Habitual Drunk Drivers

[dazzleman]

There's a woman that a friend of mine works with who is a raging alcoholic and a habitual drunk driver.  She has a total disregard for the danger in which she puts innocent people who happen to be crossing her path.  Numerous times, she has hit other people's cars and just driven off.  If the other driver is there and she has to stop, she acts as if it's the other person's fault and accepts no responsibility for the accident even though it's always 100% her fault.

We've always said that it's only a matter of time before she seriously injures or kills somebody.  So last Saturday, she was driving drunk as always, and hit a 24-year-old pedestrian and knocked her right out of her shoes and 30 feet into the air.  She kept going and was caught about a mile from the accident scene only because the other cars on the road boxed her in and kept her from leaving until the police arrived.

The woman she hit was taken to a local hospital but her injuries were serious enough that she had to be airlifted to a different hospital for treatment.  She could possibly have longer term damage from the accident.

This drunken bitch is now charged with a few things like vehicular assault, drunk driving, leaving the scene of an accident, etc.  She is not taking it seriously at all.  She came back to her job after being in jail, and many of the people there were supportive of her.  They act as if she is going through an ordeal equivalent to the innocent person that she hit.  I just can't fathom this way of thinking at all.  This woman is degenerate drunk with no regard for the safety of others, and she's already laughing and joking about the whole thing, saying that she thought she had hit a rock.

I wonder whether she will get the penalty that she really deserves, which is a lengthy prison term.  She has no interest in alcohol treatment and doesn't think she has a problem.  It seems our legal system caters to people like this.  It's really outrageous.  Of course her license is suspended, for whatever that is worth, but I'm sure she'll drive anyway if she can get her hands on a car.  Her car is impounded for evidence because the flesh of the woman she hit is on her headlight.

This case is so outrageous, and I don't think people like this get treated with the harshness that they deserve.  The system doesn't seem to be able to distinguish between people who may occasionally have a drink too many at a party, and people who drive rip-roaring drunk on a regular basis like this scumbag woman.

[GoCougs]

That's the thing with drunks - if they would feel guilt about causing wrecks they wouldn't be drunks. It's a "disease" after all.

Also, as shown, people can't be drunks without enabling if not support from family and friends, and societal complications that come from calling out (like an employer) drunks. Now that it's a BS "disease" makes it all the worse.

The DUI defense industry is also big $$$, which is basically just another example of American entitlement masked as "freedom" and "rights."

Sadly, this is about what it takes to get drunks off the road. They basically have to maim or kill someone. From the sounds of it she's in for major jail time and hopefully a big fat lawsuit. 

[Submariner]

Wow.  I don't know who is worse, the woman or the people giving her support.

What someone puts into their body or does with their life is their business and theirs alone, but drunk driving is a an extraordinarily selfish act.  One can only hope that she serves a very long prison sentence and loses her job (and license).

[FoMoJo]

Sounds like she's a sociopath first and a drunk second.  I have no use for these people.  They're a blight on society.

[Submariner]

Sounds like she's a sociopath first and a drunk second.  I have no use for these people.  They're a blight on society.

Yeah, even if you hit someone and they were 100% at fault, I'm not sure how you could go around joking about it. 

[MaxPower]

This drunken bitch is now charged with a few things like vehicular assault, drunk driving, leaving the scene of an accident, etc.  She is not taking it seriously at all.  She came back to her job after being in jail, and many of the people there were supportive of her.  They act as if she is going through an ordeal equivalent to the innocent person that she hit.  I just can't fathom this way of thinking at all.  This woman is degenerate drunk with no regard for the safety of others, and she's already laughing and joking about the whole thing, saying that she thought she had hit a rock.

I wonder whether she will get the penalty that she really deserves, which is a lengthy prison term.  She has no interest in alcohol treatment and doesn't think she has a problem.  It seems our legal system caters to people like this.  It's really outrageous.  Of course her license is suspended, for whatever that is worth, but I'm sure she'll drive anyway if she can get her hands on a car.  Her car is impounded for evidence because the flesh of the woman she hit is on her headlight.

This case is so outrageous, and I don't think people like this get treated with the harshness that they deserve.  The system doesn't seem to be able to distinguish between people who may occasionally have a drink too many at a party, and people who drive rip-roaring drunk on a regular basis like this scumbag woman.

