FC: Drunk PSU official, charged with DUI (.25% BAC), almost crashes into police officer
- Thread starter StamfordBridgeVikingatLeftOffensiveTackle
- Start date
Police: Have you had any alcohol today sir?
Me: No. I have been too busy smoking meth.
Police: But no alcohol?
Me (pulling a tooth out of my mouth with my fingers): Nope. Just smoking meth all day.
Police: OK sir, have a nice day.
Here is a extension of your advice. I made my three children watch this with me when they were in HS and again when they started college.
I have zero tolerance for people who drive drunk and I'm willing to bet this isn't the first time she's done it. This will undoubtedly be financially costly for her including possibly losing her job.
This from the PENDOT website on drunk driving:
Prior to coming to Penn State she was a student conduct coordinator at the College at Brockport in Brockport, New York (near Rochester) where she oversaw the student conduct system in collaboration with entities across campus. She also spent two years as an assistant director in the Office of Student Accountability and Restorative Practices at James Madison. Would like to know if she's had DUI incidents while employed at these other institutions.
This from the PENDOT website on drunk driving:
- Traffic fine: $300 - $10,000 depending on blood alcohol content and number of offenses
- Towing vehicle: $50 flat fee plus mileage
- Impound: $75-$175 per day
- Legal fees: $2,000-$8,000 or more
- Alcohol evaluation: $35-$100
- Accelerated rehabilitative disposition (ARD): $100-$1,800
- Education and treatment: $100-$1,000 or more
- License restoration: $76 non-commercial, $184 commercial
- Insurance premium: increase of about $1,000 a year or cancellation of policy
Prior to coming to Penn State she was a student conduct coordinator at the College at Brockport in Brockport, New York (near Rochester) where she oversaw the student conduct system in collaboration with entities across campus. She also spent two years as an assistant director in the Office of Student Accountability and Restorative Practices at James Madison. Would like to know if she's had DUI incidents while employed at these other institutions.
Last edited:
Here is a case that was interesting. A husband and wife were out shopping and needed assistance. I can't recall if the battery was dead or they locked their keys in the car. Anyway, when the officer helped them, he noticed an empty bottle of prescription meds in the car and asked them. The woman said that she is about to get it refilled and had the last dose in her pocket smashed up in a plastic bag. In ohio, you cannot do that as this is a way to make meds more potent. The officer asked why the drugs were mashed up and she said that she has trouble swallowing pills. He asked when the last time she took them and she said before she left home. During the time he was helping, the couple stated that she was driving and at fault for the reason why they needed help. The officer arrested her for DUI and altering a dangerous drug.Police: Have you had any alcohol today sir?
Me: No. I have been too busy smoking meth.
Police: But no alcohol?
Me (pulling a tooth out of my mouth with my fingers): Nope. Just smoking meth all day.
Police: OK sir, have a nice day.
Section 2925.24 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws
codes.ohio.gov
If she had DUI violations prior to being employed by PSU, someone either didn't do a thorough background check or simply didn't care.
You should consider moving from the Police State you live in. Comrade.Here is a case that was interesting. A husband and wife were out shopping and needed assistance. I can't recall if the battery was dead or they locked their keys in the car. Anyway, when the officer helped them, he noticed an empty bottle of prescription meds in the car and asked them. The woman said that she is about to get it refilled and had the last dose in her pocket smashed up in a plastic bag. In ohio, you cannot do that as this is a way to make meds more potent. The officer asked why the drugs were mashed up and she said that she has trouble swallowing pills. He asked when the last time she took them and she said before she left home. During the time he was helping, the couple stated that she was driving and at fault for the reason why they needed help. The officer arrested her for DUI and altering a dangerous drug.
Section 2925.24 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws
We are entirely too lenient on drunk driving.
We are pretty lenient on a lot of crimes.
Everyone associated with PSU....except for the BOT....gets a background check. It was a Freeh recommendation that was followed. Of course the board exempted itself.....probably to protect Ex-con Mark Dambly
Not sure if this is still true but it used to be that an employee could seek treatment for alcoholism under these circumstances and the university couldn't fire him/her
no i did t. i am curious if this person has been diagnosed with alcolisim or if she just drank too much one evening and got caught.
