Driver humiliated by Texas judge

[emad]

BBC News snip

A driver involved in a fatal accident in the US has been given a string of humiliating punishments by a judge. Texas District Judge Keith Dean jailed Frank Dorsett for a year, and ordered that he must then drive a low-powered car and carry a photo of the wreck he helped to cause outside Dallas in June 2003.

He must also take daily medication that will make him sick if he drinks alcohol, and carry a bumper sticker asking other motorists to call the probation department if he drives recklessly.

Dorsett was racing another driver along a highway when the other man hit and killed a 16-year-old girl in a third car.


Judge Dean was not satisfied with a jury's decision that Dorsett should face only probation.

More:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3670578.stm

[fugue]

1. This sounds like a great idea!

I move that it's done for all drunk driving violations. Well, obviously if it doesn't end in an accident, the person can't carry a picture of the wreck, but the rest could always be done, and it would WORK!

Nothing is harder on a person than humiliation. Drunk driving would disappear rapidly.

[fsbooks]

5. OK, we are all against drunk driving, but....

Did you realize there are only about 250 innocent deaths per year caused by drunk driving, at the cost of incarcerating 1.5 million people? (yes, this was one of them.)

SUV's cause the death of more innocent people than drinking?

I could go on, but I will just say that the current level of enforcement with regards to "drunk driving" is basically a scam to curtail civil liberties.

Please check out this site: http://www.geocities.com/dammdrinker/

[theHandpuppet]

7. BULL!

Those stats are a load of bull. There is NO excuse for drunk driving! NONE. For the real facts on drunk driving, try a visit to http://www.madd.org/home/

From http://www.madd.org/stats/0,1056,1112,00.html

According to data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in 2003, 17,013 people were killed in alcohol-related crashes - an average of one almost every half-hour. These deaths constituted approximately 40 percent of the 42,642 total traffic fatalities.

This is a three percent decrease from 2002, when 17,524 people were killed in alcohol-related traffic crashes, representing 41 percent of the 43,005 people killed in all traffic crashes.

Also see: http://www.madd.org/stats/0,1056,1789,00.html

[fsbooks]

8. MADD is a facist organization

Even the founder thinks they have gone beyond deaths due to drunk driving to a prohibition attitude. Mostly, again, it is about social control. If you had read the link on my post, you would see that the deaths the NHTSA and MADD promotes are "BULL" to quote you. Candy Lightner, the founder of MADD certainly thinks they have lost their original purpose. Dr. Laurence Ross of the UNM wrote a book called Confronting Drunk Driving which illustrated that the the decrease to .08 would likely increase by 60% the number of "drunk" motorists arrested without any decrease in either fatality or accident rates.

Stopping drunk driving is such a sacred cow that is just a trojan horse to bring us closer to a police state.

Here is a shorter read for you: http://www.consumeralert.org/fumento/drink.htm

[theHandpuppet]

11. A World Tour Of Nutcase Sites...

... is not my idea of legitimate fact-finding with regard to drunk driving statistics. Oh, and that second link you provided was real treat -- I especially liked perusing the author's archived articles such as,

"Environmentalist Mythology that Harms Kids"
"The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS"
"Gulf Syndrome Kills Babies--NOT"
"Bill Clinton's Domestic Abuse Cruise Missile"
"Bill Clinton Again Betrays the Vets"
"Animal Rights Mean Human Wrongs"

Oh yes such a smorgasbord of racist, misogynist, RW, Clinton-hating offerings I barely knew where to begin.

NEXT!!

[Nevernose]

32. "Ebola Virus: Horror or Hype?"

"Great Black Church Burning Hoax"
"Battered Justice Syndrome"
"EPA vs. Clean Air"
"Global Warming Hotheads Use ANything to Justify Their Theory"

And, my personal favorite title:
"Ebola Virus: Horror or Hype?"

Thanks to whoever posted this site; I'll be laughing my ass off for hours.

[One_Life_To_Give]

31. How many dead people have you pulled from cars?

If you havn't don it you should spend some time working/volunteering with some of the crash extrication people. You would learn why we say that in any pin-job between 8-12PM Fri & Sat, If you havn't found the drunk operator your missing a victim.

Tragically I have seen too many fatalities as a result of Alcahol and/or speed. Usually both.

[reprobate]

39. You are dead right.

One scene I will never forget is working an accident in which a 14 year old girl was thrown thru the windshield and her face was peeled from the forehead down to the chin. All because a drunk turned in front of her mother's car. We had to restrain some of the bystanders from performing street justice right there. It was his third DUI accident and he was driving on a suspended license.

