The headline says it all: Fatal crash, new DUI record prompt WSP to step up patrol.
This month alone King County has had over 500 DUI arrests and Snohomish County has had 370 DUI arrests.
I wonder which county will end up with more convictions? Here in King County, while the police step up enforcement of the drunk driving laws, King County District Court Judge Peter Nault is working hard to reduce the number of successful prosecutions. Woodinville is fighting back, but it is not clear a victory will really change Judge Nault’s courtroom standards.
Ultimately the voters will have a say about Judge Nault’s fitness to serve. I am not a big fan of judicial elections, but as long as we have them, let’s put ’em to good use.
Darryl, the amount of successful prosecutions does not have any bearing on how effectively we deter people from driving drunk. But it does have a bearing on how much taxpayer money is wasted sending people to AA meetings who aren’t alcoholics. Drunk driving convictions should result in people having their licenses taken away. For 1 year on the first non-accident violation. For life on the second non-accident violation or if they cause an accident. The punishment for drunk driving should not be jail or rehab. It should be the bus.
DUI arrests how many are between .08 & 1.0. Next the State will drop it to .06 to increase revenue.
There is a lot of people driving with out licenses or insurance, what should be done with them?
@2
People who drive without licenses or insurance should be dealt with through the criminal justice system. George, I completely agree with you on this, the system we have provides an incentive for police to just round up a bunch of low-hanging fruit rather than focus on trying to stop the most reckless drivers out there.
@3: “People who drive without licenses or insurance should be dealt with through the criminal justice system.”
In the absence of a handle of the social costs of those who drive without licences or insurance, I nonetheless offer the following modest proposal: Make proof of licence and insurance mandatory to obtain current tabs. Make emissions tests annual–same thing.
Raise licence tabs fees moderately to cover the added cost. Raise penalties for driving a vehicle that does not have valid tabs.
Just a suggestion.
@1 You think taking away licenses keeps people from driving?
1 – 4 The Department of Licensing is extremely reluctant to lift driver’s licenses. People with literally dozens of moving violations are licensed. DOL’s hearings and “driver counseling” are a fucking joke. Apparently the bureaucrats think they’re going to drive anyway, so if they have licenses, at least the state knows where they are. Until a fundamental change occurs in how DOL approaches the whole concept of licensing, and in the willingness of prosecutors and judges to jail people who drive without license or insurance, the whole notion of trying to control driving behavior by this means is also a fucking joke. Right now, the only effective way to keep DUIs off the road is to slam a cell door behind them.
Fining errant drivers is a fucking joke, too. When I worked for the state, I saw people with over $20,000 of unpaid traffic fines. Dozens and dozens of violations, and courts let them pay $5 or $10 a month because that’s all they can afford. For a lot of drivers hauled into court, the fines are just another debt they can’t pay.
I’ll bet you could reduce the number of DUIs by using the Russian Army Method — line ’em up, count ’em off, and shoot every 10th one … hey just kidding! Wingnut joke …
I really can’t comment about Nault or his rulings without knowing anything about the individual cases. If he’s suppressing blood and breath tests on a blanket basis, then it would seem he thinks the law is defective. I’d want to see his rationale for that before passing judgment. If he suppresses them in some cases and not others, then I’d want to examine his criteria and the legal reasoning behind it. If he simply refuses to apply the statutes or follow the rulings of higher courts, then he’s a rogue judge who should be disciplined, and if he continues, removed from the bench. I have no idea what he’s doing, but in general I will say this, we’d better hope and pray that we always have judges with the smarts and the guts to stand up against overreaching cops, prosecutors, and legislators because they’re the only thing that stands between us and tyranny. All you have to do to see what life would be like without principled and courageous judges is look at Gitmo, where hundreds of (apparently innocent) people were held for years without charges, evidence, or trials before being released back to their home countries without comment, apology, or compensation. George W. Bush personifies why we need an independent judiciary.
So, I’d be a little careful about jumping on Nault’s ass without knowing why he’s doing what he’s doing.
Making people pay stiff fines and serve jail time does not deter drunk driving. It is a waste of time.
As for reducing DUIs, which cause half the traffic fatalities in the U.S., if a silver bullet exists it’s got to be changing the culture. Drinking and driving has to become socially unacceptable, like smoking in buildings or voting Republican. If someone leaves a party or a tavern after drinking and climbs into a driver’s seat, people need to approach him/her and say, “What do you think you’re doing?” Same with abortion; you can never get rid of it by outlawing it, you have to train society to not want abortions. Same with drinking and driving, you have to condition people against it, because you can never effectively police it, you’ve got to have universal voluntary compliance. That’s the only way we’ll ever stop it.
I know you’re not a big fan of judicial elections, but elections are the best way to hold judges to account for bad decisions. As long as judges are appointed by a political hack or some inside group of know-it-alls, they will rarely if ever be independent. Election of judges has been the rule in this state since the Constitution was adopted; the first sentence of which reads something like “all power rests in the people” and that is where it should remain.
