kissing and breast fondling.
Meanwhile, Park was on patrol in the southwest portion of Irvine. Prosecutors believe he was craving a sexual rendezvous, and so he watched for Lucy’s white BMW to leave the strip club parking lot, then tailed her, waiting for an excuse for a stop. Park insisted he’d been cruising on the 405 north and coincidentally saw Lucy’s vehicle weave and speed.
Kamiabipour, the prosecutor, shook her head in disbelief. She knew the facts—that the officer had waited at least eight or nine minutes before stopping the stripper on a secluded section of a highway that was out of his jurisdiction.
“He was stalking her,” she said.
Four months earlier, Park had stopped Lucy under similar circumstances. That time, he’d ignored a plastic drug baggie he’d found in her car and her suspended license. But the stop wasn’t a waste of time. After friendly chit-chat, the officer had scored Lucy’s phone number. Telephone records show that Park called the stripper the next morning. She told him she was too busy to meet.
On the witness stand, Park explained that he’d called Lucy out of concern for a citizen’s safety. He also shrugged his shoulders when Kamiabipour slowly listed the first names of nine Captain Cream female employees—Annette, Denise, Rashele, Marlia, Brandi, Andrea, Deborah, Laura and Shannon—whose license plates he’d run through the DMV computer in the weeks prior to his sexual encounter with Lucy. (Another coincidence, according to Stokke.) Jurors also learned that Irvine Police Sgt. Michael Hallinan had previously warned Park as they left work to stay away from the strippers.
Park, who works in construction nowadays, conceded that he’d been given the warning but claimed that he had no clue it was Lucy in the vehicle or that she had an invalid driver’s license, even as he approached her car window.
Kamiabipour believed she’d caught the 6-foot-3 cop in a lie. Records show he ran the bosomy, 5-foot, 110-pound dancer’s license plate before the stop, did not call for backup despite the potential for an arrest and failed to tell his supervisor or dispatch that he was leaving Irvine. Several Irvine officers testified that Park’s behavior that night was odd.
“[Park’s] testimony was just incredible,” said Kamiabipour. Irvine city officials must have doubted his story, too. After an exhaustive police internal affairs investigation, they felt it was prudent to give Lucy $400,000 to make her civil lawsuit go away—for fear a jury might give her much more.
In a secretly-recorded phone call to Laguna Beach police shortly after the incident, Lucy recalled that she’d told Park she had no license. Park began “rubbing himself up against me,” she said. “Then, he said, ‘What are we going to do here, Lucy?’”
Park unzipped his pants, took his penis out and got an erection, she explained. “Basically, the officer made me give [him] a freaking hand job and he let me go. I’m so freaked out about it.”
(Lucy also told police, prosecutors and the jury that Park had also fingered her vagina and fondled her breasts before he ejaculated on her.)
“I was confused,” she told the Laguna Beach dispatcher. “He called me afterwards. I’m scared, you know . . . What’s an Irvine cop doing hanging out at a strip club in Lake Forest?”
Telephone records prove that Park made a 19-minute call to Lucy shortly after their encounter. The officer—who told the woman he was “Joe Stephens,” an Orange County Sheriff’s Department deputy who had died months earlier—said it was a friendly call to make sure she’d arrived home safely. The stripper said he told her to keep her mouth shut.
And then Kamiabipour introduced the bombshell evidence from a high-ranking Irvine police officer: on the night Park tailed Lucy out of the city, the global positioning system in his patrol car had been disconnected without authorization.
“I checked and [the GPS] was not working,” said Lt. Henry Boggs.
An unexplainable coincidence, Park’s defense countered.
* * *
For all his boneheaded mistakes, Park madea sharp decision picking his legal counsel. Stokke (and John Barnett, Paul Myer and Jennifer Keller) is among the elite of the local defense bar. His fine suits and mastery of courtroom procedures compliment the folksy, grandfatherly style he uses to charm juries. And there was this unspoken advantage over the prosecution: longtime courthouse observers have no memory of an Orange County jury convicting a police officer of a felony.