Nope. You have to seek treatment BEFORE you get arrested. Then you're protected. Afterwards, you're at the mercy of the employer. I've never seen a personnel policy any different.
I see C Hord got charged with a felony back in 2020.
I find it bizarre that she felt it necessary to say anything about a mashed up pill in her pocket.Here is a case that was interesting. A husband and wife were out shopping and needed assistance. I can't recall if the battery was dead or they locked their keys in the car. Anyway, when the officer helped them, he noticed an empty bottle of prescription meds in the car and asked them. The woman said that she is about to get it refilled and had the last dose in her pocket smashed up in a plastic bag. In ohio, you cannot do that as this is a way to make meds more potent. The officer asked why the drugs were mashed up and she said that she has trouble swallowing pills. He asked when the last time she took them and she said before she left home. During the time he was helping, the couple stated that she was driving and at fault for the reason why they needed help. The officer arrested her for DUI and altering a dangerous drug.
Section 2925.24 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws
You also have to pass a background check when you get hired from one position into a different position at Penn State.
You have to self report before any incident. If she had them generally you are able to go on short term leave. You can't, however, push that button after shiiit goes south
Is that her? She was rocking lgbt earrings. ConfusiePenn State background check:
Nice background.
he saw the empty prescription bottle when he was helping her so asked about it. She said it was empty and showed him the zip lock bag in her pocket. She thought she was in the "safety tree".
Here is a case that was interesting. A husband and wife were out shopping and needed assistance. I can't recall if the battery was dead or they locked their keys in the car. Anyway, when the officer helped them, he noticed an empty bottle of prescription meds in the car and asked them. The woman said that she is about to get it refilled and had the last dose in her pocket smashed up in a plastic bag. In ohio, you cannot do that as this is a way to make meds more potent. The officer asked why the drugs were mashed up and she said that she has trouble swallowing pills. He asked when the last time she took them and she said before she left home. During the time he was helping, the couple stated that she was driving and at fault for the reason why they needed help. The officer arrested her for DUI and altering a dangerous drug.
Section 2925.24 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws
A few things here. First, direct me to the code section stating that single drink is an offense. I prosecuted hundreds of OVIs, and I've never heard this. Every prosecution I ever had involved either (a) over 0.08, or (b) a refusal to take a blood or breath test, but failure of other sobriety testing. Never heard of "one drink is a crime," so I need to see it. Being impaired and driving is a crime, whether over 0.08 or not, but that is not the same thing as "one drink is a chargable offense." As far as saying you didn't drink because they'll pull you out of the car...they're doing that whether you admit it or not. All the officer has to do is say he noticed the strong smell of alcohol, glassy eyes, slurred speech, etc, (along with whatever caused him to make the stop in the first place) and he has the probable cause. Your answer to that question is going to have 0 impact on whether he's pulling you out or not.
Never heard of any locality, sheriff's department, or state patrol group that had any quota or award for any type of arrest. Nor did my prosecutor's office grade any of us on # of prosecutions. We had a couple certain set standards (we didn't plea down DVs or drug offenses), but I was otherwise given discretion to do what I thought was right, and it was never questioned once. Zero statistics of my prosecutions. You should be more careful when taking anecdotes you've heard from your wife or otherwise and just broadly applying them.
You provided two examples of apparent egregious behavior. In the first, the woman was over the legal limit. In the second, I am confident the drug is the variety that impairs driving. She wouldn't have been charged with OVI if it weren't. So two examples where the people are guilty and their due process rights were not infringed is hardly swaying me to your cause.
While the answer is of course not to drive under the influence, I will agree with you to an extent on staying silent. If you are going to blow a 0.25 or anything above .12 really, just shut up, say nothing, and give no tests. Be polite, but refuse to take field tests, a breathalyzer, etc.. If you are right around the limit and have no priors, just be honest and polite. There is some chance you just get let go, but there is an almost guarantee that if you're good to the officer, have no priors, and didn't hit anyone or anything, you are not getting an OVI conviction. Anything under 0.10 on a first time is getting a plea down to a reckless every time.
