We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Texas judge busted for drunk driving pleads for special treatment

stevie-a said:
C'mon man...I call bullsh here. While I can totally see using a DD and avoiding that mess, are you really going to say that you've NEVER broken a law? Never speed, never change lanes without signalling, always come to a complete stop before turning right or at a stop sign. This isn't about picking you apart, but that's a pretty tough line to draw in the sand....
Click to expand...
None of those are even remotely close to comparison in the gravity of the situation as a DUI (which is why it's reflected as such in the lawbooks). And if you do want to nitpick, I'd say that it's a pretty easy line to draw in the sand even if you want to draw that line in the sand for example between drunk driving and rolling through a stop sign. Though, to pick a few nits of my own, a DUI is considered a criminal citation* (even if a misdemeanor) while most speeding and traffic violations are traffic citations which don't typically involve the threat of incarceration or further criminal penalty**. If you'd like to me change me comment to reflect that distinction, I'll be more than happy to do so ... and instead claim that a majority of people in this country don't run about accruing criminal citations, and I see why no reason we shouldn't expect the same from our judges.

*May not be using the exact proper phraseology.
**I'd say the same thing about a judge speeding 100 mph down a 35 mph school zone. Lose their job.
 
I can believe it. A lot of things are great about Texas. Their judges don't seem to be one of them. A fine "documentary" from a very interesting Texas criminal defense attorney. Short story, former prosecutor, now judge, withholds evidence as prosecutor. Guy is convicted for 25 years, turns out evidence might have proved his innocence (or at least gotten not guilty). Judge faces 10 years for evidence tampering, gets a few days, then doesn't resign.

This attorney is an interesting character. The attorney in this video himself went to jail for awhile for making the "jerk off" gesture while a prosecutor was talking in court. That video is also online, and very hilarious.



~Rock
 
She tells the cops, "you're going to ruin my life".
Hmmm....whose hand was pouring the beer down her throat ?
 
wadesworld said:
Is she really unfit to be a judge because she got one DUI (assuming it was her first)? Would she be unfit to be a judge if she got cited for speeding? Would she be unfit to be a judge if she was arrested for disturbing the peace because she was playing music too loud?
Click to expand...
YES! She should lose her job! No questions asked! What happens if you stand before her court, and you drive a cab and you're arrested for drunk driving while "off-duty?"
Don't worry about it, your boss would have fired you before the Judge did! Do I believe that she should lose her job for "speeding?" Depends on just how fast she was going.
A hundred MPH? In traffic? With her kids? Or .. 41 in a 35? On an empty highway? In the middle of the day ... see? BUT, she should be "accountable" for the same "retribution(s)" as I am.
Or you are! Which means paying the fine(s) that are applicable by LAW! Including serving time in JAIL that has been constituted by the City, County, and State, per statutes. PERIOD!
She should have to face another Judge, and be dealt with accordingly .. BY THE LAW! If that means that she loses her job because of it .. tuff titties!

For "loud music?" please. And don't come at me as to, "where I draw my lines" .. If it isn't obvious as to why this JUDGE should no longer be making decisions .. no wait,
PASSING JUDGEMENT, on others who have stood before her court and have been accused of the very same "crime" who have been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,
and who have fallen by her sword .. then she too should have to suffer the same consequences .. as handed down by. the. law. .. it's simple really. reeeeal easy!

Don't ever make me President, people! Ever! People like this would be dealt with swiftly and expediently .. matter a fact, because of the fact that people "in power" abuse it ..
they may be dealt an even greater "burden" of punishment then that of an "ordinary" citizen ..
 
