Greetings,
10/15/05 Sat. 1 to 7 Fall Tasting at Sam's WINES
Next week at OddFellows
2 or 3 Weeks. At Fugais. 300 East Hennepin.
C,
J
----- Forwarded message from "Jim L. Ellingson" <jellings(a)me.umn.edu>
-----
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 16:56:26 -0500
From: "Jim L. Ellingson" <jellings(a)me.umn.edu>
To: Allbnstaff(a)brewingnews.com, "Jim L. Ellingson" <jellings(a)me.umn.edu>
Subject: DUI in DC (fwd) (W-Post)
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
From the Post.
While you're there, you can check out Greg Kitsock's O'Fest Artictle.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/11/AR200510110…
Critics Say District's DUI Policy Goes Too Far
Jailing Drivers for 1 Drink Called Wasting Resources
By Brigid Schulte
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 13, 2005; B01
Officials with organizations that lobby for safe roads and tough drunken driving laws
yesterday criticized the District's zero-tolerance policy toward drinking and
driving, saying that they'd never heard of it and that limited police resources
should be devoted to those more obviously drunk.
Even D.C. Council member Carol Schwartz (R-At Large), who has sponsored legislation to
lower the legal limit for drunken driving, said she was not aware that police officers are
arresting drivers who have as little as .01 percent blood alcohol content -- less than
from drinking a glass of wine or beer -- in their systems. Nor did she think that such a
policy was a good idea.
"I think that laws have to be reasonable," she said. "And I do believe that
one glass of wine should certainly not an arrest make."
Lon Anderson, public and governmental affairs director for the American Automobile
Association's Mid-Atlantic Office, said he planned to work toward putting an end to
the zero-tolerance arrests. "This zero tolerance is out of order, out of bounds and
outrageous," said Anderson, who said he also had never heard of it. "This means
that, Heaven forbid, I could go to a Nats or Redskins game and have a beer and a dog and
my career would be over."
The Washington Post reported yesterday that Debra Bolton, a 45-year-old energy attorney
and mother of two who lives in Alexandria, was searched, handcuffed, fingerprinted and
arrested after drinking a glass of wine with dinner in Georgetown last May. A breath test
indicated her blood alcohol level was .03, comfortably below the .08 legal limit at which
drivers are automatically presumed intoxicated. She sat in a jail cell for hours and later
spent months fighting in D.C. Superior Court before the charge was dropped.
A number of motorists yesterday said they have had similar experiences. One young computer
programmer said he spent the night in a D.C. jail on a drunken driving charge even though
the breath test registered his blood alcohol content as 0.0 percent.
The zero-tolerance policy requires that police have a reason to pull the driver over in
the first place -- for example, for poor driving, or in Bolton's case, for driving
without headlights. In Maryland and Virginia, as in other states, drivers generally are
presumed not to be intoxicated if they test below .05. In all three jurisdictions, .08 is
the legal limit.
Elizabeth Wingo, chief of the criminal section in the D.C. Attorney General's Office,
said her office prosecutes cases regardless of blood alcohol level, as long as there is
sufficient evidence of impairment.
"We have zero tolerance for drunk driving. It doesn't matter what your blood
alcohol level is," Wingo said. "If you blow .02 and officers can tell
you're impaired, you'll be arrested for DUI."
The law says people can be found guilty if they drink enough alcohol "to appreciably
disturb or interfere with their normal mental or physical faculties."
But D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey, in an interview yesterday with WTOP radio, said
the department has no policy of getting tough on people who drive below the legal alcohol
limit.
"Officers bring discretion to everything they do," Ramsey said, "so there
is no order from above saying that every minor infraction of the law must be upheld."
Patrick O'Connor, president of Northern Virginia's Mothers Against Drunk
Driving, said his group lobbied for years to get all 50 states and the District of
Columbia to lower the legal limit for intoxication from .10 to .08. He said the only
zero-tolerance law MADD has pushed is for young drivers under the legal drinking age of 21
-- which all 50 states and the District subsequently adopted.
"MADD's position is that you should drink responsibly and if you feel
you're impaired, you should not drive," he said. "It's not MADD's
position that if you have a glass of wine you shouldn't get into a car."
John Undeland, chairman of the Washington Regional Alcohol Program, with members as
diverse as Anheuser-Busch and MADD, said his group's members agree that the greatest
problems are drivers who are profoundly drunk and those who repeatedly drive drunk.
"That's where resource-stretched law enforcement agencies need to focus their
resources," he said.
Neither the D.C. police nor Superior Court prosecutors keep detailed records of low-blood
alcohol arrests as a result of the zero-tolerance policy. But records do show that several
hundred drivers each year are arrested for driving with blood alcohol lower than .08
percent.
This year, Annie Cefaratti, along with Debra Bolton, will be one of those statistics. One
Tuesday night in August, she recalled, the 44-year-old real estate agent and Reston
resident had a glass of wine with dinner at Sette Osteria, with a big bowl of pasta and
espresso. Two hours later, as she drove home in her black Mercedes SUV, she quickly picked
up her cell phone to answer her son's call.
