Tuesday, October 4, 2016

DUI Dishonor Roll

MADD:  Every two minutes a person is injured in a drunk driving crash

Amherst police arrested three drivers on the charge of Driving Under the Influence over Homecoming Weekend and all three took the legally admissible breath test back at APD headquarters.

One of the three, Brendan Gillis, compounded his mistake by failing to appear in Eastern Hampshire District Court on Monday morning for arraignment and a warrant for his arrest was immediately issued.

UPDATE (10/5).  Mr Gillis appeared in Court this morning with an attorney and had his case continued to December.  
Brendan Gillis, age 22, now on the run (APD intake photo)

You can run but you can't hide -- especially in the age of supercomputers.

Anton Kolossov, age 19

Interestingly the BT may actually help Mr. Kolossov as the results are just barely over the limit.

Daniel Cutler, age 32


Anonymous said...

.07 is less than .08

Larry Kelley said...

Test 2 was was .081

Anonymous said...

It"a all a good time- then someone dies or gets hurt - no skin off a perps apple - it" the victim that does society's penance - every way- every day $&@?!!

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry but we have no winner for Best Dressed this week.

Anonymous said...

Doesn't matter it was less than .08. Under 21 years old...

Anonymous said...

It does matter because this is America....when you do something wrong, there are multiple crimes that apply. It is pretty rare to be charged with one thing. This is where "throw the book at him" comes from. This is there so you know who is in charge and that you are particularly afraid of falling out of line. It is like prison rape, tolerated because it helps those in charge.

I think the take away is that despite how common this type offense is, we do little to nothing to mitigate it, we allow it and then we allow the government to profit off of it - that is the system. If we wanted to stop drunk driving or even slow it significantly, we would take more action. I think it is obvious we want to keep the current revenue based system going. This is a money issue, not a safety one.

Perhaps we could offer the government higher alcohol taxes, making sure that they add up to more than the drunk driving revenue, and get some change on this topic? I think the issue there is that the government is not just one entity. If we do this, the money will go to assessors and collectors vs. cops and judges. This sets up an internal fight that will not happen. I think we are stuck with drunk drivers. I do not believe the incentive for changing this is larger than the barriers to doing so. Even when this was a slightly hot issue a couple of decades ago....this lousy system is what resulted.

Drunk drivers suck, governments that turn a blind eye for revenue are far worse.

FYI 0.81 is not significantly different than 0.78, unless you have a low quality lawyer.

Anonymous said...

Mustn't confuse America with the government of America.

Anonymous said...

"Doesn't matter it was less than .08. Under 21 years old.."

Is he not under 21 per the report? Than the law is .02 which makes the argument of .078 v .081 null and void

Anonymous said...

SO much confusion, let me help: he is under 21 so he will face an additional penalty pursuant to c90s24p for having any BAC 0.02 or greater. This "penalty" is a license suspension of 180d to 1y. This is administrative only as he HAS THE SAME LIMIT for court purposes to be per se (0.08) as those over 21. The Commonwealth only can introduce the lower of the two samples (0.07) and the higher one is not admissible nor is the third decimal as it is truncated. So, for court this kid will skate on the OUI as the only evidence in way of a BT will be an 0.07. Hell, its near impossible to convict with results of 0.08/0.09.

The cops put in all three results (Subject 1, cal check, Subject 2) to satisfy c90s24k.

Anonymous said...

I am confused by the last post. How much can I drink before I drive and get caught?

Anonymous said...

In the Gazette, 81 year old Amherst woman raided by MA national guard and state troopers. They took her plant and put it in a loaded truck with other plants they were driving around the community confiscating from, get this, adults (that is a joke, they are obviously not adults or they would be able to decide for themselves). Note they are not even arresting people, because that may cause action from the public, when driving around armed with guns taking peoples' stuff, well they know that you, their neighbors, will do little to nothing to stop them...because you never stop the government from taking more money or stuff. Way to go.

Meanwhile the same groups of officers and armed soldiers driving around our communities cannot do more to stop drunks or out of control town officials....or other bad cops. I have never heard of a group of Marijuana users driving around armed, threatening peoples' lives, preying upon the community as such. Is there anything that can be done about these thugs? My sense is not in weak Amherst.

Talk about the dishonor role or roll. Meanwhile the Amherst police allowed this group of out of control armed criminals to drive around town....when it is their job to protect people, especially the elderly and weak, from such violent aggressors. Where were they?

Anonymous said...

I have heard of drunk / potted/ boozed losers doing hit & runs and leaving a victim flatlining and crippled for life - like myself -victim of this CRIME - for example ...ya Thunk ?!$$&@