Last edited:
Wowza.
 
deuce said:
And before someone says "We've all broken a law here or there." I'm going to respond with "No, we don't."
Click to expand...

deuce said:
None of those are even remotely close to comparison in the gravity of the situation as a DUI (which is why it's reflected as such in the lawbooks). And if you do want to nitpick, I'd say that it's a pretty easy line to draw in the sand even if you want to draw that line in the sand for example between drunk driving and rolling through a stop sign. Though, to pick a few nits of my own, a DUI is considered a criminal citation* (even if a misdemeanor) while most speeding and traffic violations are traffic citations which don't typically involve the threat of incarceration or further criminal penalty**. If you'd like to me change me comment to reflect that distinction, I'll be more than happy to do so ... and instead claim that a majority of people in this country don't run about accruing criminal citations, and I see why no reason we shouldn't expect the same from our judges.

*May not be using the exact proper phraseology.
**I'd say the same thing about a judge speeding 100 mph down a 35 mph school zone. Lose their job.
Click to expand...


The question was whether you've broken any laws here or there, not a comparison of laws. You seem to have backed down from the original claim, either due to a technicality and/or severity of the offense. Either way, laws are laws and WE ARE ALL GUILTY of breaking a law at some point...whether knowingly or knowingly.

I could care less either way. Speeding can be just as dangerous as driving under the influence, however, there's a greater negativity toward DUI's. Perhaps it's because someone has knowingly impared themselves, to which I would say that by speeding (under no influence) you've essentially done the same thing.

That said, how about The Open Championship tomorrow?! Woo hoo!
 
McRock said:
I can believe it. A lot of things are great about Texas. Their judges don't seem to be one of them. A fine "documentary" from a very interesting Texas criminal defense attorney. Short story, former prosecutor, now judge, withholds evidence as prosecutor. Guy is convicted for 25 years, turns out evidence might have proved his innocence (or at least gotten not guilty). Judge faces 10 years for evidence tampering, gets a few days, then doesn't resign.

This attorney is an interesting character. The attorney in this video himself went to jail for awhile for making the "jerk off" gesture while a prosecutor was talking in court. That video is also online, and very hilarious.



~Rock
Click to expand...


Well, the guy got exactly what he wanted, a law enforcement official to come out and approach him while he was filming. Not hard to accomplish with what he was doing.

I grew up in Williamson County actually and the local law enforcements were known for being hard on criminals. You did not want to get pulled over in Williamson County. It was unfortunate what happened with the Ken Anderson situation. With all the corrupt officials we've had in the US accused of crimes while serving the state this was the first prosecutor that actually did jail time for their actions. It is not common for prosecutors to do jail time when they are found guilty of something while working a case. But to think this just happens in the Texas judicial system is a bit naive. I'm not saying our system is perfect but to single out one case and say we have issues across the board is a bit of a stretch.
 
Hawk said:
Tough call Wade. It might be different if she had a different job though. People who dispense justice are held to a high standard and I think that's completely fair. CDL drivers will lose their licence for a DUI as well - essentially a trip the unemployment line. If many of us have a little wacky tobaccy on our own time and fail a test we'll be looking for a new job. There are things you just have to understand you can't do and plan for them when you're not drunk and prone to making bad decisions.
Click to expand...

Great comment, Hawk. My job requires DOT drug and alcohol testing and there is no pleading ignorant or leniency.
 
stevie-a said:
Speeding can be just as dangerous as driving under the influence, however, there's a greater negativity toward DUI's.
Click to expand...

Not even close to accurate and it has been proven I am sure time and time again. Speeding CAN cause issues. It is why limits are in place. Driving under the influence DOES impair one's ability which has been proven and why there is a threshold.

Not sure why this part is even debated, because frankly its rather laughable. It would be like saying eating is as dangerous as driving impaired, because I might choke. Yes, I am aware that eating is not illegal, but with the ways laws are passed in this country, its heading that way.
 
Nate said:
Well, the guy got exactly what he wanted, a law enforcement official to come out and approach him while he was filming. Not hard to accomplish with what he was doing.