Even with all the laws we now have, DUIs still get too leinient punishment.

[struggle4progress]

13. NTHSA link

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/finalreport.cfm?title=Crashes&stateid=0&year=2003&title2=Alcohol

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

15. Sorry, I feel that there's been a knee jerk over-reaction to DUI's

Here in Alabama, a person can do more time for a third DUI in his/her lifetime (ANY DUI, no accidents or associated traffic violations) than they would do for pulling out a gun and shooting someone dead (if it's a manslaughter violation).

It's the same sort of thing that we saw when they were passing out 10 year sentences for an ounce of marijuana.

[Infomaniac]

17. Using a gun to kill can be manslaughter in Alabama?

I sat on a jury for a murder trial. One of the jurors wanted to convict on a lesser charge and we sent a note out to the judge. We were told that since a gun was used, our only choice was murder 2. NY didn't have a murder 1 charge at the time. The judge said that using a gun or weapon to kill somebody met the standard for depraved indifference, which is the underlying element for a murder 2 conviction. Manslaughter is reserved for killing somebody with your car or your fists or putting somebody in a position to be killed by a car.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

20. I'm not a lawyer, but have read about shooters being charged

with man 1 & 2. It happens. Not right, but it happens.

[mdredmond]

26. Shooters: manslaughter sometimes appropriate

>>read about shooters being charged with man 1 & 2. It happens. Not right, but it happens<<

Manslaughter is perfectly appropriate when a shooter who would be justified in shooting someone ends up killing an innocent third party. There was no intent to kill the third party, thus 2nd degree murder won't fly.

[happyslug]

36. Not quite the law in most states

Under the "Model Penal Code", for example, if someone WRONGFULLY thinks he is acting in self-defense when he kills someone, the crime is manslaughter not Murder. For example when a person chases a criminal out of his house and shoots the criminal as the criminal is running away, thinking that it is self-defense in such situations, the killing is manslaughter not murder (And NOT self-defense for the Criminal was running away).

Other examples exists, for in most states the Judge would have been WRONG if he stated that just the use of a Gun automatically makes the crime Murder (Through there may have been other reasons for his ruling). The use of a Gun may indicate a "depraved indifference" but it how the gun was used not just the mere use of a gun. The same can be said of Fist and a Car, it is HOW the weapon was used NOT the use of a fist or a car that shows a "Depraved Indifference".

Another example is if the underlying crime was robbery then use of a gun could show a "depraved indifference" to killing someone compared to someone who threaten to rob you with a knife or his fists. The "Depraved Indifference" is that a fist or knife would require more work to do the same damage as a gun.

Thus my point it is NOT the use of a gun that can make a crime "Murder" instead of manslaughter, but how the gun was used and how it was intended to be used.

Model Penal Code and Common Law explained:
http://ls.wustl.edu/Organizations/SBA/Outlines/Crim%20Law%20ChartBrickey2002.htm

Murder Defined:
http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m150.htm

Copy of Kansas law on Murder and manslaughter:
http://www.stonelaw.org/Murder.htm

[HarveyBriggs]

25. MADD Killed a friend of mine ...

Had a very respected prosecuting attorney tell me so.

Here's what happened and here's the take:

First off MADD is only concerned about lowering BAC -- essentially neo-prohibition -- not putting repeat drunks away for a long time.

The result of their lowering BAC is making average people, who are not incapable of driving with the low .08 level of alcohol in their blood, into criminals. Juries sympathize and don't convict, or don't convict on harsher counts.

The lobbying for lower BAC also takes precious resources and attention away from the serious issue of heavy-drinking repeat offenders.

I had a friend, teammate on a bike racing team killed by a heavy-drinking repeat offender/ repeat killer. That's right, MADD let him kill, then kill again. The prosecuting attorney in the case directly blames MADD and so do the cops on the case.

Look. It takes four hours to process a DUI offense. So when law enforcement is taking in all the .08s, then the .25s and .20s are free to kill. And those kooks are serious about drinking and driving and avoiding law enforcement. The dedicated drinking drivers don't give a damn about who they hurt and MADD doesn't give a damn about stopping them.

Another recent example. Two drunk drivers get their licenses suspended. The .08 obeys the law and turns to riding a bicycle. The .20+ drunk gets back into his car and who does he kill a few weeks later? Sadly the .08 person on their bicycle. The sentence for the fatality? Six months in jail.

