millerboycott.com

In my last post (The DUI Double Standard Continues), I commented on how cops commonly get a free pass when they’re caught driving drunk.  I should have added that this double standard is applied to judges, too….

DUI Charges Dropped Against Judge


Willowbrook, IL.  Feb. 15 – Charges were dropped Wednesday against a veteran Cook County judge accused of drunken driving last fall in Willowbrook, his attorney said.

Judge James Gavin was charged with misdemeanor DUI after police pulled him over Oct. 28 for using the shoulder to pass another motorist on southbound Illinois Route 83 after he had exited a tobacco store.

Police alleged that Gavin, 55, smelled of alcohol and failed an eye-gaze test before refusing to submit to other field sobriety and blood-alcohol testing. His license initially was suspended for his refusal to submit to the tests. But, on Dec. 7, DuPage County Judge Liam Brennan ordered that Gavin’s license be returned, ruling police lacked sufficient evidence to stop Gavin.

On Wednesday, at a hearing in which the defense sought to quash the arrest and suppress evidence, Brennan ruled that the act of driving on the shoulder absent other evidence of impairment was insufficient for the case to continue.

“The problem I have is all the other things that we typically look for to support a DUI arrest simply are not here,” said Brennan, according to a transcript provided by the defense. “Mr. Gavin was polite, oriented to time, place and person. I don’t think in the context of all the other things we expect to see and don’t see that there was reasonable grounds for his arrest.”…

Hmmmm…."The police lacked sufficient evidence to stop" the judge?  Since when is passing on a shoulder insufficient evidence to stop and ticket a driver?  

And "the act of driving on the shoulder absent other evidence of impairment was insufficient for the case to continue"?  Uh, what about smelling of alcohol, failing the "eye-gaze" nystagmus field sobriety test, refusing to take any more field sobriety tests and refusing all blood-alcohol testing?  And I’m pretty sure a few other things which are standard in any cop’s arrest report weren’t mentioned — slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, etc.  And what about the fact that a refusal to submit to testing is legally admissible as evidence of consciousness of guilt? 

Oh, right.  The judge must have been sober: he was polite, knew what time it was, knew where he was, and knew who he was.  Incredible.

For other examples of judges getting free passes, see When Judges Judge Judges, DUI Double Standard Continues, When Judges Protect Their Own, Who Will Guard the Guardians, and Who Judges the Judges?.
 

DUI BLOG

I’ve posted ad nauseum in the past about the double standard when it comes to cops who drive drunk.  See, for example, The Unwritten Code, The Blue Code: Cover-Up of a Cover-Up, The Blue Cover-Up, The DUI Double Standard, The DUI Double Standard 2, Guarding the Guardians and The Thin Blue Line for a few examples of this widespread practice.

The latest blatant example:

OWI Charge Against Keokuk County Sheriff Dismissed

Washington, Iowa.  Feb. 10 – The Washington County Attorney’s Office on Friday announced that it is dismissing a drunken driving charge against Keokuk County Sheriff Jeffrey Earl Shipley, 46, on the condition he receive alcohol evaluation and treatment.

Although Shipley no longer is facing criminal charges, the Iowa Department of Transportation now lists his driver’s license as invalid, a penalty under Iowa Code for refusing to consent to a blood alcohol content test.

It’s unclear how Shipley’s suspended license will affect his ability to do his job. Shipley on Friday declined to comment, and an official in his office also refused to answer questions.

Washington County Attorney Larry Brock said Friday that his office had sufficient evidence to prove Shipley guilty of OWI, but there were “additional factors” that led prosecutors to conclude they had a less than 50 percent chance of convincing a jury in Keokuk County to convict Shipley.

“The trial would take place in Keokuk County where Sheriff Shipley was elected in 2008 by receiving 49 percent of the vote in a four-person race,” Brock said. “Sheriff Shipley received the most votes in 14 out of 17 precincts thereby indicating that Sheriff Shipley received strong and widespread support throughout Keokuk County.”

Brock said his office also deferred prosecution because Shipley was “still coping with the tragic events” involving a fatal shooting of Keokuk County Deputy Eric Stein on April 4.

When asked if Shipley received special treatment, Brock said, Shipley did not.

