Improper Parking

DUI reductions often make the better stories

Drunk driving and gerrymandering don’t usually go hand in hand, but there are exceptions. The race-based district-drawing skills of Virginia Democrats half a century ago had areas around majority black Petersburg represented in the state Senate by a rural Democrat from Windsor, 50 miles east. When the state senator got a DUI on his home turf, fickle memory tells me, the hearing was too far away for the local paper to send a reporter.

The charge was probably reduced to improper driving. That’s a standard go-to when the various officers of the court know a guy was drinking but don’t think driving under the influence can be proven. I covered the case in Sussex County in 1984 of a man who had passed out, driven his car into a ditch, and slid over against the passenger door. He admitted to the officer who found him that he had been driving the car when it ran off the road.

His attorney pointed out that the defendant was not behind the wheel and, based on his breath test, was entirely too drunk to know if he had been driving or not. The judge, rumored to have strong empathy for drinkers, reduced the charge to improper parking and fined the driver $150, close to $500 today. When I interviewed the attorney later, I had the strong sense that he still couldn’t believe it. My best recollection is that the charge of improper parking did not exist in Sussex but the attorney, who had dodged a bullet with a Hail Mary, was not going to argue or appeal. Let sleeping drivers lie.

Soon after the news story ran, some people went and talked to the judge and he decided to retire, presumably to spend more time with his family.

The obvious reason to be remembering this history is the recent arrest of Harrisonburg City Council member Chris Jones and the reduction of a DUI charge to improper driving. Several comments showed up on various social media sites suggesting the fix was in and there was something nefarious about the reduction. No, there wasn’t. If Jones had superpowers to manipulate the courts, he would have used them to persuade the arresting officers. The reduction is what happens in DUI cases a lot of the time, especially when the defendant has sense enough to hire an attorney who specializes in alcohol-related cases.

The conspiracy theories pop up anyway, especially among those who want any public official charged with any crime to get life without parole. The theories defy logic. For instance, if Hilary Rodham Clinton had the power to avoid prosecution for various murky crimes for three decades or longer, why didn’t she use that power to win the Electoral College?

The other half of the conspiracy theory in the Jones case involved the mysterious “medical issue” mentioned in court but never expressly defined. One theory is that the issue was described in court but Jones used his superpowers to keep it out of the news reports. Again, if he had those powers, he could have used them to avoid the arrest. Another, the one I like, is that Jones’s attorney mentioned it to get it on the public record, but that if it had been real legal evidence, it would have been presented and not just mentioned.

Bottom line, Jones should not have been driving, as the videos show. But his case was reduced not through any crooked deal but because DUI cases are like that. Through luck or wit, Jones delayed a blood test for close to three hours while metabolism did its duty. The case for DUI wasn’t strong enough, but the fact that he was asleep behind the wheel on a busy street had to be taken into consideration. At least he put it in park.

(Worth noting, the videos were posted by Dave Briggman, who is utterly fearless and can find anything. Others view his talents less fondly, and describe them less glowingly. I’ve described his skill set in some pretty crude terms and he’s taken it as a compliment.)