Repeat Drunk Driving Offenders

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

MrsSpringsteen

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
29,291
Location
Edge's beanie closet
I am so tired of stories like this..lock them up and get them off the roads permanently. I can't understand why drunk driving seems to STILL be an acceptable crime in 2005

Infant clings to life after crash tied to repeat offender
Driver is called 'worst nightmare'
By Raja Mishra and John Ellement, Globe Staff | July 26, 2005

QUINCY -- Lawrence J. Robertson had been arrested at least four times for driving while high or drunk. Due to four consecutive license revocations, he has not been legally allowed to drive in Massachusetts since 1983, state officials said.

Yet Quincy police say the 43-year-old Braintree man was behind the wheel Sunday afternoon, stoned on drugs, when he ran a red light and plowed into a sport utility vehicle driven by a pregnant 24-year-old woman, leaving her infant girl, born hours after the bloody crash, clinging to life at a Boston hospital.

With pregnant Katelyn Melia trapped in her overturned SUV, Robertson appeared to pretend he was an innocent bystander at the scene until police determined he was the driver, witnesses said.

The state's registrar of motor vehicles called Robertson ''our worst nightmare": a long-term substance abuser willing to drive without a license. Robertson's case is likely to intensify debate over Melanie's bill, legislation proposed in May that would mandate jail time for such repeat offenders.

''He's the guy that, short of following him around, you can't catch," said Registrar Kimberly Hinden. ''They'll just keep doing it over and over again. Our laws need to be changed. . . . He should have been put in jail."

Robertson's girlfriend, Linda Manna, told police she allowed him to use her car, despite knowing his license had been revoked.

Robertson's car knocked Melia's SUV on its side, sending it skidding into a utility pole. She was 21 hours from the scheduled delivery of her baby. Her 2-year-old son, Ryan Doyle, also in the car, was rescued uninjured. Melia, from Quincy, was rushed to Boston Medical Center, where her daughter was delivered by caesarean section.

Yesterday, Melia was in fair condition, while her daughter remained in critical condition in the neonatal intensive care unit.

''The story line here is the creep: They can do it to you, they can do it to anyone, any time," said a man at Melia's home who identified himself as a close relative. ''Go to the hospital and ask how many times a week does this kind of thing happen. It's sick."

Robertson was arraigned yesterday on two counts of causing serious bodily harm while operating under the influence of drugs, as well as single counts of operating under the influence of drugs, operating a motor vehicle with a revoked license as a habitual traffic offender, marijuana possession, negligent operation of a motor vehicle, and failure to stop at a red light. He is being held on $50,000 bail and is due back in Quincy District Court on Aug. 23. His lawyer refused to comment yesterday.

State records detail Robertson's troubled driving history. He was found guilty of drunken driving four times: in Quincy (1982), in Belmont (1985), in Braintree (1993), and in Abington (1999). Authorities said Robertson had a fifth previous driving violation involving drugs or alcohol, though the violation was not listed in documents provided by the Registry.

In addition, he was caught driving without a license, valid license plates, or insurance four times, according to state records.

On Oct. 2, 2003, the state declared Robertson a habitual traffic offender after a Holbrook incident in which Robertson was caught driving with someone else's plates on his car, adding to his lengthy list of violations. Under the declaration, Robertson would not be eligible to drive until 2007.

Despite these repeated punishments, state officials and activists anguished over a system that failed to keep this troubled driver off the road.

Hinden urged passage of Melanie's bill, named for 13-year-old Melanie Powell of Marshfield who was killed by a repeat drunk driver in 2003. The bill would mandate three months in jail and a three-year license suspension for those caught driving under the influence with a suspended license. Currently, these offenders get 60 additional days of license suspension.

''Guys like Robertson just don't get the message," Hinden said.

The events unfolded at the corner of Copeland and Common streets in Quincy around 1:50 p.m. Sunday. Judith A. McEntire was working behind the counter at the nearby Sly Fox bar, when she heard a loud noise.