“This case was a borderline case,” he said.

Shipley was not falling-over drunk, did not have slurred speech and refused to take blood alcohol content tests, leaving them without hard evidence, according to Brock.

Still, he said, investigators felt Shipley was guilty of OWI.

“One of the stronger pieces of evidence was his refusal to take a test,” Brock said, adding that if Shipley really had consumed only one beer, like he claimed, he would not have tested above the legal driving limit and should have been fine to take a test.

Among other evidence investigators had toward proving Shipley’s guilt was the “very strong odor of alcohol” coming from him when an Iowa State Patrol trooper initially pulled him over about 8 p.m. July 27 near the intersection of Highway 92 and Stone Street in Sigourney.

Shipley’s eyes were watery and bloodshot, and the trooper noticed Busch Light beer cans behind the passenger seat of his truck, which also smelled of alcohol, according to an investigation report released Friday.

Shipley, who had his 19-year-old daughter in the truck with him when he was pulled over, admitted to having one beer with his supper, according to the report. He had difficulty finding his registration papers when asked for them, the report states, and Shipley handed the trooper his concealed weapons permit when asked for his driver’s license.

Investigators said Shipley also “engaged in behavior which can be used by persons suspected of OWI to mask the odor of alcohol and interfere with certain breath tests,” according to the report. Brock wouldn’t elaborate on those behaviors.

Shipley didn’t cooperate with field sobriety tests, he refused to go to the booking room once taken to the law enforcement center, and he asked “why he was not being given any professional courtesy,” the report states. Shipley told a sergeant that he “knew (Shipley) could not take the tests.”

“Sheriff Shipley did not provide any details as to why he felt he could not take the tests,” according to the report.

This summer’s incident was not Shipley’s first alcohol offense. Shipley pleaded guilty on Nov. 25, 2008, to operating a motorboat while intoxicated. He was sentenced to pay fines and spend two days in jail in that case, according to Iowa court records.

Brock stressed that members of the public shouldn’t think they can get out of an OWI prosecution simply by refusing to take the tests. And, according to Iowa law, test refusal results in a one- to two-year license revocation…

Hmmm….So the prosecutor says that he had "sufficient evidence to prove him guilty", but there were "additional factors"….like the Sheriff had political power in the county, and he was "coping with tragic events".  Strange, as a former Deputy D.A. myself, I always thought the sole question for a prosecutor was whether the evidence showed a crime was committed.  Period.

A "borderline case"?….The Sheriff  had a "very strong odor of alcohol on his breath", "eyes were watery and bloodshot", had cans of beer behind his car seat, couldn’t find his registration, refused to cooperate with field sobriety tests, showed consciousness of guilt by refusing a breath or blood test, refused to go to the booking cage, and wanted "professional courtesy" — i.e., a blue get-out-of-jail-free pass.  

Borderline?  In the D.A.’s office, we would have called this one a "slam-dunk".

(Thanks to Bob Matura.)

 

DUI BLOG

The use of DUI quotas — requiring patrol cops to arrest a minimum number of citizens for drunk driving — is usually illegal or against public policy, primarily because it forces cops to arrest drivers who are innocent. 

Yet, the simple fact is that many — maybe most — police agencies across the country use them.  See, for example, DUI Quotas, "Inside Edition" Documents DUI Quotas Across U.S. and "Yes, We Have No Quotas".  And another simple fact is that police agencies routinely deny they are using quota, preferring instead to call them such things as "guidelines", "objectives" or "performance standards".

And the reason for the continued use of DUI quotas is simple:  money.  Cities strapped for revenue have discovered that drunk driving arrests are a lucrative source of revenue.  See, for example, DUI: Government’s Cash Cow and How to Make a Million in the DUI Business.  This is commonly accomplished through the use of quotas and  sobriety checkpoints (aka DUI roadblocks).  See DUI Roadblocks for Fun and Profit.

Are State, Feds Tying Police Grant Money to DUI Arrest Quotas?

Chicago, IL.  Feb. 11 – One DUI arrest every 10 hours.

Police call it an “objective.” Or a “guideline.”

