I live close to a small town and I have a situation.
A 23 year old guy, was driving his car in a 25 m.p.h. zone. He stopped, turned the corner, went about 75 yards and hit a car and crashed into a house.
They had to cut him out of his car, and then he refused medical help.
He totaled the car he hit and left a large hole in the house.
This guy's father is the bailiff in the court. This guy had a drunken driving charge and he got a 250.00 fine and 6 months in jail with all but 3 days suspended a while back.
He has been in trouble several times and has always received the minimum fine or sentence.
This latest incident was not reported by the paper, radio nor any source. It was like someone is trying to make it go away. If anyone else would have done this, it would be all over the local news.
He was not even given a breath test on this. This guy is pretty much drunk all the time.
What can I do to get some action done on this?
I wrote letters to the State Patrol, a news agency, the local police department, etc, and nothing is being done to this guy.
Anybody have any suggestions/ideas as to what can be done, or who to contact to get something done on this. This guy is going to kill someone eventually while the law just turns it's head.

These things happen. I doubt a Bailiff would have a high enough pull to help his son.

As to what you can do, NOTHING. A police officer cannot chage someone with running a traffic light unless they witness it. Do you know for a fact the man was drunk? Did you witness him drinking? Were you present at the scene? Are you going by history and reputation?

I can run a red light 1000 times and never have an accident but be ticketed each time. Then I have an accident at the light and either not have a witness that I ran the light or maybe I had the green light but past history cannot be brought to play in the current issue.

As to the minimum sentencing, that is common everywhere. Give the minimum and the court is through with it. Multiple offenses increases the penalty but there is still a minimum penalty and that is what a person will get.

Does it sound right? Nope but that is the way it is. I dealt with a guy a couple yrs back. He had killed people three times and served time for each but he got the minimum each time and got probation when he served the minimum time. But he is back on the street.

We do not have enough jails or tax money to give people max sentences.

You got that exactly right. Nothing is going to be done until he kills someone. Someone who is living now and enjoying life is fated to be killed by this guy.

Two things........

Send the information to your State's Attorney General and see if you can get them interested in investigating.

And contact your MADD (Mother's Against Drunk Driver's) rep. These crazy women really take exception to this kind of **** and are likely to be out demonstrating in front of your courthouse as early as tomorrow morning. MADD loves publicity of this kind.

Only if it was proven the person was intoxicated. Rumor or hearsay is not a conviction or even a fact.

Maybe, but they are likely to be asking why in the world he wasn't tested.

....and since when does a bailiff carry that much weight?

In my opinion, the authorities will never do anything about this guy you are talking about. It sounds to me as though he has something on a judge, or someone in law enforcement that no one wants to be made public. I have seen this before. One of these days someone who really cares for one of his victims will work his karma out real good.
I once knew a guy who was in trouble with the law almost all of the time. When he was killed in an argument over a deer in the woods, the papers or local news didn't even comment on the fact that he was shot point blank with a 30.30. People still wonder what happened to his killer. Nobody even cared. That guy should be careful during deer season for sure. Things like that have a way of working themselves out.
gordon

__________________
better have that checked

Sounds like that feller caught somebody boinkin' a sheep and is playin' it for all it's worth.

Durned shame cuz he's gonna kill someone.

Meanie that I am, I hope the person he kills-is himself.

Is he a kennedy?

I've lived in the small towns. I've seen this kind of thing. On the surface, there is not much you can do about it.

I was talking to the local DA about an elder abuse situation about 30 years ago. I was telling him about how this guy had a long history of abuse, the victim would always bail him out, blah, blah, blah.

The exact words he used were "We can't do a damn thing until he kills her."

Well, many years later, the abused and the abuser are both deceased. He tried as hard as he could to kill her and she tried as hard as she could to "bail him out." They both died of natural causes...but in reality...he killed her "mentally" meany years earlier.

Getting back to your case, I would "tell the world." The state Attorney General may not be able to do anything...but at least you are "on record" as trying to do something.

Like was once said..."Some people just need a kill'n."

__________________
G.P. Charlie

cant win these things in a bedroom community.
Legit cases are thrown out of court so the guilty can play a round of golf with the judge next weekend.

"proper channels" are there to waste your time while giving the appearance of action in such a town.

there is one effective method that I have YET to see implemented ... its called an air strike.
I'm positive it would work. there may be less radical solutions that would work as well. Though they elude me.

__________________
it just needs more voltage

Merril....

Too funny!

__________________
Non gratum anus rodentum

I've seen things like this, but MOST of the time it hasn't been corruption at all. Rather, there's been an inability to prove the case(s).

For example, in Florida, even if the suspect admits driving in a similar situation, the State needs a "wheel witness" (someone to put the suspect behind the wheel at the time of the incident) in order to get the admission into evidence.

Here, and this is not a small town, we've prosecuted the sons of the current and past Sheriff, the entire City Council of one of the smaller cities and its Mayor and several County and City officials.

Its a matter of proof at least MOST of the time.

People here and elsewhere often jump to conclusions that lack any evidentiary validity-like this guy caught the judge with a small, furry creature.

By all means, go to someone in authority but outside the town's politics. Go yourself, so you can get the straight scoop one way or the other.

Bob

Thanks for all the great information. I know I am probably running into a brick wall with this, but I have to try.
I have been talking to many young people about this. I get the same story from everyone that I talk to, that he drinks a lot everyday.
His arrest record verifies this also. But as many of you have stated, it was not proven in this wreck.
He totaled the car that he hit. They had to cut him out of the car he was driving. He knocked the house off the foundation.
After he was cut out of the car, he laid in the yard for about an hour and refused medical treatment. His father picked him up at the wreck.
The town has 4 cruisers, and they all responded to the wreck. The lady that lives in the house said that he was not given a breath test.
I mailed 8 letters today. It might not do any good, but I have to try. Thanks guys.

unfortunately the answer is ..................nothing. stuff like this happens all the time.
is it right.........NO. is it fair..........NO. but thats life in the world today.
try not to dwell on it or it will drive you crazy.

cobra44,

Whatever you mail, send it return receipt so that someone at the other end has to sign for it.

When you have any sort of a meeting with the bureacrats, open up a notebook and start writing notes. Ask them specifically for their name, title, and contact information.

What this does is send a message that you are documenting everything for future use. Bureaucrats do not like the fact that someone is willing to create documentation that proves they have been properly notified and have done nothing.

Documentation also signals loud and clear that you are willing to pursue the course doggedly.

When a bureaucrat is facing a problem that can be documented back to them and threatens their career, they will take action to save their own neck.

Documentation will also be highly necessary if you do go to the attorney general or any other outside agency. They will not take on the job unless they have a clear chance to not screw their ownselves...remember they are bureacrats as well.

I know, I worked for the federal government for 31 years.

Good luck. This sort of thing is criminally common in New Mexico.

__________________
Have guns...will shoot'em.

Call your State's Attorney General office and talk to him over the telephone. He will listen.

More or less my thoughts on the situation. I'm not sure of your exact location here in the USA, but I can tell you the "he needed killin" defense is admissable in more than a few courts of law once you head south of the mason-dixon. Give it time, this guy will do something and end up dead or in jail for it.

The legal profession suggest sending emails. With such, you have a record of the time, date and the exact communication wordage.

Sending a letter with a return receipt requested used to be the rage until some took it to court. I can send someone a blank sheet of paper but in an envelope with a return receipt request and then claim that was the letter giving them a check or any information being claimed.

Still, in this case as in many others, there is no proof of anything. There are no witnesses to the incident. Every town has it's share of town drunks. You may not know them but they are there. The identity of some would shock you. Locally we have had a Pentecostal pastor from a neighboring town fall dead off a bar stool from alcohol poisoning (later found to be a constant drunk for over 20 years), a Senator having a mjor wreck while drunk (later admitted to a substance abuse clinic) and a lawyer that was famous across the south found to be practicing law beautifully while totally intoxicated and he never remembered what happened once he sobered up.

We all know of the alcohol habits of Betty Ford, Ted Kennedy and many more well known people. Nothing is done to them for many reasons.

While I am all for getting the drunk drivers off the road, there are other things that are just as bad. We began drug testing drivers invovled in any fatality or critical injury accident. This has been going on for over five years. During that time we have found more to be impaired on drugs than alcohol. Be it pot, crack, meth or coke, people are high and impaired but you never know it until something happens.

We often swat at gnats while swallowing camels.

oldman45,

Great advice on emails, something I did not consider. But, how does one prove the intended party received it? Can they claim..."I never got that email."?

I too have wondered about the drugs, here in N.M. we have a LOT of "drunk driving" reports but rarely does the news report drugs along with the drunk driving charges. Maybe the differentation is of no importance to the news I guess.

__________________
Have guns...will shoot'em.

This is merely typical small town America. The criminal "justice" system, to varying degrees, tends to look the other way for both ends of the social spectrum. They ignore the "connected" folks simply because they are "connected", and ignore the low and no income folks because they create a load of paperwork, can't pay a fine, and costs the local government money to incarcerate them. Small town cops know who makes up the "unconnected" working class that will get the the bulk of the tickets and fines bestowed upon them. Good luck making any changes to your local "good ol' boy" system.

This is common every where. Many low lifes are never dealt with until they commit a major crime. Locking them up for small crimes does not change them, it only adds cost for the local PD to house and feed them. There are not enough Sheriff Joe's.

Be sure to have all your documentation squared away. It would suck for your actions to have no result, but allow your target to sue you for libel and/or slander.

It sounds like you need either:

A. A new D.A.

B. A new judge.

C. All of the above.

He could be a member of DAMM ( drunks against mad mothers) sorry I never get to use this acronym. Jeff