@11 I know how to stop dogs from committing voting fraud.
Euthanize the fuckers.
@13 I agree, except I don’t think we should let dogs vote on whether the vet puts them to sleep.
Hey dog — the last thing you’re ever going to see is a vet snapping on a pair of rubber gloves and smiling at you as he taps the syringe with his forefinger and squirts a few drops of barbiturate to make sure it’s working …
Confiscating cars would help.
@17 Not as much as you think, because people who drink and drive will simply drive junkers, and when you confiscate their heap, they’ll simply go out and get another one.
Maybe technology is the answer — in the interim, a sensor and interlock system built into every car that blocks the ignition if the system detects alcohol on the driver’s breath; and, long-term, computer-operated driverless cars (in which case, it won’t matter how drunk you are).
In fact, long-term, I think technology will lead us to a transportation system consisting of automated, driverless, personal modules. Not mass transit, but individual vehicles, but with drivers replaced with computers, we’ll be able to get many more vehicles on our existing road infrastructure through higher traffic densities than can be achieved by human operators, while totally eliminating accidents.
NLRB Flexes Its Partisan Agenda
“Labor board restricts unions’ use of e-mail
“By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
“The New York Times
“The National Labor Relations Board has ruled that employers have the right to prohibit workers from using the company’s e-mail system to send union-related messages, a decision that could hamper communications between labor unions and their membership.
“In a 3-2 ruling released Friday, the board held that it was legal for employers to prohibit union-related e-mail so long as employers had a policy barring employees from sending e-mail for ‘non-job-related solicitations’ for outside organizations.
“The ruling is a significant setback to the nation’s labor unions, which argued that … employees should be able to communicate freely with co-workers to discuss work-related matters of mutual concern. …
” … [T]he … decision gives companies nationwide the green light to prohibit union-related e-mail as part of an overall nonsolicitation policy. ‘An employer has a basic property right to regulate and restrict employee use of company property,’ the board’s majority wrote. ‘The respondent’s communications system, including its e-mail system, is the respondent’s property.’
“Labor leaders attacked the decision, calling it part of board rulings that have favored employers and undercut workers.”
Quoted under fair use; for complete story and/or copyright info see http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ail23.html
Roger Rabbit Commentary: The Republican majority’s reasoning is absurd and merely a mask for their pro-management, anti-worker partisan agenda. Union activity is “job-related” and labor unions are not “outside organizations,” they are as much partners of the business as its suppliers and customers. To equate union communications with sales solicitions is patently ridiculous. You could also say employers own their rest rooms, but that doesn’t give management a right to stand there and watch employees task a piss. Relationships between employers and employees are not a private matter; society has a strong public interest in regulating those relationships for the public interest, and for the protection of both employers and employees. E-mail has become such a fundamental part of communication that this ruling amounts to stifling the rights of workers to organize and collectively bargain; and to protect those rights, Congress should step in with legislation to overturn this ruling.
erratum – solicitations
erratum – take a piss
Damn it’s hard to type with furry paws
Once again, Republicans have demonstrated their hatred for workers. When workers are despised and treated like coolies, why should anyone work? I advanced my social status tremendously when I quit working and became an economic leech.
I should have done it years ago; Republicans figured this out long before I did. They were doing it before the Civil War. In fact, they’ve been doing it for as long as there have been Republicans; and before there were Republicans, there were Romans doing it.
No one should work! If you work, you can’t even take a piss without your boss watching you, much less send an e-mail to Joe Blow in Shipping about getting together for a little union talk during lunch break. Next thing you know, the NLRB will tell workers they can’t shit during work hours because the employer owns their asses. The solution to this is — quit! Don’t work! If you don’t work, they can’t keep you from e-mailing your buddies about low pay, bad supervisors, sick buildings, and excessive workloads. If you’re an Owner instead of a Worker, you make more money, pay less taxes, and don’t have to piss in front of a video camera.
I’m an Owner now. I own my pension, social security benefits, and stocks. Now they can’t make me work, and have to pay me even though I don’t work! Now they have to kiss MY ass, because I’m a Shareholder! Sure beats working.
Hey, capitalism sucks, but that’s the system and I’m just going with the flow. We’re Democrats so that someday we can live like Republicans, too.
One more thing. Trolls criticize me for sitting on my fat rabbit ass posting on HA all day, but you don’t see them criticizing Stefan for doing the same thing on his sucky little blog. Why is that? Fucking hypocrites.
I guess they think being a leech and living on other people’s labor is a good thing only when they do it.
The State sure loves the taxes they collect off of alcohol
they should give a one hour window so a guy could get home
and let all the drunks kill each other. Dont want to get
killed by a drunk driver, stay off the road during this time. For sure any DUI penalties should be tax deductible
since it must be Bushs’ fault that booze is legal. Gotta
go make a hot buttered rum. MMMMM
Stefan doesn’t work. He’s a full-time party hack and propagandist like me. The difference is that I live on the fruits of a lifetime (45 years) of hard work, and he lives on his wife’s job as a corporate lawyer. In the town where I grew up, men like that were called gigolos.