Why? Because MADD needs the carnage to fuel their prohibitionist drive to reduce BAC levels. The .20+ BAC driver is MADDS best friend. Without the horrific posters the repeat offenders create -- without those victims MADD can't advance their prohibitionist agenda. It's a ghoulish organization that feeds off of dead sons and daughters for a motive they keep hidden.

You won't hear this publicly from law enforcment, but privately you can hear plenty of swearing about how stupid and vicious MADD really is.

I've lost five friends to drunk drivers. None of the killer drivers blew under .20. None were .08. And I have serious doubts about how much .08 had to do with the contribution to the accidents where it is noted.

We license old people who lack the vision and co-ordination to drive -- their capabiliteis are far worse than the average 35-year old who blows .08. But the hysteria over alcohol has created a real mess.

Maybe if law enforcement wasn't out on MADD's wild goose chases, then they would have caught the .27 drunk and the .23 drunk that murdered my friends. And maybe, just maybe that .27 drunk would not have notched his second victim.

Even more to the point of the .08 BAC being used as a tool for prohibition, note how the BAC limit for driving is often noted in news articles, and in criminal trials as pointing to somebody's guilt in another crime because they were over the "legal level," evem though that level was only set for driving. Yet once that level is set, people are arrested with that level of alcohol in their blood for a variety of crimes they would never have been convicted of if this level wasn't established for driving -- people visiting parties, taking their dogs for a walk, even people found at phone booths calling a cab. Essentially, the level becomes a crime even though that was never the intent of the lawmakers. It was however, the intent of MADD.

I HAVE NO REGARD AT ALL FOR MADD! They are the killer's best friend. Carrie Nation in a new disguise.

Harvey Briggs

[muriel_volestrangler]

30. What an incredible distortion by that attorney

They even said 'directly blames MADD'. That's ridiculous. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Obviously the drunk driver was directly to blame. Indirectly to blame were the juries who absurdly let off someone who had driven with a blood alcohol level of over .20. After that the blame goes onto the state legislators who have crafted the law so badly that that could happen. After that, all the voters who let in such bad lawmakers. Maybe after that, you can blame MADD, who may have distracted the voters.

Your lawyer acquaintance is a supreme jerk - and the law officers who agreed with them.

[hyphenate]

23. My sister is an alcoholic

And while stats might say one thing, the reality is that most driving drunks are merely accidents waiting to happen. Some accidents are likely never reported because of the convictions given when you're caught, as well as some have likely been very close, but a sober driver was able to act more quickly to avoid disaster.

I've driven with my sister and I've been very, very scared. If I didn't need a ride at those times desperately, believe me, I would never have gone.

I don't believe statistics--I believe in my own experiences, and driving drunk is one of the biggest sins someone can commit on both their passengers AND themselves.

[RivetJoint]

28. Actually SUV's don't CAUSE accidents

Poor drivers do. Drunk ones as well.

[Almost_there]

29. 250 deaths? Yeah, right.

Well, I agree with the judge. Drunk? Racing? This guy should have been given a hell of a lot more than PROBATION. I kind of like the judge's spunk on this. He isn't killing the guy, he is simply humiliating him for taking another human being's life because he was a drunk driver.

As far as your 250 deaths a year in drunk driving, uh... yeah. Sure. I think I've seen more than that in "America's Wildest Police Chases". Your sources are so sad, I don't even think Drudge would reference them. Come on, MADD is a Fascist organization? It was started by a woman whose kid was KILLED BY A DRUNK! Get a grip, dude. How about if you go deep sea diving drunk. Enjoy. I'll buy the Jack Daniels for you, since you'll only kill yourself. You get behind the wheel of a 4,000 pound steel projectile drunk, you deserve every punishment you get.

~Almost

[CookieD]

19. How do you know "drunk driving would disappear rapidly"? n/t

[fugue]

21. OK, I am hypothesizing that drunk driving would disappear rapidly

The punishments for drunk driving now are minimal. The threat of public humiliation for an extended period of time, however, is something many fewer people are willing to risk. For many, the prospect would be worse than jail time.

It probably wouldn't disappear entirely, true, but the impact would be massive.

[Fleshdancer]

2. why did the jury only give him probation???

A young woman is dead due to his idiotic actions. I don't get it. And if he isn't thrown in jail, then why can he still drive? Driving is a previledge and when you kill someone with your car because you were driving recklessly, then at the very least, you shouldn't have a licence to drive. Insane.