McEntire ran outside to help, noticing Melia was pregnant and bleeding heavily. She told a person at the scene, who replied, ''Wow! She's pregnant?" The person was Robertson.

''He was like another passerby," McEntire said.

Even as emergency personnel worked to save the passengers, ''Robertson stood by across the street asking questions as though he was not involved in the accident," according to a Quincy police report.

Robertson eventually identified himself as the driver when questioned by police at the scene.

Robertson told police the 2002 Ford SUV he drove belonged to his girlfriend. Robertson was evasive and could not describe where he was driving or how he ended up colliding with Melia's vehicle, police said. They described him as being ''unsteady on his feet," as having ''bloodshot eyes," and appearing to be ''very nervous."

Police searched Robertson's vehicle, finding a prescription pill bottle with Manna's name on it, but Robertson denied having ingested any of the pills.

Manna later told police that Robertson has been living with her in Braintree for about three months and that Robertson was a drug addict whose ''narcotic of choice" was OxyContin.

She said she let him use her car to go to the store Sunday because he told her he was ill. She thought he was sick with narcotic withdrawal symptoms rather than high when he drove off, according to the police report.

No charges have been filed against Manna.
 
:mad: :mad: :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored:

There are so many things wrong in this story.... I don't even know where to begin!! (And I mean the actions of people...not the facts themselves.)

As for drunk driving being "acceptable", I don't believe that's the issue. This story points out one thing with our current system: You can take away a person's license/driving privileges, you can even give them jail time for a while. But when they are back out amongst the general public, how is law enforcement to stop them BEFORE they get behind the wheel of someone else's car? (Short of following them 24/7)

That being said, I certainly feel the girlfriend has some share of the blame here. She knows the piece of crap she's living with has an OxyContin problem & yet she allows him to drive her vehicle around. At this point, the biggest penalty she's going to have is that (assuming she carries auto insurance!) she'll owe for the damages to the other driver's car and for the medical expenses resulting from the accident, PLUS the damages to her own car - which will only be paid if she's got collision coverage on her vehicle. Not near enough punishment for her part in this tragedy if you ask me. :tsk:
 
Last edited:
Nor can I.

And yes, it gets my blood boiling when I hear about people being arrested numerous times for drunk driving offenses. I heard a story once about some guy in...Ohio, I believe it was, who finally got a tough jail sentence after his 400th drunk driving arrest.

What. The. Hell?

And people wonder why the idea of driving makes me nervous.

Angela
 
It's terrible. You can't drive more than a few miles around where I live without seeing a cross or some other memorial on the side of the road. And the majority of them are caused by drunk driving.

I suppose it's hard to enforce the laws, but we need the punishment to be much more severe. Maybe that would dissuade a few people at least from putting innocent peoples' lives in danger.
 
I had a conversation w/ my mom and aunt just the other night about drunk driving. We all agreed that drunk driving should be completely unacceptable and think it would be very fair to say anyone arrested for drunk driving loses their license for LIFE. Driving and having a license is a privilege, not a right.
 
I think we're doing something wrong.

Laws and punishments regarding DUI's should change.

You see how that woman knew he was an addict and still let her drive her car? She should have gotten a fine and 2 or 3 days in jail. Teach the "passerbys" a lesson.
 
This useless moron and his mentally deficient girlfriend should both never be allowed to drive again. Send them to jail for a few years too.

What a horrible way for a baby to come into the world. I hope it survives.
 
Harsh punishments don't equal lesser DUI's. Sad but true.

You take away someone's license, they still can get into a car and drive. You take away their car, they can buy another one. Put them in jail, they'll get out eventually and go out and drink n drive again. Sad but another true fact.

What these people need to be sentenced to is long-term treatment centres. And I mean long-term and serious treatment. None of this spend 3 days in jail or on ankle bracelet shit, or 20 days in jail or on ankle bracelet shit. And for the third DUI, it's like 90 days in jail or ankle bracelet. Do you think this really helps the problem? No.
This person doesn't have a problem DRIVING. They have a problem DRINKING OR DRUGGING BEFORE or DURING DRIVING.