It wasn’t a surprise that Stokke put the woman and her part-time occupation on trial. In his opening argument, he made it The Good Cop versus The Slutty Stripper. He pointed out that she’d once had a violent fight with a boyfriend in San Diego. He mocked her inability to keep a driver’s license. He accused her of purposefully “weakening” Park so that he became “a man,” not a cop during the traffic stop. He called her a liar angling for easy lawsuit cash. He called her a whore without saying the word.
“You dance around a pole, don’t you?” Stokke asked.
Superior Court Judge William Evans ruled the question irrelevant.
Stokke saw he was scoring points with the jury.
“Do you place a pole between your legs and go up and down?” he asked.
“No,” said Lucy before the judge interrupted.
“You do the dancing to get men to do what you what them to do,” said Stokke. “And the same thing happened out there on that highway [in Laguna Beach]. You wanted [Park] to take some sex!”
Lucy said, “No sir,” the sex wasn’t consensual. Stokke—usually a mellow fellow with a nasally, monotone voice—gripped his fists, stood upright, clenched his jaws and then thundered, “You had a buzz on [that night], didn’t you?”
As if watching a volley in tennis, the heads of the male-dominated jury spun from Stokke back to Lucy, who sat in the witness box. She said no, but it was hopeless. Jurors stared at her without a hint of sympathy.
In his closing argument, Stokke pounced. He called Lucy one of those “girls who have learned the art of the tease, getting what they want . . . they’ve learned to separate men from their money.”
Kamiabipour wasn’t amused. “Dancer or not, sexually promiscuous nor not, she had the right not to consent,” she told jurors. “[Park] doesn’t get a freebie just because of who she is . . . He used her like an object.”
http://www.sandiegoduihelp.com
San Diego DMV information after a San Diego DUI / Drunk Driving arrest
What you must do within 10 days of being arrested
10. If you need to save your driver's license or privileges, your attorney has only ten (10) calendar days to contact DMV!
Do not schedule yourself. If you contact DMV to schedule a date conflicting with your attorney's calendar, DMV will not reschedule and you may not get the attorney of your choice. There is no rush as long as your attorney contacts DMV by the 10th day from your arrest.
9. The ten (10) day time limit is computed from the Issue date of the SUSPENSION/REVOCATION ORDER AND TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE. If time is running out or you are late, contact an attorney ASAP.
8. This ADMINISTRATIVE PER SE SUSPENSION/REVOCATION ORDER AND TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE is the California DMV paper which you should have received.
7. Even if you did not receive this DMV paper, the California DMV will probably take action against your driving privileges.
6. Even if you have a license from another state, and even if the officer did not take your license, that state may also take action against your driving privileges.
5. This TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE ENDORSEMENT is valid for only thirty (30) days from the issue date.
If a DMV hearing is requested within ten (10) days, your DMV TEMPORARY will be extended & there will be a stay (delay) of any suspension until the outcome of your DMV hearing is determined.
4. Do not confuse this initial 30 day TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE with your court date!
The DMV and criminal proceedings are separate and independent. The outcome of one almost never affects the other. Sometimes the officer or the DMV paper confuses or misleads you to believe that the TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE is good "until the court date". If there are approximately thirty (30) days from your arrest date to your court date, this may just be a dangerous coincidence. There usually are months before your DMV hearing takes place.
3. There are three (3) issues at the hearing if you completed a chemical test. (See reverse side of DMV paper.)
Issues are whether the officer had probable cause to stop or contact you or whether the chemical test evidence is beatable.
2. The DMV has the burden of proof to prevail on all three (3) issues. If DMV meets the burden of proof on two (2) issues, you win!
1. All a DMV attorney has to do is knock out one (1) DMV issue to save your license & you avoid any reissue fee and/or Proof of Insurance SR-22 filing!
http://www.sandiegodui.com
>
http://www.sandiegoduihelp.com
10. If you need to save your driver's license or privileges, your attorney has only ten (10) calendar days to contact DMV!