Former Will County State’s Attorney Jeff Tomczak calls it a “quota.” And he said the language — found in the fine print of grants funding some suburban police patrols — could undermine drunken-driving cases when they reach a courtroom.

“I haven’t seen anything like this before,” said Tomczak, now a criminal defense attorney.

Local law enforcement officials say Tomczak’s wrong. Under a real quota system, officers get punished when the numbers don’t add up. That’s not the case here, they said, and there must be some way to find out if federal money has been spent wisely.

“There is no quota system in the Will County Sheriff’s Office,” Deputy Chief Ken Kaupas said.

But Tomczak’s not alone. The Governors Highway Safety Association also said the grant language should be changed, but not for fear of a legal challenge.

Executive director Barbara Harsha said the public simply might not like it if officers are told how often to make an arrest, and that could make the job harder for police.

The grants in question are funded federally but distributed by the Illinois Department of Transportation, which wrote the “performance objectives” in the documents to offer some accountability to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The grants are designed to help police cut down on alcohol-related crashes and curb drivers’ dangerous behaviors.

A Will County IDOT grant from 2009 to 2010 said deputies were expected to write one ticket or warning each hour they were on patrol and make one drunken-driving arrest every 10 hours.

Similar language can be found in grants given to Shorewood and Minooka around the same time.

But Kaupas said his agency didn’t quite meet that mark last year.

He said Will County made three DUI arrests in 157.5 officer hours during alcohol-enforcement details funded by IDOT in May, August and September. To meet the grant’s “performance objectives,” that number should have been more like 15 or 16…

Tomczak said defense attorneys could use the grant to suggest officers are being compelled to make arrests. He’s even made the argument, putting Will County Sgt. Steve Byland on the stand during a DUI case last month to talk about the traffic division Byland leads.

Byland told a judge his department has no quota system, but he said it would have to answer to a grant representative if the numbers fail to add up.

“If he does not make a certain rate per se,” Byland said, “then we would have to explain to him what happened that month.”

Kaupas said IDOT-funded details are always summarized in a report to the agency.

Tomczak’s client eventually was found not guilty. But Harsha said she hasn’t heard of a DUI arrest being thrown out of court for such language.

She did say IDOT should consider asking officers to make a certain number of traffic stops or “interactions” with the public — not arrests. She said most states steer away from the language used by Illinois.

“There’s no rule that says you can’t have an objective that has a certain number of arrests per hour,” Harsha said.

“But it does give the appearance of having a quota.”

  Yes, it does give that "appearance", doesn’t it?  As the Mad Hatter said to Alice in Through the Looking Glass:

“When I use a word”, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

“The question is”, said Alice,”whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is”, said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.”
 

DUI BLOG

Police officers continue their MADD-inspired "War on Drunk Driving", setting up DUI roadblocks and roving patrols, meeting DUI quotas, and nailing anyone remotely suspected of driving under the influence….unless it’s another cop.

It’s long been a common practice for cops to cover-up for other cops, of course, particularly where drunk driving is involved.  And I’ve posted repeatedly in the past about this "Blue Code".  See, for example, The Unwritten Code, The Blue Code: Cover-Up of a Cover-Up, The DUI Double Standard and Guarding the Guardians. 

But the Code continues….

SAPD Investigating 7 Officers After Alleged Drunk Driving Accident, Attempted Cover-Up  

San Antonio, TX.  Feb. 6 – The San Antonio Police department has launched an investigation into seven of its officers after an apparent alcohol-related crash and a possible cover up, San Antonio Police Chief Bill McManus said.

Chief McManus said the off-duty sergeant was apparently driving under the influence, headed north in an unmarked patrol car on Highway 281 and crashed into a barrier near Josephine at about 5:30 Thursday morning. The sergeant wandered away from the vehicle to a building several blocks away, where security guards called police.

McManus said a "number of improprieties" were found involving six responding officers during the initial investigation, including an attempt to take the sergeant home and remove evidence from the car.

The sergeant is a 20 year veteran of the force who had been working the night before the accident and some of his officials responded, McManus said. The sergeant’s blood was drawn "within hours" of the accident but he was not arrested.

"I don’t take this lightly. I take this very, very seriously and I think our actions have proven it," said McManus.