Hey Stefan! I know you read this blog! That’s why I insult you here. Maybe I should insult your kid, too, because that seems to really get to you. I’m not that kind of bunny, though. (Well, yes I am, but I’m keeping that one in reserve.) Anyway, Stefan, how’s your public records lawsuit against KCRE and Dean Logan coming along? We haven’t had an update from you for quite a while. Does that mean your lawsuit didn’t survive the county’s motion for summary judgement? Or did you cut a deal with our REPUBLICAN prosecutor to not move for dismissal, so your lawsuit can serve its partisan purposes? In any case, when the judge awards you damages for giving you only 600,000 documents, and free use of a county employee and a room in a public building for 6 weeks, are you going to share the loot with the generous contributors to your “legal action fund” who helped pay for the lawsuit? If not, why not? Why won’t you answer these questions? What are you hiding?
Personally, I think Stefan was just grandstanding. Maybe Richard Pope could check the court records to see if Stefan ever bothered to file the thing. I’ll bet he didn’t. It was just so much hot air.
@28 Can wingnuts get any dumber?
Roger Rabbit says:
1 – 4 The Department of Licensing is extremely reluctant to lift driver’s licenses. People with literally dozens of moving violations are licensed. DOL’s hearings and “driver counseling” are a fucking joke. Apparently the bureaucrats think they’re going to drive anyway, so if they have licenses, at least the state knows where they are. Until a fundamental change occurs in how DOL approaches the whole concept of licensing, and in the willingness of prosecutors and judges to jail people who drive without license or insurance, the whole notion of trying to control driving behavior by this means is also a fucking joke. Right now, the only effective way to keep DUIs off the road is to slam a cell door behind them.
Hey Roger you had a great brain fart, that’s the first thing you said that had merit in months. The only way to keep drunk drivers off the road is remove their ability to drive and jail is not the only solution. First if you get caught driving drunk (.1 and above) for the first time you lose your driver licenses for one year no exceptions. Next violation it will be for life. That means the plates will be removed from their car and put in storage until the year is up and all fines paid. No insurance the cops impound the car and the owner goes too jailed and loses their license for a year also. Any victim of an uninsured driver the state will pay the victims double the cost of the damages. Now you hold both criminals accountable for the crime (Criminal and the State for not doing their job). Those folks who love to drive and drink should not be allowed to drive at all and if someone dies because of their habits should never be allowed to drive again. Now if that means sending the prisoners to GITMO or worst a State prison that is out source to Mexico would be just fine by me. European Common Market will not allow anyone to drive while drunk, without a driver’s license, or current insurance coverage, and the jails are not full.
“FBI aims to amass huge database of people’s physical characteristics
“By Ellen Nakashima
“The Washington Post
“Related
“How biometric technology works (PDF)
“Hoover had plan for mass arrests
“CLARKSBURG, W.Va. — The FBI is embarking on a $1 billion effort to build the world’s largest computer database of people’s physical characteristics, a project that would give the government unprecedented abilities to identify individuals ….
“Digital images of faces, fingerprints and palm patterns are flowing into FBI systems …. Next month, the FBI intends to … significantly expand the amount and kinds of biometric information it receives.
“In coming years, law-enforcement authorities around the world may be able to use iris patterns, face-shape data, scars and perhaps the unique ways people walk and talk to … identify criminals and terrorists.
“The FBI also will retain, upon request by employers, the fingerprints of employees who have undergone criminal background checks so the employers can be notified if employees have brushes with the law.
“‘Bigger. Faster. Better. That’s the bottom line,’ said Thomas Bush III, assistant director of the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division (CJIS ….
“The increasing use of biometrics for identification is raising questions about the ability of Americans to avoid unwanted scrutiny.
“It also is drawing criticism from those who worry that people’s bodies will become de facto national-identification cards. Critics said such government initiatives should not proceed without proof the technology can pick a criminal out of a crowd.
“The use of biometric data is increasing throughout the government … the Defense Department has been storing … images of fingerprints, irises and faces … and … DNA samples …. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been using iris scans at … airports to verify the identity of travelers ….
“‘It’s going to be an essential component of tracking,’ said Barry Steinhardt … of the American Civil Liberties Union. ‘It’s enabling the always-on-surveillance society.'”
Quoted under fair use; for complete story and/or copyright info see http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ics23.html
“Brandon Mayfield … is an … attorney … in … Oregon … arrested … in connection with the Madrid attacks … an FBI internal review later acknowledged serious errors in their investigation.
“Mayfield … served … with the Army in … Germany …. He met his wife Mona, an Egyptian national and the daughter of a college professor, on a blind date … and converted to Islam following his marriage …. The imam of the mosque … described Mayfield as ‘very patriotic’.
“Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, Mayfield … suspected that he was under surveillance by the federal authorities. … According to court documents, the FBI used Letters of National Security in order to wiretap his phones, bug his house, and search his house several times.
“A bag containing detonating devices, found by Spanish authorities following the Madrid commuter train bombings, had fingerprints that were initially identified by the FBI as belonging to Mayfield (‘100% verified’). …
“When the FBI … sent Brandon’s fingerprints to the Spanish authorities, they contested the matching of the finger prints from Brandon Mayfield to the ones associated with the Madrid bombing. Further, the Spanish authorities informed the FBI that they had other suspects who were … not linked to anyone in the USA. The FBI completely disregarded all of the information from the Spanish authorities ….
The FBI arrested Mayfield … and held him with no access to family and limited access, if any, to legal counsel. The FBI initially refused to inform either Brandon or his family as to why he was being arrested or where he was being held ….
“Later, the FBI leaked the nature of the charges to the local media and the family discovered what the charges were by watching the local news. …
“The court documents clearly state that Spanish authorities informed the FBI … that they arrested an Algerian … who was an exact match for the fingerprints. Despite this, the FBI refused to release Brandon Mayfield until the story was broken by the international press ….
“Following his arrest, Spanish authorities relayed their increasing doubts that the fingerprint on the bag was actually his to the FBI, though these concerns were not communicated to Mayfield’s attorneys … [after] Spanish authorities … announced that the fingerprints actually belonged to an Algerian … Mayfield was still not released from prison until the international press broke the story ….
“The FBI conducted an internal review of Mayfield’s arrest and detention, concluding that although he was not arrested solely due to his religious beliefs, they may have contributed to investigator’s failure to take into account the Spanish concerns over fingerprint identification. The FBI issued a press release announcing the report’s conclusion that they had not misused the Patriot Act in the investigation.
” … Mayfield has filed several lawsuits …. One sought to force the government to return or destroy copies of items seized from his home. Another … challenged the law … used against him as unconstitutional. The Federal Government filed several motions to have Mayfield’s case dismissed as a matter of national security, or national secrets, but these were denied by Judge Aiken. … [T]he U.S. government settled part of the lawsuit with Mayfield for a reported 2 million dollars. The United States government issued a formal apology to Mayfield as part of the settlement. … On September 26, 2007, two provisions of the U.S. Patriot Act were declared unconstitutional. Finding in Mayfield’s favor, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as amended by the Patriot Act, ‘now permits the executive branch of government to conduct surveillance and searches of American citizens without satisfying the probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment,’ which violates the Constitution of the United States.”
Quoted under fair use; for complete article and/or copyright info see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield
Roger Rabbit Commentary: And we’re supposed to trust these clowns to identify “criminals and terrorists” from head shapes and walking patterns, when they can’t even perform 100-year-old fingerprint identification procedures correctly?
The FBI used to be a respected law enforcement agency. Now it’s a fucking joke. And the Mayfield case illustrates why the government cannot be, should not be, and must not be entrusted with the above-the-law and beyond-judicial-review powers that the Bush regime has sought to arrogate to itself.
And then there was J. Edgar Hoover and his “red scare” mass-arrests scheme … these fucking rightwing paranoiacs are no less oppressive or obnoxious then the English king our ancestors liberated us from 231 years ago.
And we’re supposed to let them spend billions of OUR money on building computer systems so they can identify us as “criminals and terrorists” based on our head shapes or how we walk??!!!!!!!
These fucking wingdings are out of control.
Folks check out the History Channel for the next showing about the German Autobahn’s you might be surprise about how they solve their congested and dangerous highways. The folk’s in this state might learn something on how to build and regulate the traffic on our freeways. Charging fees, diamond lanes, and mass transit will not make the driving public happy. The government social engineering will not fix the problems, lack of vision, and many committee meetings will not produce results. Maybe a change of government to a new crop of people will help produce the taxpayer’s results. How many elections does it take for the crow running this state to get the hint? Just locking up all the drunk drivers will solve the carnage on this state highway. Looking for the state to lead the way will require Leaders which we do not have trying to lead.
Modern Marvels: The Autobahn.
Imagine a superhighway designed for speed…thousands of miles of roadway unhindered by limits of any kind. Buckle up for safety as we take you for the ride of your life when we explore the fascinating history and current reality of the world’s fastest freeway. The number-one works project of the Third Reich, the Autobahn was known as Adolf Hitler’s Road until Germany’s defeat in WWII. Reconstructed and extended to more than four times its original size, it became a symbol of the New Germany.
http://www.history.com/shows.d.....eId=191979
Roger Rabbit says:
And we’re supposed to let them spend billions of OUR money on building computer systems so they can identify us as “criminals and terrorists” based on our head shapes or how we walk??!!!!!!!
