Collin County DWI Lawyer & Attorney : Hunter Biederman : Texas DWI Defense : Serving Collin County, Denton County, Dallas County

A recent article in the Dallas Morning News is talking about a new law passed by Texas to help nab more uninsured motorists.

The topic of this post is not whether or not it is a good law, waste of time, etc., but rather who helped champion the law.... Yup, MADD.

In the article, it tells us that:

One group that lobbied for the law was MADD [Mothers Against Drunk Driving] of Texas, which argued that the average drunken driver is less likely to have insurance than other drivers.

"The need for this law has not changed in the past three years. In fact, it has probably gotten worse," said Bill Lewis of MADD-Texas. "There are probably more uninsured people today than when the law was passed."

WHAT??

At least they aren't making up false statistics, or skewing stats, as been pointed out by other bloggers here, here, and here.

So intoxicated drivers were intoxicated at the time they were supposed to renew their insurance?

In thinking back.. with the exception of one case, every DWI case I have handled, the client had insurance at the time.  OK, so my sample group may not mean much, but there is no rhyme or reason to this thinking by MADD.

This just further shows that MADD is a political lobbying group...

So this got me to thinking.  Why would a group like MADD want a law to help nab uninsured motorists?

Maybe it is because they know that many state find DWI checkpoints to be illegal, and this is just their way of finding a way to allow police "reasonable suspicion" to stop just about anyone.

This program:

aims to create a database for police officers, state troopers and vehicle inspection stations to instantly verify whether a motorist has the minimum coverage required under state law.

Basically, this could just be another tool or rouse to allow an officer to pull you over, just to check up on you.  Obviously, this system is going to have problems... but these officers will still argue "good faith" when explaining why you were pulled over.

So, yes, I guess it makes sense that MADD would support this initiative...

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I read an article today on the online version of the Tyler Morning Telegraph.  It is entitled "MADD President: More To Be Done To Prevent Deaths." 

Some interesting thoughts of MADD... Here are some of the quotes of MADD's political agenda and hopes to remove all free will from our citizens...

Ms. Knox said MADD's goal is to eliminate drunken driving by separating alcohol from cars.

She talked about new, developing technology that will one day allow cars to read alcohol intake by a person's touch or breath when they get behind the wheel.

Birch said the devices will be unobtrusive, similar to air bags, because about 40 percent of Americans don't drink. The public demanded air bags for every passenger in a car and MADD wants the public to demand alcohol-detecting devices in every car, he said.

And,

Five years from now, he hopes there will be fleet vehicles with interlock devises, placed there by employers, Birch said. Ten years from now, they hope to have them on all vehicles.

And,

Now, MADD is also trying to get sobriety checkpoints in every state.

And one of my favorites,

Bingham has said trying driving while intoxicated cases can be difficult because jurors think everyone has drank and driven and no one got hurt. But, Bingham said, at any moment accidents can occur. He said the offense is committed by many people in the public but it doesn't lessen the seriousness of the offense.

He said it is his responsibility to be aggressive with the cases, but there are other district attorney's offices that reduce first-time DWI offenses because they are afraid to try the cases. He said Smith County juries are not so tolerant.

Bingham said the penalties need to fit the crime.

Here's my question about that.... If jurors think that a first time offender is someone that deserves a second chance.. how is that not the penalty fitting the crime?  Why is it that MADD believes THEIR version of punishment is the only acceptable version?

Juries are made up of a cross section of society.  Shouldn't society, and not a political Action Committee such as MADD be the decision makers?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

Apparently some other groups are getting into the court watching program too.

Christian court watches keep tabs on judges, is the title of CNN's article on the subject.

This Kentucky group has been getting in on the action as well.  It appears that their motives are more for drug offenders when they watch the courts.

From my last article, MADD pays 40K per year for "Court Monitors," I spoke about MADD getting money from the government to "watch/influence" the courts in DUI and DWI cases.  This issue has been taken up by Mark Bennett and Robert Guest in the past as well.

Hey, at least this group isn't State funded....

The original Story can be found on CNN.com, HERE. 