[Ediacara]

6. He didn't hit her

The guy he was racing hit her. I agree that his punishment should be less severe than the fellow who actually hit and killed the woman in the other car, but should be more severe than probation.

[Fleshdancer]

14. It would help if I actually read the article

novel concept, eh? lol.

Since he wasn't the one who hit the woman but did drive recklessly, then I'm okay with probation but I still want his license revoked.

[amber dog democrat]

3. If nothing else, this person may acquire some perspective

and serve as an example of where this kind of reckless behavior leads.
Its a big dose of reality.

Never mind how long his probated sentence will be, after he serves his time.
The consequences will go on for the rest of his life

People do stupid things as young adults. It does not always end this badly.

[Clovis Sangrail]

4. humiliating?

I don't get how this is a "a string of humiliating punishments ".
It sounds like a far more reasoned response to a crime than just throwing him in jail and hoping he won't do it again.

- Jailed for a year
Punishment

- Must drive a low powered car
Public safety... so he can't street race.

- Carry a photo of the wreck he caused
A private and constant reminder of what he's done.

- take medication that will make him sick if he drinks
Public safety... so he can't drink and drive.

- Bumper sticker
Public safety... to stop him from driving recklessly.

[rocktivity]

9. Not crazy about the bumper sticker part

Anyone can call the number just for the fun of it, and a cop who's low on his ticket quota will be more likely to pull him over without probable cause. But why should he be allowed to drive at all? Just take his license away for at least five years!

:headbang:
rocknation

[AlanAdam]

10. He was responsible in part for someone's death,

someone with most of her life ahead of her. Rather than feel persecuted, this criminal should soberly look at that photograph every day, and say to himself, "I can't change what I've done in the past, but I can live every day henceforth to live the kind of noble life that she had the opportunity to live, but can't because I snuffed it out.

[truthisfreedom]

12. curious that it doesn't say he was intoxicated at the time, but from the

punishment, one can only assume.

[napi21]

16. You're right! Nothing about drunk driving in the article!

I wonder if a longer article was in the Dallas paper?

I don't know what really can be done about drag racing, which is what this sounds like. I admit, I used to drag race quite a bit when I was younger (I'm 61 now), and had the car to do it! We were always very careful, and had spotters quite a way down the road on both sides to make sure there were no unexpected cars wander into the area by mistake. I'm sure it still goes on all the time now, but some pay no attention to possible consequences.

Penalties to this guy seemed fair to me. I'm pretty sure he won't drag race on the street again...maybe nowhere else either.

I wish I knew how to teach other racers the lesson this guy learned.

[Ilsa]

18. Judges prescribing drugs?

Looks like that judge was prescribing disulfiram, or Antabuse, for the man's drinking, based on the fact that it is a drug that would make him sick if he took alcohol. That is not to be prescribed lightly. Many household products, including hygiene products, have small amounts of alcohol in them, and even coming to contact with the skin can cause severe reactions, including hypertension. This man should be under the care of a doctor if he's taking this.

I think the man is luckly he isn't in jail. I don't understand probabtion in this case where someone was killed either.

[hyphenate]

22. I applaud the judge

for finding some good punishments to give him. I doubt if he'll change--most alcoholics don't. They don't think they have a problem.

[Amigust]

24. Humiliation better punishment than jail

I recall reading something that claimed humiliation was a better punishment than jail. It seems that offenders after humiliation punishment cleaned up their acts more often than those who were jailed for them.

????

[newyawker99]

27. Hi Amigust!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Night Gal]

35. Why do you assume he's an alcoholic?

The article says nothing about that, only that he had to take antabuse.

[TryingToWarnYou]

33. Sorry, but I dont see a problem with this....

If it keeps him from drinking and driving again, then it was worth it.

The last thing this asshole needs is probation.

[Lexboy1981]

37. WUT

!!

[Surf Cowboy]

34. I think the penalties should be raised for elderly or tired drivers, as

well, if they kill someone as a result of their either being too old or too tired to drive.

You know when you're too old to drive. You're that way every day, 24 hrs. per. So when an old person gets into a car and someone dies, I guess they are at least as evil as a drunk (maybe more so--the alcohol clouds judgment--ostensibly, the blue-hair is sober). So old people should be given sentences commensurate with those given to drunk drivers who are involved in fatalities.

Then we'd actually be doing something to make our highways safer.

[George W. Dunce]

38. I am sure this is in line with

what Lura got for here accident that killed someone.