That's an "achievement." I saw people crawling out of there in the day. They had asked to be cut off, and the barkeepers refused.No joke... my ex-wife was cut off at Zeno's.
Easy Peasy.
(A)(1) No person shall operate any vehicle, streetcar, or trackless trolley within this state, if, at the time of the operation, any of the following apply:
(a) The person is under the influence of alcohol, a drug of abuse, or a combination of them.
(b) The person has a concentration of eight-hundredths of one per cent or more but less than seventeen-hundredths of one per cent by weight per unit volume of alcohol in the person's whole blood.
The PA law is similar to that. It does not mean a person can be arrested and charged for having one drink.
I believe AZ says you can be arrested for DUI and DWI. DUI doesn’t require a minimum BAC while DWI does. DUI is more behavior based.
Sorry, but “Under the influence” does not mean having 1 drink is chargeable. Under the influence means you were impaired by the amount you drank. That is what must be proven, not whether you had 1 drink.
that isn't true here in my community. "under the influence" is based on the officer's discretion. If you go over the center line and get pulled over then admit to having take a prescription drug, the officer can write you up for being under the influence. And that is clearly what the law I liked says.
any of the following apply:
(a) The person is under the influence of alcohol, a drug of abuse, or a combination of them.
(b) ....
This isn't correct. It means that the officer CAN and a prosecutor can. They, in most cases, choose not to.
Often, it has been used to "pile on" where the officer feels the person is guilty of something but can't get the goods or where the state wants to "pile on" for some other charge to improve their negotiating position during plea bargaining.
But my wife has had several cases where officers pull people over and cite them for DUI because they were swerving. In one case, a woman was turning left at a red light. The road she was turning onto had two lanes with a turning lane. At close to midnight, she stopped, waiting until the light turned green, and then proceeded. There were no cars in any of the three lanes she was turning to (left, right, center turning lane). An officer pulled her over because her car wheel went over the left yellow line separating the turning lane from her lane. My wife recorded a half dozen cars, in a single green light, that turned left and did the exact same thing and presented it to the prosecutor.
Last edited:
One other point relative to localities having awards or points/awards. And this is one village to be sure. however...
my wife had an officer on the stand. She did some research that showed this individual had 33% more DUI's issued than any other officer on the force. She asked him why he had so many. As this progressed, she asked if he was rewarded. The prosecutor objected and the judge said that she wanted to hear the answer. The prosecutor was really upset the judge allowed it to continue. My wife asked if he got a bonus or commission. Again, the prosecutor objected that the judge said that she wanted to let the questions go because she had never heard a defense attorney ask these detailed questions. So my wife started asking, one by one....did you get a letter of accommodation? Did you get a "star" or any insignia to put up? Did you get a free breakfast, lunch or dinner? When she learned that he was singled out in meetings as being a great officer for getting these DUIs, got a letter put into his file and was given a gift card the judge was shocked. So they called the officer's boss to see if the letter was used for promotion. The prosecutor objected that it wasn't germane to the case. Upon Q & A, the prosecutor agreed to stipulate that the letter was at least put into his file for a reason and that reason could only be for future promotions or raises.
The point here is that you have to ask the right questions. There was no formal reward, bonus or quota. However, relative to quota, his numbers were held up to the rest of the force as being behaviors that were recognized and rewarded. And she had to drill down to get that the reward wasn't payroll specific but that there were "perks" given out. Not only that, given out in a manner to make sure the other officers saw it as the behaviors wanted by the force.
Please cite the law which says having one drink is enough for a DUI arrest. What you cited above isn't it. The only exception in PA is commercial vehicle drivers who must be 0.00%. Above you claim cops arrest people for DUI only because they were swerving. Really?? They just pull that charge out of thin air with no other evidence?? They don't perform field sobriety tests just for kicks.
Sorry but you're off base on this one. I get the impression you think cops are a bunch of dumb asses who are out there pulling people over and fabricating serious criminal charges. I hope I never drive through your corner of Ohio because it sounds like something from the south in the 50s.
Get unlimited access today.