I just don’t understand drinking and driving

@Rockhead,

A florida lawyer with a website that address the issue of our crazy DUI laws.

You do know that the opinion on the law from lawyers are of a little more likely to be correct then Firefly posting texts of the laws or do you?

0 Replies

:::whistles:::

Look! Fresh meat over on this new thread!

Here's a quote from it:

Quote:

We have taken the following statistics from a modern sites (Statistics of Battered Women, www.asafeplaceforhelp.org) is a private women United States of America only:
- Every 9 seconds a woman assaulted them physically by her husband!
- 7% of American women have been physically assaulted, and 37% have been abused emotionally and verbally obscene insults.
- Percentage of pregnant women who were assaulted up to 26 percent.

1 Reply

@Butrflynet,

Lord I can not take any more nonsense figures produce by nonsense surveys.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

Remembering the victim of the DUI accident we have been discussing in this thread.

Quote:

Obituary for Barry Lancaster

Barry L. Lancaster, 47, of St. Petersburg, Fla., formerly of Bradley, died Dec. 23, 2011, in St. Petersburg. Visitation will be from 11 a.m. Friday, Jan. 6, until the 1 p.m. funeral services at the Clancy-Gernon-Hertz Funeral Home, west Kankakee. Pastor Karl Koeppen will officiate.

Burial will be in Mound Grove Gardens of Memory, Kankakee. Memorials may be made to the family wishes.

Mr. Lancaster was a truck driver for many years. He was born Dec. 22, 1964, in Kankakee, the son of Donald and Jacqueline Larkins Lancaster. He was an avid bowler. He enjoyed all sports, especially the Chicago teams. He loved the outdoors, fishing, loud music and being around friends and family.

Surviving are one son, Anthony "AJ" Lancaster, of Kankakee; two daughters, Ashli Lancaster and Amanda Lancaster, both of Kankakee; one granddaughter, Abby; his mother, of Tilton; two sisters and brothers-in-law, Karen and Keith Hoskins, of Tilton, and Vanessa and Ken Sackett, of Lake Placid, Fla.; one brother and sister-in-law, Ronald and Denise Lancaster, of Bradley; and many nieces and nephews.

His father died Dec. 28, 2011.
http://www.clancygernon.com/obituaries/Barry-Lancaster/#/Obituary

Quite a loss for this family in one week since both Barry Lancaster and his father died within 5 days of each other.

That is so sad! I can only imagine what the family is going through!

I sure don’t know what happens in a person’s life that makes them become homeless.

I remember about four years ago I saw this young nicely dressed, clean cut guy, probably around 22 years old standing by the freeway onramp holding a sign asking for money. I saw him about once a week for two years, each month his hair got a little longer, beard grew longer and he was dirtier each month and still wearing the same clothes from the very first time I saw him.

He was there for two years then just disappeared. I always wondered how he got to that point in his life, perhaps he had mental problems and wondered off, maybe he didn’t even know his own name, perhaps his family had reported him as a missing person and had been looking for him the whole time.

1 Reply

@jcboy,

A lot of us can understand becoming homeless and some of us do.
We have posters here who have been, are now, and likely will be, not meaning the same people.
Life can be tough and is getting more tough.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Both Hawkeye and BillRM have an absolute aversion to actually reading any of the laws pertaining to any crime we discuss in any thread

And you know this how?

Quote:

What will actually go on in that courtroom in Thom's case is not likely to center on who was at fault

DUH... the state has already decided, no facts are required, that is what the word "assumed" means.

Quote:

But it is that combative struggle between the opposing state and the defense that is the heart of our justice system, that's what keeps the state from hammering on citizens.

The majority of us at A2K would have no ability to battle the state , we dont have the bucks or the political pull to sway the DA, a position of great power in this society which is highly politicized.

Quote:

At this stage of the game, all of the speculation about who was at fault and possible outcomes for Thom is meaningless, given the absence of facts,

A statement that is true at all stages of this game, as the state does not care who is to blame, and the facts will never get a hearing.

Quote:

The system is working just fine--and that's what Hawkeye and BillRM won't/can't acknowledge.

Yes, of course we are supposed to accept your opinion as Gospel, and need to be slimed for being so uppity as to announce that we disagree with you.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

DUH

That figures.

