Law: Madd at the Constitution (part 2)

MADD's biggest push was the .08 laws, using bias research and emotionally charged rhetoric they eventually had the bill passed, even though the U.S. Government Accountability Office reviewed all the statistical data and concluded "the evidence does not conclusively establish that .08 BAC laws by themselves result in reductions in the number and severity of crashes involving alcohol." Critics cited that the law would tie up law enforcement with these "new" drunk drivers who pose little threat, and to catch these offenders they intended to use roadblocks, which are publicized and the threats know to avoid them.( Former Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that the threat to public health posed by drunk drivers was reason enough to set aside concerns about searches without probable cause- this man is no Thomas Jefferson) In 2000, President Clinton signed .08 into law and ironically the alcohol related fatalities began to incline after 20 years of decline. Fatalities began to fall again except in states that employ sobriety roadblocks, in fact they still inclined! Another concern with this violation to the Constitution is that nationwide less than .02% of stopped vehicles are cited for DUI, but other traffic violations and they most likely did not give probable cause!

They continue to push for legislation that would impose tougher penalties for people who refuse breath tests than those who fail them, disregard that Fifth Amendment! Ironic, people don't want known junk science to determine their liberty, they much rather leave the burden of proof to prosecuters, who is this? Just google for a month and see how many attorneys, judges, justices, and law enforcement officers refuse the test as opposed to submit.

ARIZONA- Pima county courthouse was the site of a MADD gathering, where they handed out ribbons and displayed a crushed car and photo's of DUI victims. This was on a day that Justice of the Peace Jack Peyton and Superior Court Judge Ted Borek were presiding over DUI trials. In a quest for justice should we not look to unbias views of the actual events, or should we try to spread our hate in hopes to influence jurers in the quest for vengeance? "They have a First Amendment right to protest, but that right ends where the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial begins," said defense attorney James Nesci.

The local chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) has engaged in "reckless and irresponsible public behavior," according to the District Attorney General of Anderson County, Tennessee, Jim Ramsey. A recent MADD fund-raising roadblock caused a two-vehicle crash and the MADD chapter has interfered in ongoing criminal investigations, including irresponsible vigilantism, according to the Attorney General. The MADD chapter accused a local retailer of selling beer to a teenager who later had an auto accident that killed two people. However, a judicial hearing found that the beer hadn’t come from the business accused by MADD of this illegal behavior. There is no report of an apology. The MADD chapter defends its attacks and other activities as being "within the policies and guidelines of MADD."
Meanwhile, many states have adopted laws that prohibit a DUI offender from a jury trial, and who do we owe this....the head of the American Institute of Philanthropy says MADD spends far too little of the money it raises on services and is lowering MADD's rating to a "D." Up to 58% (over $25,000,000)of the money MADD raises goes toward fundraising and management, the institute says. MADD fund-raising roadblocks, roadblocks, jury tampering, malicious accusations, Daubert (junk) Science, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment violations are all within the policies of MADD, so does it end here.......................Of course not

You see, the are avid lobbyists and VOTERS, and can influence votes in a community with a simple call to arms. -City MIS Department at MADD's request from dispositions entered by municipal court staff on DWI cases adjudicated by Judge Fran Gallegos. The analysis reveals: Only 37 out of 912 cases involved a jail sentence. A conviction rate of 49.7%. (The state average was 85%) Only 54% of the aggravated DWI cases that refused the breath/blood tests resulted in a conviction. Only 8.6% of offenders convicted of aggravated DWI were sentenced to jail (aggravated DWI carries a mandatory jail sentence). ANALYSIS:Result 1: Less than 50% (N=453) of 912 DWI cases resulted in convictions. Forty-two percent (N=366) of these cases were dismissed. These include 24% that were dismissed with "no conditions" and 18% "with conditions."
This scrutiny was jeopordizing this judges livelihood, even though the final descision was based on facts, this judge allegedly tampered with DWI records that are sent to the state DMV, showing harsher punishment that was actually given, and resigned due to the allegations.

Ferrell Hunter, a sheriff's deputy in Tunica County, Mississippi, was a Stakhanovite arrester of motorists on DUI charges, hailed by the state chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving as the state's top such enforcement officer.Tunica County has had a peculiarly low rate of actual conviction for DUI defendants. It turned out that Hunter had an arrangement with former Oxford attorney Joe Gregory Stewart: Hunter would provide Stewart with the names of motorists he arrested, Stewart would approach them and sign them up as clients, Hunter would then fail to make court dates so that the charges would be dropped, and Stewart would kick him back $200 or $300 per case. Now Hunter will serve three years probation after pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit extortion, while Stewart was sentenced to three years probation, hit with a $20,000 fine and disbarred. (Andy Wise, "Former Tunica County Deputy Sentenced For Fixing DUI's", WREG, Mar. 10)

I personally oppose MADD for the simple fact they have no interest in justice, just a revenge based pursuit of convictions, regardless if a person is innocent. Deliberately advocating junk science, while expressing fallocious concerns for public safety, dismantling the Bill of Rights that was set forth to protect all of us from the harms of injustice. Anger is a phase of the greiving process, could this be the only reason why the have such a high turn-over rate even at the high paid executive level? It has been said that MADD rather than help the victim's families, keeps them in a state of anger. I have seen some of the ficticious stories rambled at their forum, and when proven false, they spew more hatred, and have currently shut down their forum to the public. One case, taken to the media shows a young man who was killed by a drunk driver, the media failed to report that the driver of his vehicle also had a high BrAC, in fact, the victim's BAC was lower than the driver of his car, he also was not wearing a seat-belt! Another case was even on Opera, "Burned alive by a drunk driver", that failed to reveal that the GM (platinum sponsor) product she was driving was notorious for catching fire after a collision! And on and on........
I am waiting to see if they try to take legal action over this report, since we obviously do not need Amendments, as long as it falls "within the policies and guidelines of MADD."

>"Mr. Howarth, how many fatal accidents do cell phone users cause every year versus drunk drivers?" "I have absolutely no idea, nor do I care." --- Brian Williams and MADD lobbyist Tom Howarth, MSNBC, March 4, 1998. (Cell phone use has been equated to a BAC of .10 (drunk). MADD supports cell phone use while driving, so you can report drunk drivers.)