McManus would not identify any of the officers involved and he would not release the results of the blood or urine test. He also wouldn’t detail what lead up to the accident or where the sergeant was headed.

The responding lieutenant, three sergeants and two officers are being investigated, he said. The sergeant driving the vehicle is on administrative leave and the six others on administrative duty. McManus said the criminal and internal investigations are ongoing.

An officer at the scene who reported the incident is not facing any charges.

Maybe there’s hope.  One of the eight cops decided not to dishonor the oath he took when he put on a badge.
 

DUI BLOG

It is a well-documented fact that our prison population continues to grow at a rate outpacing that of the population.  As of the end of 2009, we now have the dubious distinction of having the largest per-capita prison population in the world — according to Wikipedia and U.S. Department of Justice statistics, 749 of every 100,000 citizens, or about 1% of adults in the U.S.

In a well-reasoned and fascinating article appearing in today’s issue of The New Yorker entitled "The Caging of America", author Adam Gopnick analyzes the reasons behind this growing phenomenon.  In doing so, he comments upon an almost uniquely American development:
 

New York, NY.  Jan.30 — …(A) growing number of American prisons are now contracted out as for-profit businesses to for-profit companies. The companies are paid by the state, and their profit depends on spending as little as possible on the prisoners and the prisons. It’s hard to imagine any greater disconnect between public good and private profit: the interest of private prisons lies not in the obvious social good of having the minimum necessary number of inmates but in having as many as possible, housed as cheaply as possible. No more chilling document exists in recent American life than the 2005 annual report of the biggest of these firms, the Corrections Corporation of America. Here the company (which spends millions lobbying legislators) is obliged to caution its investors about the risk that somehow, somewhere, someone might turn off the spigot of convicted men:

Our growth is generally dependent upon our ability to obtain new contracts to develop and manage new correctional and detention facilities. . . . The demand for our facilities and services could be adversely affected by the relaxation of enforcement efforts, leniency in conviction and sentencing practices or through the decriminalization of certain activities that are currently proscribed by our criminal laws. For instance, any changes with respect to drugs and controlled substances or illegal immigration could affect the number of persons arrested, convicted, and sentenced, thereby potentially reducing demand for correctional facilities to house them.

It is, of course, the "American Way" for big corporations to spend millions through lobbyists to influence legislation and policies which contribute to increased profits.  Are we that far from our fellow citizens being incarcerated because of laws that are designed to improve the "business" of prisons — i.e., increase the supply of prisoners?  

Is it already happening?

(Thanks to attorney Deandra Grant of Richardson, Texas.)
 

DUI BLOG

I don’t even know where to start with this one….

Man Spends 2 Years in Solitary After DWI Arrest


Dona Ana County, NM.  Jan. 25 – A New Mexico man who said he was forced to pull his own tooth while in solitary confinement because he was denied access to a dentist has been awarded million due to inhumane treatment by New Mexico’s Dona Ana County Jail.

Stephen Slevin was arrested in August of 2005 for driving while intoxicated, then thrown in jail for two years. He was in solitary at Dona Ana County Jail for his entire sentence and basically forgotten about and never given a trial, he told NBC station KOB.com Tuesday night.

"[Jail guards were] walking by me every day, watching me deteriorate," Slevin said. "Day after day after day, they did nothing, nothing at all, to get me any help."

Slevin’s medical problems extended beyond his dental issues, he said. His toenails started curling around his foot because they were so long, he told KOB.com. And his countless requests to see a doctor for depression medication were ignored, he said.

He said his lawsuit "has never been about the money. I’ve always wanted this to make a statement."

The million, awarded by a federal jury Tuesday, is one of the largest prisoner civil rights settlements in U.S. history, according to KOB.com.

"I wanted people to know that there are people at The Dona Ana County Jail that are doing things like this to people and getting away with it," said Slevin, who now suffers from PTSD and believes he will have to take medication for life as a result. "Why they did what they did, I have no idea."

The mistreatment started from the moment his client was arrested, Slevin’s attorney, Matt Coyte, told msnbc.com.

"He was driving through New Mexico and arrested for a DWI, and he allegedly was in a stolen vehicle. Well, it was a car he had borrowed from a friend; a friend had given him a car to drive across the country," Coyte said.