I grew up in Williamson County actually and the local law enforcements were known for being hard on criminals. You did not want to get pulled over in Williamson County. It was unfortunate what happened with the Ken Anderson situation. With all the corrupt officials we've had in the US accused of crimes while serving the state this was the first prosecutor that actually did jail time for their actions. It is not common for prosecutors to do jail time when they are found guilty of something while working a case. But to think this just happens in the Texas judicial system is a bit naive. I'm not saying our system is perfect but to single out one case and say we have issues across the board is a bit of a stretch.
Click to expand...

Very true. There has been a history in many states. Parts of New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Michigan (Detroit), Illinois, Nevada, Texas, Florida, Arizona, etc. Having lived in or near and/or worked in a number of these places, including Texas, I have seen it all over.
 
JB said:
Not even close to accurate and it has been proven I am sure time and time again. Speeding CAN cause issues. It is why limits are in place. Driving under the influence DOES impair one's ability which has been proven and why there is a threshold.

Not sure why this part is even debated, because frankly its rather laughable. It would be like saying eating is as dangerous as driving impaired, because I might choke. Yes, I am aware that eating is not illegal, but with the ways laws are passed in this country, its heading that way.
Click to expand...


Cause it's a slow day and there's nothing going on, let's keep this rolling...hahaha...


Which is more dangerous?

A) Individual driving a vehicle at 70 mph in a 30 mph zone
B) Individual driving slower than the speed limit and IF tested would blow a 0.09 and showing ZERO signs of impairment.

I'm pretty sure that I could drink enough to blow 0.09 and still operate a vehicle in a manner that you'd never have a clue that I had a drink. I do not do this, so ease up with the pitchforks...but I'm pretty sure there are a number of us that either have or still do this.

You mention a threshold associated with drinking, but isn't a speed limit somewhat similar in that it is a recommended safe speed? I have yet to play my ace in the hole by mentioning speeding in a school zone...OR....speeding down your street while your kids are playing in the front yard. Pretty sure you would have a different opinion on the issue of someone speeding down your street vs. someone that was obeying the traffic laws albeit over the limit and "hidden" in their vehicle. Drunks aren't necessarily visible, speeders are.

For the record, I am not condoning drinking and driving.
 
Comparing the two is laughable.
Going more than double the speed limit would be equal to someone being .20 or so impaired.

These arguments are bordering ridiculous dude. And FWIW, speed down my road...Its a cul de sac, and let me know how that ends up for you. :D
 
stevie-a said:
deuce said:
Cause it's a slow day and there's nothing going on, let's keep this rolling...hahaha...


Which is more dangerous?

A) Individual driving a vehicle at 70 mph in a 30 mph zone
B) Individual driving slower than the speed limit and IF tested would blow a 0.09

You mention a threshold associated with drinking, but isn't a speed limit somewhat similar in that it is a recommended safe speed? I have yet to play my ace in the hole by mentioning speeding in a school zone...OR....speeding down your street while your kids are playing in the front yard. Pretty sure you would have a different opinion on the issue of someone speeding down your street vs. someone that was obeying the traffic laws albeit over the limit and "hidden" in their vehicle. Drunks aren't necessarily visible, speeders are.
Click to expand...


Thats a bad example because in most states when you go that much over the limit it takes it from a traffic infraction and makes it a crime for reckless endangerment. I'm not trying to be a jerk when I say this but arguing speeding against DWI is laughable. Sure their are times like the examples you've given are really bad but law enforcement will not just right someone a summons for driving recklessly thru a school zone or going 40mph over the limit.
Click to expand...
 
jitzy said:
Thats a bad example because in most states when you go that much over the limit it takes it from a traffic infraction and makes it a crime for reckless endangerment. I'm not trying to be a jerk when I say this but arguing speeding against DWI is laughable. Sure their are times like the examples you've given are really bad but law enforcement will not just right someone a summons for driving recklessly thru a school zone or going 40mph over the limit.
Click to expand...

This whole conversation has been hypotheticals since someone claimed to have never broken a law....and it spiraled from there.