Do not schedule yourself. If you contact DMV to schedule a date conflicting with your attorney's calendar, DMV will not reschedule and you may not get the attorney of your choice. There is no rush as long as your attorney contacts DMV by the 10th day from your arrest.
9. The ten (10) day time limit is computed from the Issue date of the SUSPENSION/REVOCATION ORDER AND TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE. If time is running out or you are late, contact an attorney ASAP.
8. This ADMINISTRATIVE PER SE SUSPENSION/REVOCATION ORDER AND TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE is the California DMV paper which you should have received.
7. Even if you did not receive this DMV paper, the California DMV will probably take action against your driving privileges.
6. Even if you have a license from another state, and even if the officer did not take your license, that state may also take action against your driving privileges.
5. This TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE ENDORSEMENT is valid for only thirty (30) days from the issue date.
If a DMV hearing is requested within ten (10) days, your DMV TEMPORARY will be extended & there will be a stay (delay) of any suspension until the outcome of your DMV hearing is determined.
4. Do not confuse this initial 30 day TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE with your court date!
The DMV and criminal proceedings are separate and independent. The outcome of one almost never affects the other. Sometimes the officer or the DMV paper confuses or misleads you to believe that the TEMPORARY DRIVER LICENSE is good "until the court date". If there are approximately thirty (30) days from your arrest date to your court date, this may just be a dangerous coincidence. There usually are months before your DMV hearing takes place.
3. There are three (3) issues at the hearing if you completed a chemical test. (See reverse side of DMV paper.)
Issues are whether the officer had probable cause to stop or contact you or whether the chemical test evidence is beatable.
2. The DMV has the burden of proof to prevail on all three (3) issues. If DMV meets the burden of proof on two (2) issues, you win!
1. All a DMV attorney has to do is knock out one (1) DMV issue to save your license & you avoid any reissue fee and/or Proof of Insurance SR-22 filing!
http://www.sandiegodui.com
>
http://www.sandiegoduihelp.com
Sunday, February 11, 2007
San Diego DUI - second DUI: Woman hits cop car
SAN DIEGO -- A 21-year-old woman was arrested and charged with driving under the influence of alcohol after allegedly hitting a police car, NBC 7/39 reported.
San Diego police said the crash happened at about 4 a.m. Saturday on Home Avenue underneath the Interstate 805 overpass.
Police said the officer had pulled over another vehicle for a traffic stop when the woman drove up on the sidewalk, hitting the police car's side door.
Officers said the woman's Breathalyzer test registered at 1.8, and that this is her second DUI charge.
There were no injuries reported.
http://www.sandiegodui.com
San Diego police said the crash happened at about 4 a.m. Saturday on Home Avenue underneath the Interstate 805 overpass.
Police said the officer had pulled over another vehicle for a traffic stop when the woman drove up on the sidewalk, hitting the police car's side door.
Officers said the woman's Breathalyzer test registered at 1.8, and that this is her second DUI charge.
There were no injuries reported.
http://www.sandiegodui.com
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Question the San Diego DUI blood technician's credentials
Suspects have a right to question the nurses who draw blood.
NEWARK, N.J. - A state appellate court ruled yesterday that accused drunken drivers have the right to question nurses who take blood samples.
The decision would affect perhaps several hundred of the 30,000 DWI cases brought annually in New Jersey, said Evan M. Levow, a lawyer for the Gloucester County man whose arrest led to the ruling.
Most of the remaining DWI cases rely on evidence from a breath test.
Levow praised the ruling, asserting that "because there are so many variables and factors for contamination of the blood sample, the defendant must have the right to confront all of the witnesses in the chain of the blood evidence."
"People generally don't challenge blood cases because they figure there's nothing to challenge and that it is accurate," said Levow, a Cherry Hill lawyer whose practice is devoted to drunken-driving defense.
An expert for the defense testified that errors in drawing blood could inflate the blood alcohol content, including using an alcohol swab instead of a betadine swab to sterilize the suspect's skin before inserting a needle. Other mistakes include improperly prepared or sealed vials, which could allow fermentation to occur and create alcohol, the expert said.
State law allows for prosecutors to introduce a certification from the nurse that the blood was taken in a "medically acceptable manner."
But the appellate panel, in a 3-0 ruling, said the inability to cross-examine the nurse violated the defendant's right to confront witnesses under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I of the New Jersey Constitution.
It reversed the man's conviction and sent the case back for a new trial.
The state Attorney General's Office had no immediate comment on the decision.
The Gloucester County Prosecutor's Office, which handled the case, has made no decision on whether to appeal, said Bernie Weisenfeld, an office spokesman.
The case stems from the arrest of Robert Renshaw at 2:17 a.m. Aug. 19, 2004, in Franklin Township.
Renshaw, 33, of Elk Township, was found behind the wheel of a Ford Explorer that rammed a tree on the lawn of a house. A mailbox and signs had been hit, and a utility pole was left hanging by wires.
A police officer said Renshaw appeared disoriented, could not provide identification, and had alcohol on his breath.
Renshaw was taken to a hospital where blood was taken. His blood alcohol content was found to be 0.1416 percent in one vial, and 0.1403 percent in a second. Both readings are nearly double the legal limit of 0.08 percent.
Levow said his client maintains he was not drunk.
http://www.SanDiegoDUIhelp.com
NEWARK, N.J. - A state appellate court ruled yesterday that accused drunken drivers have the right to question nurses who take blood samples.
The decision would affect perhaps several hundred of the 30,000 DWI cases brought annually in New Jersey, said Evan M. Levow, a lawyer for the Gloucester County man whose arrest led to the ruling.
Most of the remaining DWI cases rely on evidence from a breath test.
Levow praised the ruling, asserting that "because there are so many variables and factors for contamination of the blood sample, the defendant must have the right to confront all of the witnesses in the chain of the blood evidence."
"People generally don't challenge blood cases because they figure there's nothing to challenge and that it is accurate," said Levow, a Cherry Hill lawyer whose practice is devoted to drunken-driving defense.
An expert for the defense testified that errors in drawing blood could inflate the blood alcohol content, including using an alcohol swab instead of a betadine swab to sterilize the suspect's skin before inserting a needle. Other mistakes include improperly prepared or sealed vials, which could allow fermentation to occur and create alcohol, the expert said.
State law allows for prosecutors to introduce a certification from the nurse that the blood was taken in a "medically acceptable manner."
But the appellate panel, in a 3-0 ruling, said the inability to cross-examine the nurse violated the defendant's right to confront witnesses under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I of the New Jersey Constitution.
It reversed the man's conviction and sent the case back for a new trial.
The state Attorney General's Office had no immediate comment on the decision.
The Gloucester County Prosecutor's Office, which handled the case, has made no decision on whether to appeal, said Bernie Weisenfeld, an office spokesman.
The case stems from the arrest of Robert Renshaw at 2:17 a.m. Aug. 19, 2004, in Franklin Township.
Renshaw, 33, of Elk Township, was found behind the wheel of a Ford Explorer that rammed a tree on the lawn of a house. A mailbox and signs had been hit, and a utility pole was left hanging by wires.
A police officer said Renshaw appeared disoriented, could not provide identification, and had alcohol on his breath.
Renshaw was taken to a hospital where blood was taken. His blood alcohol content was found to be 0.1416 percent in one vial, and 0.1403 percent in a second. Both readings are nearly double the legal limit of 0.08 percent.
Levow said his client maintains he was not drunk.
http://www.SanDiegoDUIhelp.com
Friday, February 09, 2007
San Diego DUI: Pedestrian Danger Zones
SAN DIEGO -- If you're walking in San Diego County, chances are you could put yourself in the path of danger.
According to a 2004 study by the Surface Transportation Policy Project, the county was rated as one of the least safe metropolitan areas for pedestrians.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedestrian Danger Zones By City
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be more exact, it ranks 28th in pedestrian danger among the 50 largest counties in the U.S.
Overall, the top pedestrian danger zones in the city of San Diego have something in common: a lot of people, a lot of cars and in some cases, a lot of partying.
Breaking it down by cities, in 2006, La Mesa had 21 pedestrian-involved collisions. The most dangerous location was Grossmont Center Drive in front of the mall where there were five accidents.
In Carlsbad, there were 52 pedestrian collisions. What's unique to this city is that 25 of those involved bicyclists. Two accidents have occurred at the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive.
There were 25 pedestrian-involved collisions in the area known as Core-Columbia, in and around the Gaslamp District. Hillcrest had the second-highest totals with 26 collisions in 2006. And the top pedestrian danger zone was in Pacific Beach, where there were 37 pedestrian-involved collisions.
NBC 7/39's Artie Ojeda spoke with a local mother whose daughter was killed in a hit-and-run in Pacific Beach. Kathy Padilla told NBC the driver had prior DUI convictions. He was sentenced to four years in jail.
Following her daughter's death, Padilla has been working to create "Angie's Law," which would require stronger penalties for hit-and-run drivers.
The group "Walk San Diego" is also pushing for safer streets. Many communities are responding, creating so-called pedestrian master plans.
http://www.SanDiegoDUI.com
http://www.SanDiegoDUIhelp.com
According to a 2004 study by the Surface Transportation Policy Project, the county was rated as one of the least safe metropolitan areas for pedestrians.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedestrian Danger Zones By City
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be more exact, it ranks 28th in pedestrian danger among the 50 largest counties in the U.S.
Overall, the top pedestrian danger zones in the city of San Diego have something in common: a lot of people, a lot of cars and in some cases, a lot of partying.
Breaking it down by cities, in 2006, La Mesa had 21 pedestrian-involved collisions. The most dangerous location was Grossmont Center Drive in front of the mall where there were five accidents.
In Carlsbad, there were 52 pedestrian collisions. What's unique to this city is that 25 of those involved bicyclists. Two accidents have occurred at the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive.
There were 25 pedestrian-involved collisions in the area known as Core-Columbia, in and around the Gaslamp District. Hillcrest had the second-highest totals with 26 collisions in 2006. And the top pedestrian danger zone was in Pacific Beach, where there were 37 pedestrian-involved collisions.
NBC 7/39's Artie Ojeda spoke with a local mother whose daughter was killed in a hit-and-run in Pacific Beach. Kathy Padilla told NBC the driver had prior DUI convictions. He was sentenced to four years in jail.
Following her daughter's death, Padilla has been working to create "Angie's Law," which would require stronger penalties for hit-and-run drivers.
The group "Walk San Diego" is also pushing for safer streets. Many communities are responding, creating so-called pedestrian master plans.
http://www.SanDiegoDUI.com
http://www.SanDiegoDUIhelp.com
Monday, February 05, 2007
Dial 911 if San Diego DUI Driver?
http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/dial-911-to-report-drunk-drivers/2007020215350
9990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001)
Dial 911 to Report Drunk Drivers
WASHINGTON (Feb. 2) - Driving home one night, Caroline Cash spotted a black Honda swaying in and out of its lane on a busy Interstate in suburban Washington.
Cash was concerned that the driver might be drunk. So she used a tactic being pushed by many states - she picked up her cell phone and dialed 911.
"The public is starting to understand ... the tragedies that can occur if no one reports that person," said Cash, executive director of the Maryland and Delaware chapters of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. "There is no way that law enforcement can do it alone." States are using highway message boards, road signs and public awareness campaigns to encourage motorists to dial 911 on their cell phones if they come across people who might be driving drunk. The messages are expected to be used this weekend to guard against impaired driving tied to Super Bowl parties.
In California, law enforcement started a campaign last fall after noting an increase in drunken driving deaths. The state has relayed the message on overhead freeway signs and near rest stops.
Motorists can call in anonymously and are asked to describe the vehicle - its license plate, make and model and color - along with its location. Some states also have cell phone hot lines to state law enforcement.
Authorities say they use the tips but are required to make their own assessment before pulling someone over. They recommend that motorists pull over before calling, but it typically falls under the emergency exception in states banning the use of handheld phones while driving.