Slevin was depressed at the time, Coyte explained, and wanted to get out of New Mexico. Instead, he found himself in jail.

"When he gets put in the jail, they think he’s suicidal, and they put him in a padded cell for three days, but never give him any treatment."

Nor did they give him a trial, Coyte said. Slevin said he never saw a judge during his time in confinement.

After three days in a padded cell, jail guards transferred Slevin into solitary confinement without explanation.  "Their policy is to then just put them in solitary" if they appear to have mental health issues, Coyte told msnbc.com.

Dona Ana County officials were tight-lipped about the case, refusing to answer questions about whether any jail employees were reprimanded or fired over Slevin’s treatment…

While in solitary confinement, a prisoner is entitled to one hour per day out of the cell, but often times, Slevin wasn’t even granted that, Coyte said. He was deprived of showers and grew fungus underneath his skin. He lost his will to even want to get out and live in the outside world, Coyte told msnbc.com.

"Your insanity builds. Some people holler or throw feces out their cell doors," he said. "Others rock back and forth under a blanket for a year or more, which is what my client did."

By the time Slevin got out of jail, his hair was shaggy and overgrown, his beard long, and his face pale and sunken, a drastic contrast from the clean-shaven booking photo taken of him when he was arrested two years prior…

"Hs life has been devoted to survival [since his release from solitary]," Coyte told msnbc.com. "He is totally inequipped; he is hollow. They’ve removed his humanity from him."

His suffering hasn’t been in vain though, Coyte said.  "He’s a brave guy. When he says it’s not about the money, he really means it. He wants no one to go through what he went through. And people do, in New Mexico and across this country."

This wasn’t China or North Korea.  This happened in America.  And as his attorney said, this kind of thing isn’t going on just in New Mexico, it’s happening "across this country".
 

(Thanks to Robert Battle and Bill Sullivan.)
 

DUI BLOG

It may not surprise you to find out that alcoholics arrested for DUI will generally have higher blood-alcohol readings. It may surprise you, however, to learn that individuals having the disease of alcoholism will generally have higher blood-alcohol readings because they are alcoholics…..

That’s right. It’s because the physiology of alcoholics is different in some important respects. One of those is that their bodies produce more acetaldehyde — far more. Acetaldehyde? That’s a compound produced in the liver in small amounts as a by-product in the metabolism of alcohol. Unfortunately, alcohol in the lungs has been found to metabolize there as well as in the liver — and to produce acetaldehyde there.

The amount of acetaldehyde produced in the lungs (to then be breathed into the breathalyzer) varies from person to person. “Origin of Breath Acetaldehyde During Ethanol Oxidation: Effect of Long-Term Cigarette Smoking”, 100 Journal of Laboratory Clinical Medicine 908. But in a study focusing on alcoholics, researchers discovered that the amount of acetaldehyde in the breath and blood of alcoholics was 5 to 55 times higher than that in nonalcoholics. “Elevated Blood Acetaldehyde in Alcoholics and Accelerated Ethanol Elimination”, 13 (Supp 1) Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior 119.

End result: since breathalyzers can’t tell the difference between alcohol and acetaldehyde (see earlier post, “Why Breathalyzers Don’t Measure Alcohol”), alcoholics will usually have falsely higher blood-alcohol readings.
 

DUI BLOG

Coming to your state soon…

B.C. Senior Snared by Draconian Drunk Driving Law

Calgary, Alberta, Canada.  Jan. 12 —  To bully and berate an innocent senior then punish her without a trial for a crime she clearly didn’t commit.

This, apparently, is what Alberta has to look forward to under draconian drunk-driving laws inspired by our neighbouring province, where suspected motorists are guilty until they prove themselves innocent.

Fortunately for 82-year-old Margaret MacDonald, tears brought on by allegedly obnoxious B.C. RCMP officers didn’t blind her to protecting herself.

"I came into the house and burst into tears — then I stood here at three o’clock in the morning and thought ‘my word means nothing’," said MacDonald.  "Three officers don’t believe me, so I phoned the hospital and took a taxi over to have a blood test.  I’m not going to let the Mounties get away with saying I was drunk."

At the Cranbrook, B.C., hospital, she obtained a laboratory document proving what she’d desperately been trying to tell police a few minutes before.  There was no alcohol in her system — not a drop — and yet MacDonald’s failure to provide a proper breath sample meant her car was taken away for a month and her licence suspended for 90 days.

Now, ,000 out-of-pocket and in fear of losing her home, the Cranbrook senior will wait another six months for a ruling on her case…

It was May 21 when MacDonald was approached by an off-duty RCMP officer, just outside her home.  MacDonald, a near-teetotaler, was returning from an engagement party at a friend’s house when she mistakenly turned into the wrong lane. She assumed that’s why the police officer was there.

Even when the off-duty cop told MacDonald a breathalyzer was coming to test her for drinking and driving, she didn’t worry — her last serious drink was 60 years ago. "I really don’t drink," she said.  What she didn’t count on was the lung power needed to properly blow into a police breathalyzer. Having suffered from serious pneumonia a few years ago, she couldn’t manage.

That didn’t stop RCMP from making her try — over the next two hours, MacDonald says she was forced to stand in the chill and told to blow 15 times by increasingly snotty RCMP officers.

"He pounded on the hood of his car and shouted at me to blow. He shoved this thing in my mouth and it fell on the ground, and he picked it up and put in back in again," said MacDonald.

"I said, ‘I don’t drink, I haven’t been drinking,’ and he said, ‘you’re sticking your tongue in there because you don’t want do this — you’re slurring, you’re drunk and you stink of alcohol.’"

RCMP officials are now reviewing the conduct of officers that night, but try as they might, the Mounties couldn’t get a sample from the shivering, teary-eyed senior, who was wearing only sandals and a thin dress.  

Thus, MacDonald was cited for failing to provide a breath sample, given a Notice of Driving Prohibition for three months, fined 0 and told her car was to be towed.

MacDonald wept, but she was sharp enough to obtain proof of her innocence, because in Canada that used to be enough to make those in power see sense.

Not anymore. Under a system about to be adopted in Alberta, drivers suspected of driving drunk, even under .05%, can lose their licences and cars without a trial.

Even after MacDonald took her blood test to the RCMP station, she was told nothing could be done…

Despite proof of alcohol-free blood, B.C.’s superintendent of motor vehicles adjudicator still found her guilty…

The ordeal took a massive toll on MacDonald — a few days later, she suffered what doctors in Calgary told her was a mild, stress-related heart attack, leaving her bed-ridden in hospital.

Back in Cranbrook, all she can do is wait.

"I’m nearly 83 and you have to cope with life, but through my years I’ve never been this traumatized over anything," she said.  

"Especially when I’m totally innocent."
 

The War on Drunk Driving continues…. 
 

DUI BLOG

I’ve mentioned in the past that police agencies across the country use DUI arrest quotas — and almost uniformly deny the practice.  See, for example, DUI Quotas,  "Yes, We Have No DUI Quotas" and "Inside Edition" Documents DUI Quotas Across U.S..

The latest example of this supposedly non-existent practice:

Drunk-Driving Quota Case May Lead to Similar Efforts Elsewhere


Baltimore, MD.  Jan. 6 – Even as prosecutors weigh an appeal of a Howard County judge’s decision to throw out drunken-driving charges and rule that they were tied to illegal citation quotas, defense lawyers are considering whether the same defense might apply to past or current cases.

District Court Judge Sue-Ellen Hantman’s ruling in a case against an Ellicott City woman has raised questions on both sides — as well as eyebrows around the legal community…

Hantman said the charges against Katie Majorie Quackenbush, 22, were linked to an illegal quota — a ruling based on a memorandum that police have said was intended to describe the requirements of a federal grant that paid overtime for officers to target drunken and aggressive drivers through "saturation patrols."

"I find any evidence in this case to be inadmissible," she said, according to a recording of her Thursday ruling, and that ended the prosecution. Nevertheless, the judge indicated that "I don’t think saturation patrols are in and of themselves illegal, merely the quotas."…

The police chief said a memo to officers that called for two to four citations per hour contained, “in retrospect, not the best wording,” and conceded that he “could see how it could be misinterpreted.” He said the department does not use quotas and had revised the memo.