I'm not arguing which is better (or worse) between speeding and DUI, and for the record there never were parameters on the severity of the offense -- speed or BAC level, rather this discussion centered on whether speeding was an infraction and *COULD* be as harmful as driving under the influence. The obvious answer is YES, depending on the circumstances. As you and JB pointed out, doubling the speed limit (SPEEDING) could be equated to someone with a BAC of 0.20.

I'm done here, this thread has long since lost it's context.
 
And another drunk diver is news because.................?
 
It's hard to believe that some are arguing for leniency for the poor judge. And to think that many say that poor people and minorities have too much sense of entitlement. How about rich people, politicians, and LEOs? IMO, the only ones that don't have ANY entitlement are the middle class slobs. We don't get any breaks. Give me a break (see what I did?). I am a middle class slob who needs a security clearance to perform my job, which clearance would get automatically revoked if I ever got a DUI. Would any amount of pleading buy me any leniency in the event of a DUI? Give me a break. Please.
 
stevie-a said:
The question was whether you've broken any laws here or there, not a comparison of laws. You seem to have backed down from the original claim, either due to a technicality and/or severity of the offense. Either way, laws are laws and WE ARE ALL GUILTY of breaking a law at some point...whether knowingly or knowingly.
Click to expand...
You got me! I received a citation once for rolling through a stop sign. Guilty as charged. Of course, common sense dictates that it's pretty obvious that that's not a crime (its an infraction), while a DUI clearly is. If someone wants to win that argument, they can have it ... yay, you won an internet argument! But please have a clue and don't use it to justify this judge getting leniency because "we all break the law". A majority of people go through their lives not committing crime (see what I did there?), judges should at a minimum be held to that standard.
 
deuce said:
Of course, common sense dictates that it's pretty obvious that that's not a crime (its an infraction), while a DUI clearly is.
Click to expand...

Since you want to be a d-bag about it, I figured I'd prove you wrong again. A traffic infraction is a form of crime. I won't bother posting any links that prove this, I'll let you go check for yourself. Yep, I won again! Yeah me!

As for the judge, I never justified or supported her attempt to receive leniency for her actions. I only said that I could see her presiding over other trials like property law, etc. I'm done here, save the keystrokes.
 
There will absolutely be NO name calling and personal attacks and I mean this to ANYBODY!

While I am sure other places allow that stuff...At THP it is definitely NOT tolerated!
 
I'm impressed that there is even the slightest bit of sympathy thrown towards this judge. Builds a career around the law, breaks it by speeding AND being intoxicated while driving, and then asks for the law to bend in her favour. It's a prime example of how broken this society can be at times, and while it doesn't surprise me, it's incredibly disappointing that she'd be stupid enough to get behind the wheel.

It's a big reason why I don't even have one beer and drive -- Not to mention drink and then speed. It's 100% asking for trouble.
 
Canadan said:
I'm impressed that there is even the slightest bit of sympathy thrown towards this judge. Builds a career around the law, breaks it by speeding AND being intoxicated while driving, and then asks for the law to bend in her favour. It's a prime example of how broken this society can be at times, and while it doesn't surprise me, it's incredibly disappointing that she'd be stupid enough to get behind the wheel.

It's a big reason why I don't even have one beer and drive -- Not to mention drink and then speed. It's 100% asking for trouble.
Click to expand...
Agree I think there's no excuse. It's really not hard to avoid being drunk and driving.
 
Evok said:
Agree I think there's no excuse. It's really not hard to avoid being drunk and driving.
Click to expand...

I'll always remember the instructor from my driving school talking about people who get dehydrated a bit playing sports in the sun, have a single beer, and end up being a bit more intoxicated than usual because of it. Were this story closer to that, and less about 5 beers and speeding, I suppose I'd offer a small amount of sympathy -- But all I read here is someone who dishes out the law every day being completely stupid and paying for it dearly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top