Nationally, nearly 17,000 people died in alcohol-related crashes in 2005, including pedestrians and cyclists, a number that has shown little decline in recent years. In California, the toll was an estimated 1,250.
Delaware recently placed a dozen signs along state roads. The program was modeled after one in Colorado, where motorists have been instructed to dial *CSP - contacting the Colorado State Patrol - to report roadway problems.
"Our feeling is better safe than sorry. If the person does turn out to be impaired, you just possibly saved someone's life by telling police," said Andrea Summers, a community relations officer with Delaware's Office of Highway Safety.
The call-in approach isn't perfect. Calls to 911 from a cell phone frequently need to be routed to the proper jurisdiction because of different wireless carriers and callers who may be traveling far from home.
In Arkansas, the state doesn't have a specific number for callers to report drunken or aggressive driving or to contact regional divisions of the state police, said State Police spokesman Bill Sadler.
But he said the calls can be routed to the proper authorities. When it comes to road safety, "Quite frankly, we'll take the information any way we can get it," Sadler said.
Greg Rohde, executive director of The E9-1-1 Institute, which monitors emergency communications issues, said initiatives like these need to be accompanied by education programs.
"It can be very harmful to the system and impede public safety if 911 calls are ringing off the hook with inappropriate calls," Rohde said.
wwww.sandiegodui.com
9990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001)
Dial 911 to Report Drunk Drivers
WASHINGTON (Feb. 2) - Driving home one night, Caroline Cash spotted a black Honda swaying in and out of its lane on a busy Interstate in suburban Washington.
Cash was concerned that the driver might be drunk. So she used a tactic being pushed by many states - she picked up her cell phone and dialed 911.
"The public is starting to understand ... the tragedies that can occur if no one reports that person," said Cash, executive director of the Maryland and Delaware chapters of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. "There is no way that law enforcement can do it alone." States are using highway message boards, road signs and public awareness campaigns to encourage motorists to dial 911 on their cell phones if they come across people who might be driving drunk. The messages are expected to be used this weekend to guard against impaired driving tied to Super Bowl parties.
In California, law enforcement started a campaign last fall after noting an increase in drunken driving deaths. The state has relayed the message on overhead freeway signs and near rest stops.
Motorists can call in anonymously and are asked to describe the vehicle - its license plate, make and model and color - along with its location. Some states also have cell phone hot lines to state law enforcement.
Authorities say they use the tips but are required to make their own assessment before pulling someone over. They recommend that motorists pull over before calling, but it typically falls under the emergency exception in states banning the use of handheld phones while driving.
Nationally, nearly 17,000 people died in alcohol-related crashes in 2005, including pedestrians and cyclists, a number that has shown little decline in recent years. In California, the toll was an estimated 1,250.
Delaware recently placed a dozen signs along state roads. The program was modeled after one in Colorado, where motorists have been instructed to dial *CSP - contacting the Colorado State Patrol - to report roadway problems.
"Our feeling is better safe than sorry. If the person does turn out to be impaired, you just possibly saved someone's life by telling police," said Andrea Summers, a community relations officer with Delaware's Office of Highway Safety.
The call-in approach isn't perfect. Calls to 911 from a cell phone frequently need to be routed to the proper jurisdiction because of different wireless carriers and callers who may be traveling far from home.
In Arkansas, the state doesn't have a specific number for callers to report drunken or aggressive driving or to contact regional divisions of the state police, said State Police spokesman Bill Sadler.
But he said the calls can be routed to the proper authorities. When it comes to road safety, "Quite frankly, we'll take the information any way we can get it," Sadler said.
Greg Rohde, executive director of The E9-1-1 Institute, which monitors emergency communications issues, said initiatives like these need to be accompanied by education programs.
"It can be very harmful to the system and impede public safety if 911 calls are ringing off the hook with inappropriate calls," Rohde said.
wwww.sandiegodui.com
| This website & linked blog is made available by this law firm for general information purposes only and to provide a general understanding of the law, not to provide legal advice. Readers of this website/blog are cautioned that reading the website/blog does not create a lawyer-client relationship between the reader and this law firm. |