Some interesting clips from the article...

Becknell -- a devout Christian known to many as "Brother John" -- pulls out a pen and an inch-thick docket, mostly of drug and alcohol cases. For the next three hours, he takes diligent notes on the judge's actions, the attendance of police officers, repeat offenders making another appearance, and so on.

The purpose? To make sure drug offenders in eastern Kentucky are getting what they deserve.

The Community Church of Manchester is leading the way through "Court Watch," a program in which volunteers attend court hearings to monitor judges overseeing drug-related cases.

"They know they're welcome in my court anytime I'm there," said District Judge Renee Muncy.

Yet, she added that she doesn't feel pressured by the presence of Court Watch participants.

Neither does Circuit Judge R. Cletus Maricle, who said, "Some judges probably feel they are there to intimidate him. If the judge is intimidated, that's his fault."

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In another attempt to influence the Courts, the New Mexico chapter of MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving), has decided to pay $30,000 - $40,000 per year (per person)  in order to "monitor" DWI and DUI in the local courtroom, and the activities of judges and prosecutors.  Oh yeah.. they are hiring 5 full time people to perform this service.

Problem 1:
Political/lobbyist organizations using taxpayer money

I wouldn't be quite as much against this proposition if the funds for the "monitors" was raised independently.  In my opinion, any organization can do whatever they want with their money, and pursue the goals of their organization.  But here, they received $400,000 grant from the state Traffic Safety Bureau.  Taxpayer money going to a political organization.. I see major problems with that.

Problem 2:
The court's "biased" approach to law enforcement

"Metro Court spokeswoman Janet Blair issued a statement on July 25 saying the court has had an excellent relationship with MADD in the past. 'We look forward to their continuing observations in our courtrooms. We will welcome any constructive recommendations that come from their study that will help reduce drunk driving in our community,' Blair wrote.

The court should be an unbiased entity in an adversarial system.  Why would the court spokeswoman be looking forward to recommendations of a lobbying group?  I can't imagine the court spokeswoman taking meetings with the local criminal bar association.

-------------------
The article comes from the posting on the free republic.  See below:

New Mexico MADD chapter moves offices Downtown to better monitor DWI cases
Albuquerque Tribune ^ | 7/26/07 | Christopher Sanchez

Posted on 07/28/2007 6:00:54 PM PDT by elkfersupper

The New Mexico chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving has plenty to celebrate.

The organization on July 25 held a grand opening for its new headquarters Downtown and received a $400,000 grant from the state Traffic Safety Bureau to monitor DWI cases in six counties, including Bernalillo, said Terry Huertaz, executive director of MADD New Mexico.

The organization will hire five full-time court monitors to track DWI cases at random and to gather data for an annual report, Huertaz said.

"We're hoping our presence in the court will be a positive thing. We're not there to find something corrupt, but if that does happen, we will expose it to the public," she said. "We don't want to be an organization throwing rocks at the system - we want to be part of the solution."

The report doesn't have to be negative, she said.

"We might see something really awesome going on in a particular county that a district attorney, a police officer or a judge has figured out," Huertaz said, "and we should share that information with everyone."

The court monitors will track 200 to 400 cases annually in each county - Bernalillo, Santa Fe, San Juan, Rio Arriba, McKinley and Doña Ana. They were chosen because they have the highest numbers of alcohol-related arrests, crashes, deaths and injuries, Huertaz said.

The organization received the grant a week before moving into its new headquarters at 1100 Fourth St. N.W., she said.

MADD moved Downtown because it is closer to the courts, the District Attorney's Office and the Albuquerque Police Department, she said.

"We strategically moved here so we can be near all our partners," Huertaz said.

The court monitors will be paid between $30,000 and $40,000 per year, she said.

Metro Court spokeswoman Janet Blair issued a statement on July 25 saying the court has had an excellent relationship with MADD in the past.

"We look forward to their continuing observations in our courtrooms. We will welcome any constructive recommendations that come from their study that will help reduce drunk driving in our community," Blair wrote.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks