Lawrence Wolf - Part 26

No Driving Until You Pass Your Breath Test

According to a story from the Los Angeles Times, California drunk drivers that have been convicted of DUI may have to take a Breathalyzer test every time they want to drive their cars. That is, a bill proposes a new program that would place ignition-locking breath analysis systems into the automobiles of those individuals that have been convicted of driving while under the influence. Such a device would force motorists to have to pass a blood alcohol concentration test before their cars are permitted to start. The bill is currently awaiting approval from Governor Schwarzenegger, and is set to run in Los Angeles, Alameda, Sacramento, and Tulare counties.

According to the bill, the ignition-locking systems would take the place of a convicted motorist’s restricted license. Furthermore, it would be expected of motorists to pay for the installation of the devices and it creates the interesting question as to how law enforcement and probation officers would be able to enforce such a program. Ultimately, there are numerous issues that could arise that would prove the program to be relatively ineffective in curbing driving while under the influence.

For starters, a restricted license is very different than an automobile that does not start unless a breath test is passed. That is, while a restricted license will follow convicted motorists around from vehicle to vehicle, the Breathalyzer will not. All one would need to do to essentially circumvent the system would be to use another person’s car instead of their own, which begs the question as to how exactly a program such as this would prove to be successful.

Credit Card Cop Arrested for Fraud

The Las Vegas Sun recently reported that a North Las Vegas Police detective has been arrested for allegedly using a department credit card to make personal purchases. The 39-year-old has been placed on paid administrative leave while the investigation is being handled. The week-long investigation that led to his arrest was prompted when the department credit card went missing.

The accused detective has been charged with three counts of credit card fraud, and three counts of accepting merchandise obtained by unlawful use of a credit card, all considered felonies. If convicted of a felony crime, a person’s future is put in jeopardy and may face lengthy prison time, hefty fines capable of putting one in debt, and many other consequences.

In any event, it is important to remember that accusation of a crime does not necessarily mean that you will be found guilty. In is essential that the services of a skilled criminal defense attorney are sought to ensure that you are afforded the strongest possible defense in relation to an understanding of the extent of the charges against you.

Prison Pop Cut Could Mean More Arrests

It was recently reported on cbsnews.com that a panel of federal judges has decreed that the state of California must reduce its prison population by as much as 40,000 inmates, all in hopes of alleviating overcrowded prisons and improving the time and attention allowed for inmate health care. The current population of about 150,000 would be cut down to about 110,000, and a plan for doing so must be made by the state of California within a time period of 45 days.

An article in the Los Angeles Times article recently stated that “the governor and most legislative leaders back a plan that would reduce prison populations by as many as 37,000 over the next two years using a combination of early releases, changes in parole policies and shifting some prisoners to county jails.” While this idea seems relatively sound, it has received backlash from law enforcement and victim’s rights groups, who believe that putting convicted prisoners back on the streets could pose a risk to the well-being of California’s general population.

Furthermore, in putting pervious offenders back on the streets, in can be assumed that law enforcement officials opposed to the idea may profile these recently released inmates, or simply become much stricter in their practice of arresting individuals for committing crimes.

White-Collar Pastor Accused of Embezzlement

The Press Enterprise, pe.com, recently ran an article that talked about a pastor that has been accused of embezzlement and money laundering. The Compton-area pastor pled not guilty to both counts. The Double Rock Baptist Church has accused the former pastor of diverting funds from church bank accounts and using the funds for personal projects in his Corona home. If convicted, the pastor could face more than seven years in prison.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office has been investigating the preacher for some time now, even searching his home in 2008 and confiscating financial records that may have aided in securing his arrest. After the search, members of the church were threatened not to cooperate with the investigation at the risk of being barred from the church. While evidence collected and witness testimony will more than likely procure a conviction against the pastor, not all cases of white-collar crime in Los Angeles are as clear cut.

The trust given to those in charge of finances is tremendous. However, just because a person has access to funding does not mean that the person is going to, or already has, embezzled it.

Jackson’s Doctor Admits to Dosage that Doesn’t Add Up

According to the Los Angeles Times, the reported levels of the anesthetic propofol which contributed towards Michael Jackson’s untimely death are relatively too low to have posed any sort of risk to the pop star. Jackson’s doctor claims to have administered a dosage of 25 milligrams to Jackson, who was dependent on the drug to fall asleep nightly. However, according to medical experts, a dosage that size taken by a patient such as Jackson, someone who was accustomed to taking the drug and had therefore built up a tolerance for it, would have little effect, if any at all, on his well-being.

The article goes on to report that in a three-hour interview with police, Jackson’s doctor claimed that he was attempting to wean the singer off of the drug, and that Jackson typically received a dosage totaling 50 milligrams. On the day of his death, Jackson was given a host of other sleep aids prior to the admitted 25 milligram dosage of propofol, leading some to question whether or not a lethal combination of medications could have ended Jackson’s life.

Even more problematic is the argument by experts that propofol, given in either a 25 milligram or a 50 milligram dosage, is not powerful enough to aid with sleep in the first place, causing some to question the validity of Jackson’s doctor’s claim, particularly since preliminary toxicology reports told of “lethal levels” of propofol present in Jackson’s blood.

Commerce Man Pleads Not Guilty in DUI Crash

According to an article from examiner.com, a Los Angeles county man was recently taken into custody on suspicion of driving under the influence and causing an accident. The 23-year-old man is said by police to have been the cause of the accident that involved a reported four other vehicles. Though the man was not said to have been injured in the crash, a 9-year-old girl that was a passenger in the man’s car was seriously injured and died shortly after arriving at a nearby hospital for treatment. The man now faces charges including vehicular manslaughter, DUI, and child endangerment and could use the help of an experienced Los Angeles drunk driving defense attorney.

Reportedly, the man did not notice the slow down in traffic while traveling along the Northbound I-5, and swerved to avoid the vehicles in front of him but barreled into other vehicles as a result. The crash took place at 1AM in the city of Carlsbad.

Though driving under the influence and driver inattention were the main culprits in causing this tragedy, not all accidents that occur under suspicion of DUI are the same. Dangerous road conditions, faulty auto products, and other drivers that are not accused of being under the influence of drugs or alcohol can all be the primary cause of a traffic accident. Thus, it is imperative that all details of any crash are thoroughly examined to determine exactly who was at fault so that accountability can be distributed accordingly.

The Number of DUI-Charged Women Rising

A recent article in The Seattle Times reported on an alarming trend that can have an impact on motorists anywhere in the country, particularly Los Angeles, where commuting via passenger car is as commonplace as taking the subway is in New York. According to the article, the number of women arrested for driving under the influence nationwide rose 28.8% higher in 2007 than it was in 1998. Interestingly enough, the number of men arrested for DUI decreased 7.5% over the same time period, indicating that woman are now more likely to engage in reckless behavior than they ever have been in the past.

Based on FBI figures relating to arrests, the state of California experienced an increase as well in the number of women driving under the influence. That is, 18.8% of all DUI arrests in California in the year 2007 involved a woman driving under the influence, while, in 1997, women only accounted for 13.5% of all DUI arrests. Numerous explanations have been given as to the reason why this deadly trend is becoming more and more prevalent across the country. Some cite that women tend to drink more at home than men do, and consequently hide their drinking problems until after an accident has occurred, at which point preventative measures to help curb the problem are too late. Others cite the current economic tide as reasoning as to why women are more likely to succumb to driving while under the influence. That is, as more and more men, and women alike, lose their jobs, there is a definite increase in pressure placed upon the shoulders of women, many of whom take on the dual roles of homemaker and financial contributor towards the well-being of the family. This added pressure, unfortunately, has led to increased drinking habits on the part of women

California DUI Arrests Rise, Yet Percent Convicted Drops

According to the California Department of Motor Vehicles, both the number of DUI arrests and DUI convictions in the state of California rose during the time period of 2001-2007. In 2001, there were a total of 176,490 DUI arrests in California. In 2007, that number rose to 203,866. As far as convictions go, 2001 boasted 140,440 convictions of DUI in the state of California, while in 2007 there were 153,348 such convictions. Interestingly, while the number of overall arrests and convictions has risen over the years, the percentage of convictions in relation to arrests has actually dropped. In 2001, 80% of arrests resulted in conviction, while in 2007, 75% of arrests led to convictions.

The question then arises as to why the percentage of convictions has dropped over the years. In fact, a close examination of the data provided by the California DMV shows that the percentage of convictions did not rise during the period of 2001 to 2007, with percentages either remaining the same or decreasing over the seven year period. What has changed over the years? The way the human body absorbs alcohol? Or the effectiveness of law enforcement tests to conclude how much alcohol is present in a person’s bloodstream?

Alcohol is not digested by the human body, but instead is absorbed into the bloodstream. As blood passes through the lungs, traces of alcohol move across the lung membranes and are released into the air when a person exhales. Depending on the concentration of alcohol in the body, the amount of alcohol released during exhale will either increase or decrease, and is representative of how high a person’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is.

Law enforcement officials use a variety of tests to determine whether or not a person has a BAC higher than the legal limit. From simple tests of observation involving agility, balance, and perception, to more complicated tests incorporating the use of devices, such as breathalyzers and intoxilyzers, law enforcement is always evolving its ways in which to tell whether or not a person is under the influence of alcohol.

Measuring BAC is Trickly and Complicated

According to an article posted on howstuffworks.com, law enforcement officers rely on a variety of tactics and devices to reasonably determine whether or not a person is under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Some of the most effective methods of this determination involve devices used to measure blood alcohol concentration (BAC) level. Breathalyzers, Intoxilyzers, and Alcosensor III or IV are the three major devices that are used to determine BAC levels.

Breathalyzers are the most commonly talked about type of test. This type of test relies on a chemical reaction involving alcohol to determine whether or not a person has a BAC above the legal limit. During the test, a person blows into a device. A silver nitrate catalyst then separates alcohol traces from one’s breath, and that alcohol then interacts with reddish-brown potassium dichromate to form a green chromium ion, an indication that alcohol is indeed present in the system of the person being tested. The substance is then compared against a sample ion, an indicator needle is activated, and the person’s BAC is determined according to how much the person administering the test needs to turn a dial in order to correct the needle.

Intoxilyzers use infrared light to affect the vibrations of molecules. Based on the change in vibration of the molecule, it can be determined whether or not, as well as how much, ethanol is present to help determine toxicity level. With this device, BAC level is ultimately determined according to how much infrared light is absorbed by the molecules.

Sobriety Checkpoints: Always Accurate?

According to the Los Angeles Police Department’s website, “the purpose of the Sobriety/Driver’s License checkpoint is to reduce the number of traffic collisions involving intoxicated and unlicensed drivers through enforcement and public awareness.” For all intensive purposes, sobriety checkpoints are a great addition to the policing of any community. Under ideal circumstances, these checkpoints can reduce the number of alcohol-impaired drivers on the road, thus making it safer for all other motorists. However, it is imperative that these checkpoints are properly maintained, and that innocent drivers are not singled out and punished for infractions relating to Los Angeles DUI offenses that they really didn’t commit.

At sobriety checkpoints, law enforcement officers can ask a motorist to vacate his or her vehicle, and possibly ask them to undergo a battery of tests meant to determine whether or not the driver is in fact driving while under the influence of either alcohol or drugs. However, if these tests are not administered properly, or if the law enforcement officials already are convinced that the motorist is in fact under the influence, then the ensuing test can be relatively biased, thus creating the potential for error and misjudgment.

Law enforcement officials are trained to look for indicators that an individual is under the influence. These include bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, fumbling fingers, the smell of alcohol on one’s breath, and the presence of open alcohol containers in the car. To improve the chances of accurate determination in regard to whether or not a person is under the influence of alcohol, it is highly desired that officers go through DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing (SFST) training prior to being assigned to work a sobriety checkpoint.