The District bans use of handheld phones while driving, and she was immediately pulled
over, she said. An officer asked if she'd been drinking. When she said she'd had
a glass of wine with dinner, he asked her to get out of the car and put her through a
series of sobriety tests. A breath test measured her blood alcohol at .04. She was
handcuffed and arrested. Her case was later dropped, she said, because the officer never
filed the paperwork. Now, the District's Department of Motor Vehicles wants her to
either get alcohol counseling or prove she doesn't need it.
"I'm D.C.-born and -raised. My family goes back six generations here," she
said. "And I'm never going to have another drink in D.C."
D.C.'s zero-tolerance policy goes back about seven years. In 1998, at the same time
Schwartz introduced an amendment to lower the blood alcohol limit for intoxication from
.10 to .08 with much media attention, then-Council member Sandy Allen introduced a
provision that lowered to .03 the level that a driver could be presumed impaired by
alcohol. Both measures passed.
Staff researcher Bobbye Pratt contributed to this report.
� 2005 The Washington Post Company
Single Glass of Wine Immerses D.C. Driver in Legal Battle
By Brigid Schulte
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 12, 2005; A01
Debra Bolton had a glass of red wine with dinner. That's what she told the police
officer who pulled her over. That's what the Intoxilyzer 5000 breath test indicated
-- .03, comfortably below the legal limit.
She had been pulled over in Georgetown about 12:30 a.m. for driving without headlights.
She apologized and explained that the parking attendant must have turned off her
vehicle's automatic-light feature.
Bolton thought she might get a ticket. Instead, she was handcuffed, searched, arrested,
put in a jail cell until 4:30 a.m. and charged with driving under the influence of
alcohol.
Bolton, 45, an energy lawyer and single mother of two who lives in Alexandria, had just
run into a little-known piece of D.C. law: In the District, a driver can be arrested with
as little as .01 blood-alcohol content.
As D.C. police officer Dennis Fair, who arrested Bolton on May 15, put it in an interview
recently: "If you get behind the wheel of a car with any measurable amount of
alcohol, you will be dealt with in D.C. We have zero tolerance. . . . Anything above .01,
we can arrest."
Neither the police department nor the attorney general's office keeps detailed
records of how many people with low blood alcohol levels are arrested. But last year,
according to police records, 321 people were arrested for driving under the influence with
blood alcohol levels below the legal limit of .08. In 2003, 409 people were arrested.
Although low blood alcohol arrests have been made in other states in conjunction with
dangerous driving, lawyers, prosecutors and advocates of drunken driving prevention said
they knew of no place besides the District that had such a low threshold for routine DUI
arrests. In Maryland and Virginia, as in other states, drivers generally are presumed not
to be intoxicated if they test below .05. Nationwide, .08 is the legal limit -- meaning a
driver is automatically presumed to be intoxicated.
Fair acknowledged that many people aren't aware of the District's policy.
"But it is our law," he said. "If you don't know about it, then
you're a victim of your own ignorance."
Bolton said she didn't know. But defense lawyers who practice in the District do.
"Even one drink can get you in trouble in D.C.," said Thomas Key, a lawyer who
successfully defended a client who had a blood alcohol level of .03. "They might not
win a lot of these cases or prosecute them, but they're still arresting people."
Not many people fight the charge, said Richard Lebowitz, another defense lawyer, because
the District offers a "diversion program" of counseling for first-time
offenders.
"If diversion is offered and accepted, there's a guarantee that the charges will
be dropped," Lebowitz said. "If you go to court and try to prove your innocence,
it's a coin-flip. So most people choose diversion."
Bolton didn't. She balked at the $400 fee and the 24 hours of class time required to
attend the "social drinker" program.
"I think it would have been fine if I'd done something wrong, but I
didn't," she said. "I had a glass of wine with dinner."
Instead, she hired a lawyer. In August, after Bolton made several fruitless appearances in
D.C. Superior Court, prosecutors dropped the DUI charge. But then she had to battle the
D.C. Department of Motor Vehicles, which warned that it would suspend her driving
privileges at the end of this month unless she went through an alcohol prevention program.
As Bolton remembers it, it was early morning May 15 and she had barely gone a few hundred
yards before she was pulled over on K Street NW. The officer, Fair, asked her whether she
realized the headlights on her Acura MDX sport-utility vehicle were off.
"Oh, man, am I going to get a ticket for this?" she remembers saying to him
jokingly.
Then he asked her whether she'd had anything to drink.
"Not really," she said. And when he asked her again, more firmly, she answered
that she'd had a glass of wine with dinner at Cafe Milano.
He asked her to recite the alphabet. In his report, Fair wrote that he had asked her to
start at the letter D and stop at X. Bolton said she thought he had asked her to stop at S
and tossed off the alphabet quickly and accurately to S.
As a result, Fair noted in his report that she had "jumbled" it.
