Arrested: David J. Mortenson, age 48, Windsor, WIThey don't list driving without a license; I do not understand how someone with six prior DWI arrests can be allowed to operate a motor vehicle. This makes me really mad.
Mr. Mortenson was arrested for Operating a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence - 7th offense, Fleeing, and Deviating from Designated Lane.
Details: A Madison Police officer laid down road spikes along Interstate 90/94, on the bridge over Highway 51, Friday night, bringing to a close a police pursuit of a suspected drunken driver. He would be arrested for his 7th offense of Operating a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence (OMVWI).
A Madison officer first saw him weaving in and out of designated traffic lanes on Milwaukee Street. The officer, with red lights and siren activated, followed the suspect onto N. Stoughton Rd., to Highway 30, and finally to I 90/94.
The officer noted that the driver nearly swerved into the path of a semi truck near High Crossing Blvd. Back-up officers responded, with one deploying the road spikes. They caused the driver’s front tires to deflate and he pulled over. He said he did not see the squad lights or hear the siren, and only knew he was being sought when his tires blew. An empty bottle of whiskey was on the front seat of his car.
19 September 2011
Repeat-offending drunk drivers
In local news:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Six? In New Mexico he'd be a lightweight. We have guys here on 23 DUI's and going strong. (http://duiattorneyheadlines.com/new-mexico-man-arrested-for-23rd-dwi/)
ReplyDeleteI propose the law be changed.
ReplyDeleteRepeat DUI offenders should have license suspended for a minimum of six months. The penalty for driving during the suspension period shall be confiscation of the vehicle and suspension extended to five years. The offender must obtain liability insurance in the amount of ten times the State mandated minimum coverage.
Upon second offense DUI conviction, license suspended for five years, and a specially marked identification card issued identifying the bearer as a repeat DUI offender. The vehicle driven shall immediately be confiscated. If license is returned after the suspension period, the license shall be marked identifying the holder as a repeat DUI offender. It shall be a felony to dispense alcoholic beverages to anyone identified as a repeat DUI offender, or for the offender to purchase alcoholic beverages.
No person convicted of a second DUI offense shall be allowed to collect any insurance payment for property damage, nor may any such payment be made to lien holders on the offender's property.
I still don't know why repeat offenders aren't made to repeat their punishments.
ReplyDeleteSay for a first offence, it's a month's ban. For a second offence, it's a month for the offence, plus a repeat of the first punishment because they didn't learn their lesson the first time around.
Eventually they'll either learn their lesson or be banned for life.
Of course, driving without a licence should lead to jail. If you can't abide by the rules of society, you should be excluded from it for a time.
In Tx, a third offense DUI _should_ get the offender 2 years in prison as it is classed as a 3d degree felony. That said, I know of multiple offenders that still walk (or drive) free thanks to lots of money, family connections, and slick lawyers.
ReplyDeletewow this is pretty horrible, drink-driving is amazingly dangerous... Australian law is you lose your license for a first DUI (and speeding more than 45km/h over the limit) You have to wait 3-12 months then start again on your Practice license.
ReplyDeleteI'm totally OK with this, if you're going to endanger people like that you can deal with not driving.
There's a guy here in Texas that's using his own funds to post billboard warning signs of repeat DUI/DWI offenders, thinking that added public shame will stop them. Recently we had a female police officer killed by a drunk driver while she had a car pulled over, the drunk driver was driving on a restricted license, he was ordered to have one of those breath test equipment installed on his vehicle, he had it installed on a motorcycle and was driving his SUV, this time however the driver didn't survive but took out a single mother police officr.
ReplyDeleteYou can take away their privileges but that can't prevent them from getting into a vehicle.
ReplyDeleteProbably better and easier for all of us if they took away their right foot, instead. Harder to hit the gas that way.
...hand controls.
ReplyDeleteStinkin' paraplegics are getting in the way of fighting repeat DUI offenders!
One of my grandsons, who lives in Arizona, had four DUIs before he turned 21 (legal drinking age in AZ), two of them with collisions and injuries requiring hospitalization. He spent a few weekends in jail. He's supposed to drive only a vehicle with the breathalyzer, but ignores that. He just drove his mother's new BMW from CA to AZ because she had to stay here to work. I do not understand Arizona's laws or culture at all.
ReplyDelete