Fix the problem.
 
Counselling/treatment, unfortunately, does not always work any more than a harsh sentence.

The safety issue is as important as the care of the person with the problem. They dont cancel each other out.
 
You're right. My stepfather is in long-term treatment right now for his 4th DUI. I have a feeling that somewhere down the line he will return to drinking and go out and drive again.

Maybe we should just really toss them into a jail and throw away the key.

:shrug:
 
If people are going to continue being a threat to themselves and others, something has to be done.
Unfortunately I reckon we all know of people who do such unexplainable things. i have a neighbour who just cannot stop drinking and driving. he has a gambling addiction and in the last year has slipped down the drugs route. His last appearance in court saw him lose his license for 2 years on the proviso he doesn't repeat offend yet again, and if he does, it's an automatic 2 year stint. Will he stop? He hasn't yet, so he is a risk to himself and everyone. Court threats fail him, as does counselling.

At least removing him from the roads will remove the threat. It's not ideal, never is.
 
VertigoGal said:
^I'm all for strengthening the punishment for DUI, but that's too harsh.

Really? Why's that?

The problem I have is that people too often have this attitude like driving is their right and by default they should be allowed to do so in whatever condition they please. Driving needs to be considered a privilege that you EARN via driver's ed and simply obeying very clear-cut and simple laws. Sorry, I just won't be part of the whole "well, they'll just do it anyway" attitude regarding harsher punishments (for any number of laws, not just DUIs). When people disobey the law, they deserve to be punished, period. I don't see the point in increasing jail time since jails and prisons are already overflowing and our tax dollars go to feed these people. You drive drunk, you don't drive again, IMO.

One of my uncles has been in jail for drunk driving and I can barely look him in the eye b/c all I can think about is what innocent people he could potentially kill next time he leaves the bar.
 
VertigoGal said:
^I'm all for strengthening the punishment for DUI, but that's too harsh.

No it isn't. Driving while drunk is easily avoided so I don't see why harsh punishments shouldn't be imposed on those who choose to do it, particularly when the potential consequences to others are so horrendous.

It's simple - if you plan to go out for the night and drink, don't take your car. If you plan not to drink and change your mind take a taxi home and collect your car the next day. If you're at home drinking and need to go somewhere then walk, use public transport, take a taxi.

There is no excuse whatsoever for driving while drunk. Even if someone has a problem with alcohol, their problem is with alcohol not with driving so even if they can't resist having a drink they certainly can resist getting into a car.

Yes taking away someone's license for life is harsh, but if people know that is the automatic punishment for being caught driving when drunk then they'll think twice before doing it. Maybe it's the only way to stop them.
 
One, when drunk, can't resist getting into a car. People do stupid things when drunk. Especially trying to drive while being drunk. And people that are around them should be punished as well if they are found with a drunk driver. That way friends of drunk drivers will stop them. A fucking bumper sticker "Friends Don't Let Friends Drive Drunk" is a joke. I've had many friends let me, wait- ask me to drive after they've seen me drink more than 2 beers. When I got caught for my DUI, my friend was with me, sober! She was taken home while I was taken to jail. She should have been charged with a crime as well, although not as bad as a crime as I've committed but I'd say the charge will be "Accessory to commit a crime" and given a $500 fine, 24 hours in jail, and a license suspension of 30 days. That way people can stop other people from driving drunk.

The second DUI, the driver should complete a 30 day rehab, plus a fine of $2000, plus 20 days in jail, plus the Driver's License is revoked for life. Any passengers of the vehicle charged with "Accessory to commit a crime". Vehicle taken away.
The 2nd "Accessory to commit a crime" should be punished as if it were a 1st DUI: 72 hours in jail, a $1000 fine, revocation of license for 90 days, and rehab as prescribed, and vehicle impounded for 30 days.
If the repeat DUI offender does it again, put em in jail for life after the 3rd DUI.
Harsh punishment, harsher laws, necessary long-term rehab= lesser DUI's.
This is the only way I see it working.

