Laura's Law: Continuing the discussion
This posting is a follow up to discussion from NC SPIN show #644, written by NC SPIN panelist and political observer Jeanne Miliken Bonds.
This past Sunday, NC Spin aired and we discussed Laura's Law, HB 49, named for a young woman who was killed last July when a drunk driver slammed into the car carrying the 17-year-old. The driver had three DWI convictions already.
The accident has led to discussions about North Carolina's continuous alcohol monitoring system, or "ankle bracelet," law. Under current law, a court cannot order an offender to wear an ankle bracelet for more than 60 days. Proposed legislation would change that limit as well as other penalties for repeat offenders.
An absolute tragedy and unfortunately one that occurs far too often. This bill also adds a level of punishment, "aggravated level one punishment, " which would be imposed on offenders when three or more "aggravating factors" are present:
- A conviction for impaired driving within the last 7 years or following the current offense
- Driving with a license revoked for another impaired driving offense
- Serious injury to another person caused by the impaired driving in the current instance
- Driving with a passenger under the age of 16
Unfortunately, NC Spin is a 30-minute program (I wish it was an hour!) with four panelists so there just is not time to thoroughly discuss a topic that warrants a more in-depth discussion.
When I worked at the Courts, we researched the North Carolina Alcohol/Drug Council statistics showing a wide variation in DWI conviction rates among North Carolina's judicial districts. Then, and now, these incidents cause some to wonder whether the courts are functioning properly. In fact, almost always, the question is "Are Judges doing their job?"
Usually, the number of defendants tried in District Coiurt who are found not guilty is low. And, it is true that there is variance in DWI conviction rates across the State. There are differences in attitudes of the members of the public who form the juries in the various districts of the State. Historically, juries in eastern North Carolina acquit a larger percentage of DWI defendants than juries elsewhere in the state.
And, those who try these cases will provide anecdotal evidence that jurors sometimes take a more lenient view when they actually sit on a jury and must make a decision that will affect the freedom or livelihood of an individual defendant.
Because of increasing caseloads, an increasing population, and not enough judges per capita, prosecutors are forced to give great weight to the track record of juries in their districts when deciding which DWI cases to prosecute and which defendants they should allow to plead guilty to lesser offenses.
Laura's Law will be a deterrent if the Courts are given enough resources to try more cases. Passing new laws, without the resources will not achieve the desired results. Remember, the same judges are trying murder, rape, armed robbery cases.
When penalties are increased, more defendants plead not guilty and exercise their right to a jury trial. More of those convicted appeal and exhaust all of the time and court resources possible. Juries want more proof at trial. Judges focuses on many different cases, all of which are critical to a segment of society so to assume Judges are not doing their job is wrong.
Only the General Assembly can provide resources to the Courts. Some assume fines and fees go to the Courts, but they do not, those monies go to the General Fund in most cases, and specified county funds in other cases.
Since 1995, NC has had Drug Treatment Courts with very successful results, both pre-plea and post-sentence, but these special Courts are not funded statewide but have been increasing in number since 1995. North Carolina Drug Treatment Courts are a relatively new part of the U.S. judicial system, and NC was one of the first States to have these Courts. These Courts have been shown to reduce the rate of recidivism and the overall cost to taxpayers in comparison to conventional courts. Unlike many States, North Carolina Courts can require individuals to participate in drug court whether they want to or not and completion of a drug court program will not typically result in reduced or dismissed charges.
Again, resources are needed but the benefits to NC are a lower risk of recidivism as more participants remain drug free. To hear the stories of those who have successfully completed these Courts, is emotional and rewarding as they return to society as productive citizens.
The answer. Resources.
Tom: One of the problems in the whole DWI situation is the failure to focus on the repeat offender. I wish we had more figures on what drivers (1st time DWI offenders or repeats) actually cause the serious accidents. I have tried them, defended them, and know my way around the subject. The .00 rule in the Baltic countries is the only way to really do anything serious about
the problem otherwise.
As you know my son is a District Court Judge. He had a DWI between college and law school. He is a serious beer drinker,but will not now go close to his car if he has had even a taste of alcohol. The tales he tells of DWI's in District Court continue to make me aware that little has changed in how the problem is handled over the last 50 years. The problem drinker is the problem. Bill Graham
Reply to this
Convicted drunk drivers are usually back out on the streets making our highways less safe quicker than the ones who they put in the hospital. Those that survived a crash anyway.
Reply to this
Is the answer truly resources? Should we throw more money, and time, at the problem? I think that would be like trying to wash the mud off the USS North Carolina with a toothbrush, and garden hose. What is the root cause of this drug problem? I believe it started in the 1950's with the parenting book that emphasized "child-centered" parenting. (I apologize because I cannot remember the book's name or author at the moment.) It is the philosophy that slowly transformed our giving society into the selfish brood of today. This horrible parenting method led to the sexual revolution of the 70's; my parent's generation. Next, our moms had to go to work to help support our lifestyles in keeping up with the Jones’. As a result, my generation was labeled "generation-x"; the first generation without an identity. I disagree with that label now because of my earlier argument, and believe my generation should be labeled "generation selfish".