0 Replies

so much negative emotion

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

The majority of us at A2K would have no ability to battle the state , we dont have the bucks or the political pull to sway the DA, a position of great power in this society which is highly politicized.

Either you really don't understand how the criminal justice system operates in a DUI case like Thom's, or you are so paranoid you can't deal with reality, or you flagrantly distort things to make yourself seem right.

Everyone who is accused of a crime has the right to an attorney, be it private counsel or legal aid/court appointed, and there is nothing necessarily second rate about a court appointed lawyer. And those defense attorneys do not sway the D.A. by "political pull" they defend their clients by attacking or discrediting the evidence, or arrest procedures, used in their client's case and this is done whether a plea is being negotiated or the case is moving toward trial--and rulings are made by a judge--the entire process is governed by formalized legal procedures and legal precedents. And that is exactly what is happening in Thom's case.

Quote:

the state does not care who is to blame, and the facts will never get a hearing.

Again, either this is sheer ignorance on your part, paranoia, or a deliberate distortion so you can justify another of your anti-government rants. Of course the facts get a hearing, and that is already taking place in Thom's case. The case has already been in court several times and another court hearing is scheduled for next week--in a public courtroom. And Thom is definitely represented by attorneys who are defending his interests.
Of course, your idea of what the "facts" are may differ considerably from what the relevant legal issues are. For instance, your preoccupation with the victim's homeless state, and how that came about, really is irrelevant regarding whether Thom was driving legally impaired and whether he caused or contributed to the victim's death by hitting him with his car, and whether he left the scene. That's what he is charged with, that's what the state must prove, and that's what the defense must refute.

Quote:

Yes, of course we are supposed to accept your opinion as Gospel, and need to be slimed for being so uppity as to announce that we disagree with you.

Well, if you don't think this particular criminal case is proceeding in an appropriate lawful and legal manner, as I do think it is, can you justify your opinion?

Thom has been charged with certain crimes, a judge accepted the charges as justified, bail was set and posted, hearings have been held, a not guilty plea was entered, defense attorneys have requested the evidence, a motion has been made to amend the bond--all within two weeks of the arrest, Why is all that not an indication that the system is working just as it should? How is Thom not getting due process? How are his legal rights not being protected?

Can you actually stick to discussing this particular DUI case?

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

A dear friend of mine, a very highly educated and accomplished person, developed schizophrenia in his mid-twenties and began living on the streets of a large city because he was too paranoid to stay anywhere. His family was beside themselves. When they were able to have him legally hospitalized they did so, at other times they had him followed by private detectives so they would at least know where he was. But he wasn't a danger to self and others, he managed to keep himself fed, and he managed somehow to keep himself safe from the elements although he lived outdoors and in parks for years at a time and was very delusional.
He refused to remain on psych meds so his condition could never be stabilized and, whenever his family managed to bring him home, he would get away and return to the streets. It was a tragic and very painful situation to witness. The last I heard, which was decades ago, they had gotten him into a long term treatment facility, but I have no idea how long he stayed there or what happened after that.

Being homeless does not mean you don't have friends or family that care about you very much. It does not mean you are a worthless bum.

2 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

be it private counsel or legal aid/court appointed, and there is nothing necessarily second rate about a court appointed lawyer. And those def

LOL I been a juror where the defendant had that kind of a lawyer a lawyer that could not even talk directly to his client and it was clear that he did not do a great deal of research on the case beforehand.

Yes sir a public defender lawyer is great for plea bargaining but for little else.

Oh I forgot the lawyer had the man put on the stand where he confessed to most of the charges!!!!!!!!!

I question if there was not one juror who did not feel sorry for this old man and yet we needed to find him guilty of most of the charges.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

developed schizophrenia in his mid-twenties and began living on the streets of a large city because he was too paranoid to stay anywhere

.

We was too cheap to paid for the kind of treatment that such people need and allow them to wonder around being a danger to public safety and order. When we shuted down most of the mental hospitals when drugs to control such conditions first came out we did not keep our promise to have the numbers of outpatient communities treatments centers needed.