These fucking wingdings are out of control.
Roger we don’t need to spend billions to identify you as criminals or terrorist supporters. All we have to do is listen to what you say and do to support that you don’t support this country. The reason for spending that large sum of money is that you cannot deal with your own fears. Godless people can’t deal with death and treats to their life. That is why they post with alias on this web site and demand someone to protect them from the boogie man. Now one thing that help in Iraq was using ID’s that could be validated and tracks with RFI devices, plus laser eye ID’s. Yes Roger your friends were left exposed at every check point and trace everywhere they went. Did you do your afternoon prayer? How is that prayer rug working out?
@5
You think taking away licenses keeps people from driving?
No, but if we focused on those people, rather than continually lowering a BAC limit that’s already too low, we’d be able to do a better job of keeping the drunks of the road through deterrance.
The problem is not drinking and driving. The problem is those who can’t fucking drive, drinking or not. Raise penalties for accidents, then add a hefty additional penalty or penalties for being under the influence when said accident occurred. Safe, legal drivers who are under the influence aren’t the problem.
Lee
Couldn’t agree more. I remember ranting enough to upset my wife when wimpy Gary Locke came on TV telling us all how many lives the .08 limit woould “save.” I couldn’t fucking believe it. What are the fucking numbers of people killed by people who test out to beween .08 and .10? I’d estimate it to be nearly or actually zero. MADD can kiss my ass when it comes to lowering the POI (presumption of intoxication) to ridiculous levels.
That said, if they want to increase penalties for accidents and/or injuries caused by drivers over .08, I have no objection.
Lee @ 40
To achieve your goal, we also need to somehow make it not count as a revenue stream.
To be clear, Gary Locke was not only a good all-around governor but was also light-years better than the alternatives the Republicans offered (Ellen Craswell and John Carlson). He just fucked up on the BAC and a couple of ther small issues.
@43
Absolutely. Right now, cops are incentivized to focus on arresting a larger volume of people rather than trying to deal with the much smaller percentage of people who are truly dangerous and who could be more easily kept off the road through the penal system. Instead, because little distinction is made between the chronic drunks and the guy who gets nailed driving home after a drink or two after work, we end up protecting no one.
Not an open thread? I failed to notice….
New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12.....ng.html?hp):
You know, I’ve always thought that our strategy of handing out cash, training and guns to whoever’s willing to work with us could wind up somehow, incredibly, backfiring.
You can’t achieve peace by just trying to ally with a lot of separate, implacably opposed factions simultaneously. Even if we can keep playing this game for a while, ultimately it doesn’t really achieve anything beyond a slight temporary reduction in American casualites. While that is politically useful for the Bush administration to kick the can down the road, it accomplishes nothing of note for the long-term improvement of the Iraqi situation for our troops or the Iraqis’ own political rapprochement.
But guess what? The US going home would reduce casualties further, faster, and cheaper.
Post 26 from the Pelletizer
You made 25 posts in less than two hours starting at 12:37 PM and ending at 2:31 PM and you accuse Stephan of doing something similar – You Sir are an idiot and it obvious that you don’t have time to read any other blogs.
Since you have the life of a ‘Dingnut’ producer, you should be paying about 75% of the cost of HA to Goldy or get your own blog to pay for.
Instead, because little distinction is made between the chronic drunks and the guy who gets nailed driving home after a drink or two after work, we end up protecting no one.
Oh, come on. You can’t get to an .08 with “a drink or two.” It doesn’t matter if somebody is a chronic drunk or not, if they’re an .08 or above, they’re dangerous, and they deserve to go to jail. There is little distinction between the two because there’s no reason to distinguish between the two.
The problem isn’t that we’re arresting too many people for DUI. The problem is that we’re not arresting enough.
Here is an interesting DUI court docket. Teresa Kulik was a top level manager in the Attorney General’s office until Governor Gregoire appointed her to the Washington Court of Appeals, Division III in early 2006. From what I understand, Kulik went to law school with Gregoire at Gonzaga and they were very close personal friends over the years.
In any event, Kulik was arrested for DUI on Saturday, November 15, 2003. A Chelan County deputy sheriff gave her a ticket, requiring her to appear in court at 9:30 a.m. on Monday morning November 17, 2003 for an arraignment.
Kulik evidently contacted the Chelan County Prosecuting Attorney — someone she would have known very well, as Kulik was head of the Wenatchee division of the Attorney General’s office. Basically, the DUI ticket was “fixed” — Kulik did not have to appear for arraignment, and instead a deputy prosecuting attorney had the court dismiss the charged instead.
In all likelihood, Kulik did not inform then-Attorney General Gregoire of the DUI arrest and abortive prosecution, and it is doubtful that Rob McKenna knew about it when Kulik continued to work under his administration. Probably no one outside of a select few in Chelan County were aware of this until recently, and certainly not before the two year statute of limitations to refile the DUI charges expired on November 15, 2005.