I have seen many of my friends over the years allow themselves to become so selfish that they risk their life, or the lives of others, in order to satisfy their selfishness. Because their parents did not discipline them when they got in trouble when they were young their behavior continued into adulthood. They simply test their boundaries until they get caught or someone gets hurt. Some of them have never seen the inside of a church, literally. This problem has been compounded over the years when capital punishment, and religion, was removed from our schools, and the metal detectors went in. I believe in order to truly fix the root cause of the problem our children’s values and morals need to be restored. Therefore, educating our children, and lifting them out of society’s moral decline is the real answer. How can this be accomplished? A good place to start is George Washington’s Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour In Company and Conversation. They can be found here: http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documents/civility/transcript.html. Our first President is the best example of civility our children should learn from.
Another good action step will be to restore the power to our valued teachers to discipline an unruly student. Furthermore, political correctness has gone too far, and I think that prayer, to our Creator, should be allowed back in our schools. We can also offer parenting classes at a minimal cost to the parent to cover the expense of the classes. Books are a valued resource. Any book in the parenting series by Gary and Ann-Marie Ezzo is highly recommended to parents with undisciplined kids. These are only a few ideas that I think will start the major transformation of our schools. The time has come to remove the cancer on society that has caused our court system to be overburdened. The liberal way of education in NC has failed miserably, and major reforms are desperately necessary. I believe that unless the root cause is addressed the DWI problem will only stagnate.
Reply to this
Maybe the answer to repeat DWI offenders is SPECIFIED PENALTIES. Since there is no acceptable excuse for driving drunk, there should be no reason to let anyone who gets caught "cut a deal". The first offense would carry a specific penalty. The second offense would carry a stronger penalty, and so on. These penalties would be mandatory for all counties, and could not be altered by anyone. The penalties would be established by the State Legislature. At some point the penalty would be prison time.
Reply to this
@Andrew. Yes, resources but not money thrown at the problem. We have more than 8 million people in NC and we generate a lot of cases - criminal and civil - but yet our number of judges and court personnel have not kept pace with caseload increases. The Courts do not have the "latest and greatest" technology either. I would just say, please visit District Court for a few hours in Wake County, and I think you will see this to be a fact. The News and Observer once published an article calling it a "chaotic."
Will resources solve the problem of people who drink and drive? No, but Drug Treatment Courts demonstrate great success in returning these offenders to useful lives in society while making the roads safer. These courts combine punishment with treatment. It takes people to try cases and when backlogs of cases occur, it takes people to catch up. Courts are not like businesses, justice does not have a "faster production time" factor.
As to what I mean about juries and how they decide in these cases, please read
http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/03/02/1023363/cook-gets-3-years-but-no-murder.html
"A Wake County jury found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter, felony death by motor vehicle and driving while impaired for his part in a collision on Sept. 11, 2009, that ended the life of Elena Bright Shapiro, an aspiring ballerina."
Even though "Prosecutors tried to persuade the jury that Cook was guilty of second-degree murder, a charge requiring proof of "malice" or evidence that the defendant drove in a reckless manner, reflecting knowledge that injury or death would likely result," two jurors held out "They were kind of stuck on he didn't get in the car with the intent on killing somebody,"
Reply to this
I agree with everything you say, Jeanne, and meant no disrespect. However, resources ultimately mean dollars, and our state is out of money. With that said, how do you propose to increase resources without an additional cost?
Reply to this
@Andrew - I completely understand Andrew and certainly did not take your comments as anything but insightful and well-thought-out! And, thanks for the dialogue.
You are correct that resources mean dollars, and we do have a budget deficit.
When I was at the Courts (1999), we presented a phased-in, long-term caseload analysis with implemented resources over time. Had this been funded - a little every year - we would have tackled this issue and not be behind as we are now. Unfortunately, it was not implemented. Really unfortunate because it is always better to plan ahead and at least try to keep up with caseload growth rather than chase it when we are really behind.
So, as for what we do ... there are many fees, fines, forfeitures the Courts collect that do not go to the Courts to fund its primary functions. Should any of these categories be increased (and they usually are on a fairly regular basis through specific legislation and categories), some percentage could be dedicated to the Courts. In order to fund an upgrade to a dinosaur technology system in the 1990s, we (the Courts) proposed that large data dumps provided (business requests) be done so at a fee and the revenue generated be dedicated to Courts technology.
And, we can still implement a phase-in plan to catch up over time so we are not constantly and consistently faced with shortages in a separate branch of government.
Reply to this