Now in this case we are likely to be locking up a useful citizen at a cost of 25,000 a year or so because we allow a man in need of treatment to wonder around on a bike.

I remember seeing such a man on the sidewalk yelling at passing cars and fear he might at any moment step in the path of those cars.

When I call 911 I was told if he was not in the middle of the road at this moment no police would come to check him out.

3 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

LOL I been a juror where the defendant had that kind of a lawyer a lawyer that could not even talk directly to his client and it was clear that he did not do a great deal of research on the case.

You persist in the folly that your personal experiences, whether true or not, represent some general conclusions.

Since no juror is ever privy to private communications between attorney and client, you wouldn't really know whether the attorney you allegedly observed could "talk directly to his client". Even if a translator was used for the client, communication is still taking place.

Furthermore, there is no reason to assume that a court appointed lawyer is any less versed in the law or less skillful as an attorney than private counsel would be, new lawyers have to obtain experience and some do that by taking court appointed cases and other, more experienced, lawyers may take some cases pro bono.

And, whether the lawyer is court appointed or private counsel, an appeal of a conviction can be made on the basis of inadequate representation by counsel if the defense attorney has failed to adequately represent the client. Lawyers can also be sued for malpractice.

And all of this is irrelevant in Thom's case as he seems to have a very adequate law firm representing him.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Now in this case we are likely to be locking up a useful citizen at a cost of 25,000 a year or so because we allow a man in need of treatment to wonder around on a bike.

He killed a man whilst over the legal limit, then fled the scene of the crime. I don't call that a useful citizen.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

. We was too cheap to paid for the kind of treatment that such people need and allow them to wonder around being a danger to public safety and order. When we shuted down most of the mental hospitals when drugs to control such conditions first came out we did not keep our promise to have the numbers of outpatient communities treatments centers needed.

That was not the case with my friend, as was perfectly evident from my post. My friend refused outpatient treatment, as was his right to do.

You cannot keep people involuntarily in community treatment centers and you cannot force outpatients to take psych meds. You can have treatment centers on every block, but that does not mean that patients will use such facilities. And that is the price that society pays for allowing the mentally ill protection of their civil rights and civil liberties.

If you were really a champion of civil rights, you would applaud the fact that the state cannot involuntarily incarcerate someone in a psych facility unless it can be shown they are an immediate danger to themselves or others, and they cannot be retained once it can be shown that the immediate danger can not be proved. So, either you are ignorant or the law, or you are a phony hypocrite.

Quote:

Now in this case we are likely to be locking up a useful citizen at a cost of 25,000 a year or so because we allow a man in need of treatment to wonder around on a bike.

Useful citizens who drive drunk, and who may cause accidents and kill people, present a clear danger to the community. Arguing that they are otherwise "useful citizens" does not mean they have not violated criminal laws for which they deserve incarceration.

You have no idea, at all, whether Barry Lancaster was a danger to anyone, or required any treatment, for any reason, but Thom was certainly a danger to Barry Lancaster, wasn't he? It was Thom's car that hit him while Thom was legally intoxicated and should not have been driving. It was Thom who should not have been on the road--at all.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Right. And your friend's story is terrifically sad.
My father was mentally disturbed before he died, and could have been homeless but was institutionalized before the changes in that system in the late sixties. We were out of our heads with worry, grief.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Now in this case we are likely to be locking up a useful citizen at a cost of 25,000 a year or so because we allow a man in need of treatment to wonder around on a bike.

So justice should be based on one's contribution to society?

(And is "useful citizen" just BillRM-speak for "income?")

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

You persist in the folly that your personal experiences, whether true or not, represent some general conclusions.

And you pull your claims as how wonderful public appointed lawyers are out of your rear end as I had not seen any links to any studies that would back up your claims!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I seen such a lawyer in action and that is far more backing then you had offer for your opinion.

2 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

My friend refused outpatient treatment, as was his right to do

It only became his right after we shut down most of the inpatient treatment centers and it had never been a right for anyone to be a constant danger to public order and safety.

The mentally ill man who was acting in a very irrational manner right by a stream of traffic was not worth having a police officer look at him at least until he kill himself.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Well, if you're going to use that many exclamation marks you must be right.

0 Replies

I just don’t understand drinking and driving

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know