She's got rights, man.  Rights.  Matter of fact, she's the real victim here.  (Don't worry about the person who actually got hurt.)

More than once I've had to remind judges that there is actually someone whose life has been significantly disrupted by the defendant's actions...and (surprise) it's not the defendant.  I've come back to my office ready to punch the walls before after hearing judges buy some of the crap defense attorneys and defendants spew at sentencing.

[MexicoCityM3]

Could you go to the prosecuting DA as a character witness or something of that sort?

[dazzleman]

Sounds like she's a sociopath first and a drunk second.  I have no use for these people.  They're a blight on society.

Absolutely.  She's pure trash.

[dazzleman]

Could you go to the prosecuting DA as a character witness or something of that sort?

I don't actually know her.  She's a friend's coworker.

[dazzleman]

She's got rights, man.  Rights.  Matter of fact, she's the real victim here.  (Don't worry about the person who actually got hurt.)

More than once I've had to remind judges that there is actually someone whose life has been significantly disrupted by the defendant's actions...and (surprise) it's not the defendant.  I've come back to my office ready to punch the walls before after hearing judges buy some of the crap defense attorneys and defendants spew at sentencing.

I don't understand judges like that.  I doubt she'll get any real jail time.

[dazzleman]

Wow.  I don't know who is worse, the woman or the people giving her support.

What someone puts into their body or does with their life is their business and theirs alone, but drunk driving is a an extraordinarily selfish act.  One can only hope that she serves a very long prison sentence and loses her job (and license).

The people giving her support are mostly (but not all) stupid low-level ghetto trash.  People who are completely morally bankrupt and have no sense of right or wrong.  Then there are the "it's a tragedy for both people" types, who can't acknowledge that there isn't equivalency between the perpetrator of the incident and the innocent victim.  Moral equivalency is a big part of why our society is fucked up.

[Rupert]

Come on, no it's not.

[Raza]

These people disgust me. 

[SVT_Power]

I don't actually know her.

Then maybe you shouldn't pass judgement 

[Submariner]

Then maybe you shouldn't pass judgement 

Nah - there is no excuse for drunk driving and even less of an excuse for making jokes about hitting someone due to your intoxication.  Passing judgement is perfectly acceptable here. 

[Submariner]

The people giving her support are mostly (but not all) stupid low-level ghetto trash.  People who are completely morally bankrupt and have no sense of right or wrong.  Then there are the "it's a tragedy for both people" types, who can't acknowledge that there isn't equivalency between the perpetrator of the incident and the innocent victim.  Moral equivalency is a big part of why our society is fucked up.

They have no sense of right or wrong, until it happens to them. 

Greg's use of "animals" feels right, but then again my pets show empathy when I'm feeling sick, so perhaps the use of "animals" is being too generous. 

[FlatBlackCaddy]

Too bad someone didn't take the trash out sooner, now it's sat around so long it's really starting to stink the place up.

I really don't understand how this shit is allowed to happen. Everyone knows about these types of people, friends, coworkers and even the police.

But we can't do anything, we have to wait until she finally kills someone. Maybe it will just be a biker or a jogger and not a minivan full of kids.

Edit:

I'm sorry, but this persons life(a person who CHOOSES to endanger everyone, selfishly) is NOT in any way shape or form more valuable than any of the people she will eventually kill. We should never have to wait until something this bad happens.

[Rupert]

Sounds like you didn't see Minority Report.

[SVT_Power]

Nah - there is no excuse for drunk driving and even less of an excuse for making jokes about hitting someone due to your intoxication.  Passing judgement is perfectly acceptable here. 

You might want to check your batteries

[GoCougs]

"We" choose to wait. We all know family, coworkers, friends, etc., who are drunks, and by and large we let them get away with. Drunks are by definition sociopaths who don't own up to their behaviors and will wreak havoc, esp. in the workplace what with the worthless HR departments and general fear of litigation, when called out.

[bing_oh]

She's got rights, man.  Rights.  Matter of fact, she's the real victim here.  (Don't worry about the person who actually got hurt.)

More than once I've had to remind judges that there is actually someone whose life has been significantly disrupted by the defendant's actions...and (surprise) it's not the defendant.  I've come back to my office ready to punch the walls before after hearing judges buy some of the crap defense attorneys and defendants spew at sentencing.