Governor Gregoire probably was not aware of Kulik’s DUI arrest when she appointed Kulik to a Court of Appeals vacancy in early 2006. By contrast, Gregoire was apparently aware of Kulik’s DUI arrest when the recent Supreme Court vacancy created by the pending resignation of Justice Bobbe Bridge needed to be filled.
Gregoire was evidently looking for a woman (three women and five men on the high court otherwise) and someone from eastern Washington (no one from there has served for over a decade, and it is an area where Gregoire is weak politically) to fill this position. Also, someone with respectable legal and judicial experience.
With over 25 years in the Attorney General’s office and her recent service on the Court of Appeals, Kulik would have been a very logical choice. Especially with her friendship with Gregoire and shared legal philosophies. Instead, Gregoire appointed Debra Stephens of Spokane to the position — a career private lawyer specializing in appellate work, and someone who Gregoire appointed to a Court of Appeals vacancy in Division III earlier this year.
Case Number: C00014440 CHS CT
Date Filed: 11/17/2003
Date Full Case Retrieved: 11/28/2007
Summary
Defendant: Kulik, Teresa Candace
Birth Date: 01/16/52 Sex: Female
Address: 1025 Canyonside RD
City,State,Zip: Wenatchee WA 98801
Violation Date: 11/15/03 Amt Due: $500.00
Case Disposition: Closed Date: 01/17/03
Jurisdiction: CHE
Accident: No
Officer: 01137 Haynes, Monika A
Names
Connection / Litigant Name Begin Date End Date
Defendant #1
Kulik, Teresa Candace 11/15/03 CLOSED
Docket
Date Description Initials
11/17/03 Case Filed on 11/17/2003 MXB
DEF 1 KULIK, TERESA CANDACE Added as Participant MXB
ARR Set for 11/17/2003 09:31 AM MXB
in Room 2 with Judge AHN MXB
Vehicle Linked to KULIK, TERESA CANDACE MXB
ARR: Held CLD
Proceedings Recorded on Tape No. SRS CLD
Log 2:19. Hrg Held Before Judge Ahn CLD
State Represented by A. Blackmon CLD
Def Not Present. CLD
Charge 1 Dismissed W/O Prejudice : State’s Mtn-Othr CLD
Case Heard Before Judge NAKATA, ALICIA H CLD
Matter Dismissed at This Time to be Refiled by State. CLD
Case Disposition of CL Entered CLD
Violations
Violation Description Bail Plea/Response — Finding/Judgment
46.61.502 Dui $500.00 Finding/Jdgmnt: Dismissed W/O Prejudice 11/17/03
Richard — you need more information before you can say that this was “fixed.” A citation could have been issued with a court date, and when the prosecutor’s office there reviewed the case, they could have declined to pursue it. It is the functional equivalent of declining to charge after reviewing reports. But when an officer writes a citation, that automatically starts the process, whether the prosecutor is going to pursue charges or not.
You may be right — but you might not. You need more info before you can draw any conclusions. It’s not fair for you to say that this woman contacted anybody, because you don’t know that.
@33 “Any victim of an uninsured driver the state will pay the victims double the cost of the damages. Now you hold both criminals accountable for the crime (Criminal and the State for not doing their job).”
Are you volunteering to pay the taxes for this?
@39 “Godless people can’t deal with death and treats to their life.”
Apart from the question of who’s godless and who isn’t, there isn’t any threat to my life from fascist pigfuckers that a double load of 12-gauge OO buckshot can’t deal with.
@40 “No, but if we focused on those people, rather than continually lowering a BAC limit that’s already too low, we’d be able to do a better job of keeping the drunks of the road through deterrance.”
Lee, with all due respect, I hope you’re drinking at home tonight and not someplace you have to drive home from … this is your most inane post of all time — unless you’re being facetious.
Higher legal alcohol limits? You gotta be kidding! Keeping drunks off the road through deterrence? You’re making funny, right?
You’re saying people who blow .08 shouldn’t be prosecuted — I vehemently disagree. That’s 3 or 4 drinks, and there’s no way that much alcohol isn’t impairing.
Actually — and this is poorly understood by the public — what’s illegal is not the amount of alcohol in your system but whether your driving is impaired. You can blow well below .08 and still be convicted of DUI based on officer testimony that your driving was impaired. The .08 simply sets the level of legal presumption of impairment. Some people don’t need 3 or 4 drinks to fuck up their coordination, alertness, and reflexes.
@47 Since this isn’t your blog, why do you care? In fact, if the comments here bother you so much, why do you even read this blog? If you don’t like it, complain to Godly … or, better yet, go fuck yourself.
Bax @ 50
I am not drawing any ultimate conclusions about the facts concerning Teresa Kulik’s DUI citation. However, she must have been in touch with the Chelan County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office over the weekend. The alleged incident took place on Saturday, November 15, 2003 and she was issued a citation at the time. In accordance with state law (and also as shown on the court records), Kulik was required to appear on the next judicial day for arraignment. That time was set for 9:30 a.m. on Monday morning November 17, 2003.