The memo also told the officers on the drunken-driving and aggressive-driving saturation patrols that they usually produce “at or above these amounts.”

The federal funds come from the National Traffic Safety Administration to the state, according to Buel Young, a spokesman for the state Motor Vehicle Administration. Jurisdictions can apply for them.

 
So the police chief insists that "the department does not use quotas"…and that the memo was just "perhaps not the best wording"?  Hmmmm…..it’s hard to see how "it could be misinterpreted": the departmental order that cops have to produce "two to four citations per hour" sounds pretty clear to me.

Interesting that the federal grant appears to have required police agencies to use quotas….
 
 

DUI BLOG

I’ve received feedback concerning my post five days ago (Let’s Define the Objective: Preventing Drinking — or Traffic Fatalities?), and there seems to be some skepticism concerning the relative dangers of drunk driving versus driving while either distracted, drowsy or drugged.  As I said in my post, the focus should be on the relative dangers to human life – not on whether alcohol is involved.  So let’s take a look at that…

The President of MADD has been quoted in the Los Angeles Times as saying: "We don’t want cell phones and drowsy driving to become the next hot-button issue for the country, because they don’t even compare with the problem of drunk driving."  The Partnership for Safe Driving, a non-profit organization in Washington, D.C., responded:

Let’s examine the claim. During the year 2001, the government estimates that 17,448 – or 41 percent – of the deaths on our nation’s highways were "alcohol-related." In addition, approximately 275,000 – or 16 percent – of the injuries were attributed to alcohol. Since the rate of fatalities is so high, and so much higher than the rate of injuries, let’s take a closer look at that statistic.

Of the 17,448 fatalities, 2,555 occurred in crashes where alcohol was detected but no one was over the legal limit. In these crashes, alcohol may not have been the primary factor in the crash; speed, distraction or fatigue could have been. That leaves 14,893 deaths that can actually be attributed to alcohol. However, of these, 1,770 were intoxicated pedestrians and cyclists who walked out in front of the vehicles of sober drivers. They had nothing to do with drunk driving.

The Partnership questions why these deaths were thrown in with what is normally presented as a drunk driving statistic. That leaves 13,123 deaths that can be attributed to intoxicated drivers. Of these, a staggering 8,308 were intoxicated drivers who killed themselves in crashes. That leaves 4,815 deaths in which intoxicated drivers killed someone other than themselves….

How do these figures compare with cell phone use?

To date, the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis has provided the only nationwide estimates of cell phone involvement in fatal and injury-producing crashes. Researchers there report that cell phones are now a factor in approximately 2,600 fatalities annually and 330,000 moderate to critical injuries. But because the data on cell phone use by motorists are still limited, the range of uncertainty is wide. Researchers say that the range for fatalities is 800 to 8,000 annually, and the range for injuries is 100,000 to one million annually….

And fatalities caused by tired and sleepy drivers?

As with cell phone use, the influence of drowsy driving and fatigue on crashes often is not known unless the driver survives the crash and admits to having nodded off. Unlike both alcohol involvement and cell phone use, there is no scientific method even available for determining its presence. That said, the government estimates conservatively that 1,500 people are killed annually as a result of motorists who fall asleep at the wheel, and another 71,000 are injured annually in such crashes. However, the National Sleep Foundation believes that drowsy driving and fatigue often play a role in crashes that are attributed to other causes. For example, the government lists driver inattention as the primary cause of approximately one million police-reported crashes each year. The sleep foundation points out that drowsy driving and fatigue make such lapses of attention more likely….

Confirmation of this data has come from a study ("Drunk or Drowsy?") jointly undertaken by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which found that “Nearly nine out of every ten police officers…reported they had stopped a driver who they believed was drunk, but turned out to be drowsy…. According to NHTSA data, up to 100,000 police-reported crashes annually involve drowsiness or fatigue as a principal causal factor.” 

Interestingly, “89 percent of police officers agreed that drowsy driving is as dangerous as drunk driving”. 

MADD’s passionate fixation on drunk driving appears to be blinding it to the importance of other, possibly more significant, causes of traffic fatalities.
  

DUI BLOG