Then he asked her to get out of the car.
Fair asked her to walk a straight line and then stand on one foot to the count of 30. He
looked into her eyes to check for jerkiness. Bolton, dressed in black silk pants and a
pink shirt, took off her pink high heels to be more sure-footed. She said she thought she
had aced the tests. "All that yoga really paid off," she thought.
But in the police report, Fair wrote that she swayed as she walked and lost her balance --
which Bolton disputes. He told her she was under arrest.
"Why?" Bolton remembers saying. "I passed all your little tests."
On his report, Fair wrote that Bolton failed 10 indicators of sobriety. But James E.
Klaunig, a toxicology expert at Indiana University's medical school who for 12 years
oversaw the state's drunken driving testing, said that such a determination was
scientifically improbable.
"There's no way possible she failed a test from impairment with a .03"
blood alcohol level, Klaunig said. "And reciting the alphabet is not an acceptable
way of measuring impairment, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration."
Fair, who said he does not comment on individual arrests, noted in his report that
Bolton's attitude was "excited," "carefree" and
"cocky."
"I was sort of laughing," Bolton said. "I look back and wonder, was I
cocky? Did I have an attitude? Well, yeah, because I was sober, so I thought it was all so
ridiculous."
Fair handcuffed her. Bolton said she was terrified. Until then, her only brush with the
law had been a ticket for speeding in a 15-mph zone in 2002.
At 1:08 a.m., at the 2nd Police District station, Fair asked Bolton to blow into the
Intoxilyzer 5000. It read .03.
"See?" she remembers saying.
He had her breathe into the machine one minute later. Again, .03.
"See?"
But Fair told her D.C. law was on his side.
On the department's Web site, D.C. police explain it this way: "Technically,
according to the D.C. Code, the District of Columbia has a zero tolerance for driving
under the influence. If a person 21 years of age or older has a blood alcohol
concentration of .02 percent [to] .04 percent and extremely bad driving, this person can
be placed under arrest for Driving Under the Influence of an alcoholic beverage."
At low levels of alcohol, an arrest comes down to an officer's discretion, said D.C.
police Inspector Patrick Burke, former head of the traffic division.
Fair, he said, has 15 years of experience and averages more than 100 drunken driving
arrests a year and is well qualified to make the call. In 1998, Fair arrested Marlene
Cooke, wife of the late Washington Redskins owner Jack Kent Cooke, for drunken driving
after she piloted her Land Rover through Dupont Circle without the headlights on. She
refused a breath test but was later convicted.
"I always say the safe bet, if you drive, is not to drink at all," Burke said.
"But even looking from a D.C. tourism standpoint, we'd be killing ourselves if
we were saying you can't go out and have a glass of wine with dinner. That'd be
ridiculous. So we tell people, you have to know your limits."
Bolton sat in a jail cell until 4:30 a.m. As she left, Fair told her he had given her a
warning, not a ticket, for driving without headlights. She walked the few blocks to
Wisconsin Avenue NW, caught a cab to her car on K Street and drove across the bridge to
Virginia. There, she said, she pulled over and cried for 45 minutes.
Since what she refers to as her "unfortunate incarceration," Bolton has spent
hours in D.C. Superior Court and at the DMV and $2,000 so far fighting the DUI charge. Her
refusal to submit to the 12-week alcohol counseling diversion program has sent her on a
"surreal" odyssey.
Twice, after hours of waiting, prosecutors told her that they had lost her file and that
she would have to come back.
On Aug. 22, after four court appearances, prosecutors dropped the charge. But she spent
all of September battling the DMV to keep her driving privileges from being suspended for
three months.
Corey Buffo, the DMV's general counsel, explained that the agency drops its
procedures only after a case goes to trial and is dismissed on its merits. "Our
burden of proof is lower" than the Superior Court's, he said. "Not enough
evidence for them may be enough evidence for us." Yesterday, the DMV decided not to
suspend her privileges and issued her a warning instead.
After so many months, Debra Bolton is just glad it's over. "It's
lunacy," she said. "I'm all for limits on drinking and driving. Whatever
the rules are, I will abide by them. I just didn't know these were the rules."
These days, Bolton goes out to eat in Virginia. And she keeps a yellow sticky note on her
steering wheel to remind her to make sure her headlights are on.
� 2005 The Washington Post Company
--
------------------------------ *
* Dr. James Lee Ellingson, Adjunct Professor jellings(a)me.umn.edu *
* University of Minnesota, tel: 651/645-0753 fax 651 XXX XXXX *
* Great Lakes Brewing News, 1569 Laurel Ave., St. Paul, MN 55104 *
----- End forwarded message -----
--
------------------------------ *
* Dr. James Lee Ellingson, Adjunct Professor jellings(a)me.umn.edu *
* University of Minnesota, tel: 651/645-0753 fax 651 XXX XXXX *
* Great Lakes Brewing News, 1569 Laurel Ave., St. Paul, MN 55104 *