It is highly unlikely that Kulik wilfully ignored the requirement to appear Monday morning. Almost certainly, she failed to appear because she knew the prosecutor would be dismissing the case. So it is pretty certain she communicated with the prosecutor over the weekend and learned that, for whatever reason, the case was going to be dismissed.
Now, it is certainly possible that the deputy sheriff filed a completely bogus and malicious DUI case against Kulik, and that dismissal by the prosecuting attorney was appropriate. But even if this were the case, Kulik still got special treatment. Normally, the prosecutor would not have known anything much about the case, much less had any opportunity to discuss the case with defendant or defense counsel, when arraignment is at 9:30 a.m. on the next business day after the ticket was issued. So regardless of whether the wheels of justice obtained a just outcome in this case, they certainly moved extremely quickly.
@48 I don’t think the problem is too few arrests. I think local police and WSP are very attentive to the DUI problem and are pulling over every suspected DUI they see. In addition, quite a few citizens use their cell phones to call in suspected drunk drivers, and the dispatchers send cops to pull over those drivers, too. I don’t think enforcement is weak at the police level.
It falls apart in the courts, though. There’s a slew of lawyers out there who make a pretty good living specializing in DUI defense. One of these lawyers told me he gets over 90% of his clients off, not on innocence or police mistakes, but by working the technicalities. Yes, these lawyers gouge their clients, and even a successful DUI defense is going to cost the driver close to 20 grand. But relatively few people are convicted because the defense bar is walking all over prosecutors.
I’m not sure why this is. One possible reason is that perhaps prosecutors assign their green new attorneys to the district court workload, where DUI cases are tried. If so, this is a mistake. It takes thoroughly seasoned, expert DUI prosecutors to avoid being outmaneuvered by the thoroughly expert and crafty defense lawyers. Some of the smartest people in the legal profession are doing DUI defense because it pays big bucks. Prosecutors need to put their best lawyers on this workload. These cases are just as tough to win, if not tougher, as homicides.
Amd then you have lenient judges. The legislature passed a law requiring jail time for DUI, even on the first offense, but how often is it enforced? How many first, second, or even third time DUIs actually serve time? As opposed to the number getting deferred prosecution, diversion, or suspended sentences?
Today, the main deterrent against driving under the influence is the financial costs, most of it for legal fees. As I said above, a DUI ticket is likely to set you back 20 thousand bucks, if not more. But even this deterrent is weakened by the fact most people have no fucking idea what the impact on their pocketbook is going to be if they get pulled over after having a few drinks. And even if the high financial cost of a DUI citation was well known to the public, this is the sort of thing people don’t think about when they’re out in a bar, having a good time with friends, and the last thing on their minds is the financial risks of getting behind the wheel after the party breaks up.
@50 Fair enough, but pending further information, so far the handling of Kulik’s case by Chelan authorities doesn’t pass the smell test.
@55 When I became a judge I made damn sure my hopping was up to snuff and never, ever, drank anything less than 12 hours before I had to hop somewhere or work. (That’s how long it takes to get the alcohol out of your system.) Judges are supposed to set a good example, not a bad one. I don’t get citations, not even parking citations, much less (Great Mother Rabbit Spirit forbid) an HUI.
Richard @55:
Normally, the prosecutor would not have known anything much about the case, much less had any opportunity to discuss the case with defendant or defense counsel, when arraignment is at 9:30 a.m. on the next business day after the ticket was issued.
Richard, you seem like a smart guy, but you have a lot to learn about the criminal justice system. You’re completely wrong. Prosecutors review charges in the morning every day. We don’t have indictments in this state. Charging decisions are entirely discretionary with the given prosecutor’s office. That means in a situation like the one we’re talking about a prosecutor has to review a case first thing in the morning to determine whether or not to file charges. A prosecutor very well could have reviewed the case the morning of an arraignment and determined that there wasn’t enough to charge. This woman may well have been in court that morning, and was told first thing that her case wasn’t going to be charged and given paperwork, then took off. Perhaps later on the case was formally dismissed, but by then she was gone. Perhaps she was there and it’s an entry error. We just don’t know.
I suspect you have no idea how things work in Chelan County. What happened in this case may be entirely routine. Or maybe it isn’t. The point is, you don’t know. Stop pretending like you do.
So regardless of whether the wheels of justice obtained a just outcome in this case, they certainly moved extremely quickly.
Right. Just like thousands of other cases like it. The same thing happens in courts around the state every day.
Roger @48 & 50:
I don’t mean to sound like I’m criticizing the cops who make an effort to enforce DUI laws, because I’m not. They do what they can. It’s just that the problem is so huge that for every person they arrest, there’s probably 100 more that aren’t. DUI is an epidemic in this country, almost certainly moreso than any other crime.