My friend has TWO DUI's. People still let her drive drunk. She's had her car taken away and her license taken away for a year and 90 days. She was put in rehab for 30 days and jail for 3 days. She has paid over $10,000 in legal fees and fines.
She still occasionally drives drunk, so don't tell me that our laws are working.
 
Considering it only takes one attempt to kill a person when you're driving drunk, I don't see why we should give these people multiple opportunities to do so.

Zero tolerance for me on this issue.
 
xtal said:
One, when drunk, can't resist getting into a car. People do stupid things when drunk. Especially trying to drive while being drunk.

Well if a person really can't resist driving while drunk they need to stop being so selfish and learn some self-control. And please note, I am not suggesting alcoholics need to stop being selfish and learn control, I'm well aware that alcoholism isn't about that. But even if someone can't resist having a drink, they can certainly resist deciding to get into a car and endanger themselves and everyone else using the roads at that time.
 
anitram said:
Considering it only takes one attempt to kill a person when you're driving drunk, I don't see why we should give these people multiple opportunities to do so.

Zero tolerance for me on this issue.

Precisely.

There's a campaign in Australia with signs I see at sporting events reading "Drink. Drive. Bloody Idiot." I reckon that should be extended: "Drink. Drive. Bloody Idiot. Forfeit Licence. Forever."
 
What truly pisses me off is that people who endanger innocent lives and thereby should have forfeited their privilege of driving are still allowed on the road while I can't drive, ever, because of my vision. These people get chance after chance while I can't have a single one. I'd love to be able to drive, while these dipshits take it for granted.

And you know what? This bullshit about needing a licence is exactly that: BULLSHIT. Sure, having to rely on others for a lift can be a bit of a hassle at times and it would be really convenient to be able to drive, but I manage to survive. I can get around to do what I need and want to do. And if you're dumb enough to drink and drive when your very job is based around driving (i.e. you're a truck driver), well, it's your own stupid fault when you suddenly find yourself in the unemployed queue and you deserve to be there.
 
Axver said:
And you know what? This bullshit about needing a licence is exactly that: BULLSHIT. Sure, having to rely on others for a lift can be a bit of a hassle at times and it would be really convenient to be able to drive, but I manage to survive. I can get around to do what I need and want to do. And if you're dumb enough to drink and drive when your very job is based around driving (i.e. you're a truck driver), well, it's your own stupid fault when you suddenly find yourself in the unemployed queue and you deserve to be there.

I couldn't agree more. I have a driving license but I don't own a car at the moment and I manage fine without it. Yes, it's sometimes inconvenient to have to rely on others or use unreliable public transport but it's by no means impossible. I think the inconvenience of not being able to drive is a mild penalty for something as serious as drunk driving.
 
I agree Axver. Dunno if Vic is the same, I'd guess so. Every 2 years diabetics and a fair list of others need to ge a medical report done to keep their license. No mention of adictions to substances which hinder skill. Of course epilepsy can affect driving. Just like fucking alcohol can. I cant believe from some of the threads we've had in here, some states in America have a blood alcohol limit of up to 0.08! You dnt all have compulsory seat belt laws, and you have ridiculously dangerously high alcohol levels!! Do you all want to die? People suggest implementing changes and then the outcries start about infringements of civil liberties. Fuck your civil liberties! Safety and liberty need compromise. It absolutely leaves me gobsmacked. I'd love to be your president for a day. I'd only last a day before some extremist liberal or conservative shot me, but you'd all be a bloody hell of a lot safer.
I look at our laws, much stricter and tighter than yours. This country gets into this mutual slap in the chops state whenever a long weekend or whatever approaches, as we too, have high road tolls. Each state has a tally and each holiday, we bemoan stupidity and wish people would wake up to themselves and that the police could do more.
 
I support legislation to do something about this terrible problem. A person shouldn't have to run any more risks when they get in a car than is necessary, and drunk drivers are a huge threat to the public safety. You can't change the fact that alcohol screws up your judgment big time. Don't let drunk drivers drive. Period.
 
Back
Top Bottom