We have a very naive, kind-hearted judge in my county (as well as a spineless law director who prosecutes misdemeanor cases). There are many, many multiple offense DUI offenders who have maybe one or two DUI's on their records when they should have a half dozen or more. They're always pleaing down DUI's to things like reckless op or (more commonly) failure to control. These are people who should be facing felony DUI charges when they get arrested because of past convictions, who are instead looking at the equivalent of a first offense DUI because of plea bargaining and an enabling judicial system. All the while, these people are being "taught" by the judicial system that there's no consequences to their actions. From a LE perspective, it's quite frustrating.

[dazzleman]

Then maybe you shouldn't pass judgement 

I know well more than enough to pass judgment on this scum.

[FoMoJo]

We have a very naive, kind-hearted judge in my county (as well as a spineless law director who prosecutes misdemeanor cases). There are many, many multiple offense DUI offenders who have maybe one or two DUI's on their records when they should have a half dozen or more. They're always pleaing down DUI's to things like reckless op or (more commonly) failure to control. These are people who should be facing felony DUI charges when they get arrested because of past convictions, who are instead looking at the equivalent of a first offense DUI because of plea bargaining and an enabling judicial system. All the while, these people are being "taught" by the judicial system that there's no consequences to their actions. From a LE perspective, it's quite frustrating.

Could it be that too many in these positions either relate to this behaviour or have someone close to them who are much the same.  I don't know how many here have driven after drinking but I can say that many of the people I have known, over the years, have driven when they shouldn't have.  The attitudes are changing now, but drunk driving is still not accepted as the crime that it is.

[AutobahnSHO]

There are too many politicians (including judges) who drive toasted so it will take a lot to change any of it...

[MaxPower]

We have a very naive, kind-hearted judge in my county (as well as a spineless law director who prosecutes misdemeanor cases). There are many, many multiple offense DUI offenders who have maybe one or two DUI's on their records when they should have a half dozen or more. They're always pleaing down DUI's to things like reckless op or (more commonly) failure to control. These are people who should be facing felony DUI charges when they get arrested because of past convictions, who are instead looking at the equivalent of a first offense DUI because of plea bargaining and an enabling judicial system. All the while, these people are being "taught" by the judicial system that there's no consequences to their actions. From a LE perspective, it's quite frustrating.

We don't do that. A nearby county does.  I actually got a lot of credit a local pd recently because I took an under the limit case to a trial. I lost, but it sends the message that we're not fucking around.

[MexicoCityM3]

We have checkpoints here on Thursday-Saturday nights that get set up around the city in random busy streers. One of the few things in Mexico where if you get caught you will not be able to pay your way out of trouble. Several friends/family members have been caught. Unavoidable immediate 20-36 hr arrest in a crappy place. Will definitely ruin your night. I am all for it.

[GoCougs]

We don't do that. A nearby county does.  I actually got a lot of credit a local pd recently because I took an under the limit case to a trial. I lost, but it sends the message that we're not fucking around.

No, it sends the message that you're wasting resources.

The problem with DUI are drunks/habitual offenders - snaring people at 0.05 - 0.08% BAC does nothing but get people who mostly don't deserve to be got.

[bing_oh]

We don't do that. A nearby county does.  I actually got a lot of credit a local pd recently because I took an under the limit case to a trial. I lost, but it sends the message that we're not fucking around.

Out law director doesn't understand that sometimes you have to roll the dice and go to trial...the judicial system isn't supposed to be a perpetual episode of Let's Make a Deal. Sometimes, the deal simply isn't correct for the crime and you have to do things the hard way.

[bing_oh]

No, it sends the message that you're wasting resources.

The problem with DUI are drunks/habitual offenders - snaring people at 0.05 - 0.08% BAC does nothing but get people who mostly don't deserve to be got.

Have you ever tested a .08 to see what it really feels like? I'll bet you havn't. Most people think that .08 is two beers...which is, for the average person, flat out bullshit. Unless you're a very regular drinker, .08 is pretty toasty....I've done the tests at .08 and can testify from first-hand experience.

[Rupert]

According to the charts, 0.08 for someone my size is well more than I would generally drink before driving.

On the other hand, DUI checkpoints are unethical, immoral, and probably unconstitutional.