DUI Without driving your car? Conviction upheld!

1st, I empathize with Lori..... BUT... it becomes part of our maturing experience to recognize when the influence of our experience, bitterness/loss or desire for prevention or correction exceeds the reasonable bounds of justice and balance: Law and its enforcement is often predicated and motivated by emotional components, which are often far reaching and more motivating to action..... than a rational and objective judgment based upon facts: Emotions drive people to actions and judgment but are seldom trustworthy nor rational. This is also true of me: When I think of some personal experience which is/was emotionally charged..... it is only with real effort and personal awareness and recognition that I am able to separate my judgment based upon the heat of emotions from the rationality and desire to be just. And this is no 'put down' to others..... and those who've read my posts can no doubt see those moments and situations where my buttons are pushed, and judgment is less rational.

Unlawful?
I agree. I wonder, after reading some comments, is it true that the LEO (law enforcement officer) had no discretion because of policy? Maybe an arrest for 'public drunkenness based upon the complaint of the driver's neighbor?

Removal of property?
If he was already parked legally at the location of his apartment, what is the justice of impounding his car and creating additional costs to him? I do find it difficult to consider that keys in the console are considered 'out of reach' if his console is similar to any of a number which I've ever seen..... but they weren't in the ignition!

Who judges the thoughts and intents?
It seems it is a very dangerous and slippery slope when law starts enforcing judgments and punishments based upon 'intentions' or 'thought'. What human being is capable of correctly judging the mind or heart of another? Isn't this entering an area of privilege to God alone?

Recognizing/ identifying with our own understanding?
We might personally challenge the motives of others based upon our own understanding.... but this does not mean that we or juries made of human flesh are capable of making an accurate determination or judgment. How does one examine the 'thoughts' of another? In a court of law..... a person is supposed to be protected from giving self evidence or witness against himself..... provided he is properly advised by counsel. Just what if that man had companions in his apartment and knew with all that alcohol he would be irritable, or angry, or violent company if he did not go to where he was alone?

What is the crime?
If it is the past convictions or charges.... the judgment should have taken place at that time and not have been deferred for a later event. If the crime was public drunkenness.... the neighbor was a witness. If the crime was driving.... the man didn't even have his keys in the ignition.... but, even to sleep in his car... he likely needed them to unlock the door.

His crime was sitting in the driver's seat while intoxicated. This does appear exceptional to most of us...... but is it? What if he was sitting in the passenger seat...... would that have made a difference in his case? (Most likely in his case, it would.)

IMO, this was unjust. Yes, I'm glad a man is not driving drunk on the roads.... but he wasn't, in this case. Once the police had possession of his keys.... he couldn't have driven, even if he woke up drunk. In this case.... if the law fully supported this conviction.... it goes beyond the justice of committing a crime except that the law makes it one by the way it has been defined.... but no real crime occurred. The law should be judged.

As another points out.... if sitting behind the wheel in the presence of keys constitutes 'driving' or control, even in a parked car..... then a child or unlicensed person is also 'guilty' .........so is a person who escapes the noise of their home to rest while medicated for a migraine headache.

As a driver on the road.... I have the right to expect laws are enforce which keeps the roads safe for me when driving..... But, as a citizen who expects my rights to be liberal and the laws to be as least restrictive as necessary to maintain civility and peace... for others as well as myself.... I think this verdict and sentence is unjust. However, perhaps a good outcome.... provided this man is willing to change instead of becoming hardened and embittered is that he'll sober up and determine to stay dry once he's released. Let's hope this is the outcome.

 

In this case.... damned if you do and damned if you don't.... since alcohol already interferes with judgment.... the drunk might as easily decide to get on the roads and take his chances with the law if caught.... than taking a break in the parking lot after drinking, for his head to clear and his system to metabolize and detoxify the alcohol before driving. Either way.... by your standard.... he's selfish and already judged.

Sleeping in a parking lot at a business which sells alcohol.... whether with or without food.... is almost like leaving a calling card for the police to pick him up for a DUI in such an instance: if he takes his chances on the road.... with care ..... he just might make it home without getting caught.... once his vehicle gets mixed with other traffic. So you would prefer conditions to cause him to make this judgment...... GREAT! Your grief grieves me more...... because people will drink..... and they will drink when out away from home..... whether you and I agree or not..... but these kinds of enforcements do NOTHING to keep them off the road: In fact, it encourages this as it punishes the drunk who takes a safe break until he sobers up..... by sleeping in a parking lot.

So what are you going to do to change this? Define 'drunk'. Define 'zero tolerance'. Isn't a 'drunk' just irresponsible for drinking too much....... or is 'he' depraved, indifferent for human life, and a self centered idiot........ under every condition? Or do you mean on the road..... where he endangers others, or in the presence of others if his reaction to alcohol results in anger or violence? (Not everyone becomes a 'nasty obnoxious' drunk.... even though they may act like a fool.)

Zero tolerance? Many DUI's and DWI's include a range of medications by prescriptions which do not affect everyone's judgment the same: Some of these medication which possess transient side effects affecting response, reflexes, judgment include medications for chronic conditions.... anti-eleptics, anti-psychotics, blood pressure medications, heart disease medications, chronic conditions which relate to pain and mobility if not maintained.... Would you suggest a universal 'zero tolerance' for these without regard to whether or not the individual is impaired or able to compensate.... by his body's ability to metabolize? Is it enough that these are found in one's system.... or is it possible and sufficient to demonstrate that such a person on medication is able to perform complex functions and demonstrate functions of good judgment?

But........ wouldn't you agree.....
a person is not guilty of 'murder' until a life is taken?

Actually the article did not make any such distinction. "State laws, however, don't articulate just what that difference is."

I'm glad not to be making the laws.... and I'm glad you're not making them either. First, I'm sure I would never please everyone.... which, no matter what the position, is the impossible task we expect of our lawmakers..... And, for you.... ( and I love you and hate that you've suffered such great losses that the wound still hurts so badly), I believe you'd create a law too harsh to be realistic which would bring enough convictions to be effective enforcement if you stopped short of making alcohol illegal..... which would probably increase crime, smuggling and add to the vices in high places.... making it unenforceable and turning some areas into war zones like earlier days of prohibition.
:1_grouphug:
I mean you well, Lori, and sorry for your pain... somethings take time.... and somethings keep hurting no matter how much time passes. Alcohol is a devil in the lives of many..... but, as a 'sin' .....any sin which controls us leads to death...... and there is no such 'lessor' sin, in the life of a believer who gives it place..... which does not work a rebellion and a 'type' of witchcraft against the very God who bought us with the precious gift of His Son.