I don’t think you can say that Kulik’s case “doesn’t pass the smell test.” What if it was a blood draw that was dismissed pending lab results? What if they then came back negative? The point is, we just don’t know the facts. Until then, nobody should draw any conclusions.
And let me be clear — I’m not defending this woman one iota if she did in fact somehow inappropriately get out of a DUI. If that’s the case, 1) She’s a pathetic excuse for a human being; and 2) Gregoire is an absolute dumbass.
Bax @ 59 & 60
You only have a blood draw (as in a blood draw taken by the arresting officer) when there is an accident or other situation in which the driver is physically unable to do a breath test, or when the driver is suspected of being under the influence of a drug (i.e. a drug other than alcohol). The court docket shows there was not an accident. It is possible (though not likely) that the officer suspected Kulik was using drugs and took a blood test.
In that hypothetical situation, the blood test results would be back fairly quickly. If they had come back negative prior to the arraignment and were in the prosecutor’s hands, then why would the prosecutor have told the judge that charges would be refiled? And if the results were still pending, it would have been far more logical to wait a few days for the results and then dismiss if the results were negative.
Bax @ 61
I certainly wouldn’t call Gregoire an “absolute dumbass” in that situation. Negligent, perhaps. Politically embarassed, definitely to whatever extent.
First, look at Gregoire as an Attorney General employer. Deputy AG Teresa Kulik is charged with DUI and the case is silently dismissed without any publicity. Is Gregoire supposed to know about this as the sitting Attorney General? Should her staff run the criminal records of every employee annually to check to see if they have been charged? Should she have a policy requiring all employees to inform management if they are ever charged with any criminal violation of the law?
Second, look at Gregoire as Governor and judicial appointing authority. Should her staff check the judicial dockets (very easy to do, since they are on a central computer system) to see if Kulik has ever been charged with a crime, and then determine the circumstances involved? Definitely, reasonable prudence says she should. But in reality, NO ONE has ever done this in the past. King County District Court and Superior Court weren’t even doing this for their pro tem judge appointments. Then I found out the pro tem appointed for Jane Hague’s DUI had two felony charges that were plea bargained down to misdemeanors. Now everyone is checking to see whether attorneys have criminal records when considered for judicial appointments. Gregoire may not have done this when appointing Kulik to the Court of Appeals in 2006, but it would have been far more likely as part of the current screening process for the Supreme Court appointment.
By the way, here is Question 34 on Governor Gregoire’s “Uniform Judicial Evaluation Questionnaire”:
34. Have you ever been held, arrested, charged or convicted by federal, state, or other law enforcement authorities for violation of any federal law, state law, county or municipal law, regulation or ordinance? Yes / No. If you answered “yes”, please provide details. (Do not include traffic violations for which a fine of $150.00 or less was imposed.) Please feel free to provide your view of how it bears on your present fitness for judicial office.
http://www.governor.wa.gov/jud.....nnaire.doc (Page 10)
So did Teresa Kulik fill out this questionnaire when she was appointed to the Court of Appeals vacancy in early 2006? Did Kulik apply for the Supreme Court vacancy this year and fill out one of these questionnaires? In either case, how did Kulik answer Question 34?
There is one possible technical loophole on a question worded like Question 34. The question is designed to find out whether anyone has been charged with a crime, even if the case was dismissed. However, a person whose DUI charge was dismissed could argue that it was a “traffic violations for which a fine of $150.00 or less was imposed”. While a DUI conviction, of course, would result in a much larger fine (and jail time), a DUI dismissal doesn’t result in any fine whatsoever! Perhaps the question could be worded better …
11:
Good point. Some idiots just don’t get the point, and continue to drive under the influence. I have no problem with automatic suspensions from six to twelve months for first offenses, subsequently leading up to permanent revocation of the right to drive, with each offense (driving despite revocation) afterwards considered a felony punishable by a year in prison for each offense.
Draconian? Yeah. But I’ve lost friends to drunk drivers. Gotta get the point across somehow. I have no sympathy for people like that.
#26 Roger Rabbit says:
Stefan has a life, besides for posting on HA you appear not to have a life.
Why not tell us how many posts Stefan makes a day on his blog. Then compare that to the number of posts you made on this thread alone-12:22. 12:27. 12:31, 12:33, 12:40, 12:40, 12:55, 12:56, 12:56, 12:59, 1:11. 1:14, 1:17, 1:28, 1:30, 1:30, 1:30, 1:40, 1:43, 1:45, 1:47, 1:52, 1:53, 1:54, 2:03, 2:26, 2:28, 2:31, 8:57, 9:00, 9:17, 9:21, 9:32, 9:37, 9:44
Please get some help. Get outside and get some exercise, some fresh air. Meet some people, make friends, maybe even a woman. Join the human race, no doubt there are some issues from childhood that you need to work out, I have faith in you that you can do it and become a useful member to society.