View Full Version : Rick Perry indicted
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/15/politics/rick-perry-indictment/index.html
Felony charges. --- Well that's two Govs that won't be in Presidential races.
One from Texas and one from VA
skijunkie55
08-15-14, 22:46
"The two felony counts against Perry, a Republican, stem from his threat to veto funding for a statewide public integrity unit run by Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg unless she stepped down, the special prosecutor in the case, Michael McCrum, said.
According to McCrum, the indictment alleges that the circumstances around Perry's veto threat amounted to a misuse of state money earmarked by the Legislature to fund the public integrity unit in Travis County run by Lehmberg.
The second charge alleges that he improperly used the veto threat to get her to resign following her arrest on a drunk driving charge. She stayed in office."
Huh???
SeriousStudent
08-15-14, 22:47
It might be worth digging into what county DA's office took it into the grand jury, and why.
I'll offer a small data point: Austin and Travis county is the most liberal/democratic city and county in the entire state of Texas. There is a LOT of backstory on this.
ETA: Oh, and I have no enormous love for Perry. But I have a lot less for the folks behind this.
Leaveammoforme
08-15-14, 22:52
Wait a minute.... Perry wanted someone to resign that was charged with DWI and that equals felony (x2) indictment.
Meanwhile Obama is systematically destroying our country while blatantly over stepping his power and.........nothing.
Averageman
08-15-14, 22:57
"The two felony counts against Perry, a Republican, stem from his threat to veto funding for a statewide public integrity unit run by Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg unless she stepped down, the special prosecutor in the case, Michael McCrum, said.
According to McCrum, the indictment alleges that the circumstances around Perry's veto threat amounted to a misuse of state money earmarked by the Legislature to fund the public integrity unit in Travis County run by Lehmberg.
The second charge alleges that he improperly used the veto threat to get her to resign following her arrest on a drunk driving charge. She stayed in office."
Huh???
Rosemary was sweet enough to threaten the Cop who arrested her, the Desk Sergeant and make a general PITA of herself the whole time She was in the lock-up.
The investigation included the evidence that She had been drinking while driving and her credit card has shown several thousand dollars of expenditures at the same liquor store for the vodka She drinks.
Ol' Rosemary put each and every case She touched in jeopardy by her actions, Perry was right to demand her to retire.
I'll give Perry's attorney credit. At face value this reeks of politicization.
ForTehNguyen
08-15-14, 23:06
charming woman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxX-qhJTfkI
Don Robison
08-15-14, 23:16
Wow, I wasn't sure of what you guys were talking about with her issues. Seems she has a lot of issues lately.
http://www.texaslawyer.com/id=1202666895623/Solo-Who-Sued-to-Remove-DA-Rosemary-Lehmberg-Files-Complaint-With-Texas-Ethics-Commission?mcode=1202666895810&slreturn=20140716001156
Averageman
08-15-14, 23:22
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-bj-BLTRRo#t=86
Ummm Yeah, that works 3 X the limit?
the public integrity unit in Travis County run by Lehmberg.
Just too funny - the public integrity unit run is run by a convicted criminal.
Wait a minute.... Perry wanted someone to resign that was charged with DWI and that equals felony (x2) indictment.
Meanwhile Obama is systematically destroying our country while blatantly over stepping his power and.........nothing.
Clearly you are a racist who should report for political reeducation.
Just too funny - the public integrity unit run is run by a convicted criminal.
I'd be surprised if it were otherwise.
brushy bill
08-16-14, 00:04
How can this fly without impeachment of POTUS?
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-16-14, 00:25
How can this fly without impeachment of POTUS?
They try to basically impeach Perry for doing his job while they won't even discuss impeaching Obama for not doing his job.
I feel like I'm the only one on crazy pills...
EDIT TO ADD: 0.24? She is a serious drunk that needs help. To be intoxicated to that level and functioning as well as she was, that is some serious tolerance to alcohol. A lot of people are jelly at that level.
It would appear that she has a drinking problem, which makes me almost wonder who was the person who reported her erratic driving? I don't think it would take many nights of following her to get her on a DUI.
They try to basically impeach Perry for doing his job while they won't even discuss impeaching Obama for not doing his job.
I feel like I'm the only one on crazy pills...
EDIT TO ADD: 0.24? She is a serious drunk that needs help. To be intoxicated to that level and functioning as well as she was, that is some serious tolerance to alcohol. A lot of people are jelly at that level.
It would appear that she has a drinking problem, which makes me almost wonder who was the person who reported her erratic driving? I don't think it would take many nights of following her to get her on a DUI.
From my understanding, she almost hit several cars head on traveling in the wrong lane on a service road next to a major hwy/interstate and was called in, and stopped by a deputy.
It looks like they got him on this one. I'm interested in hearing from lawyers in TX, but me brief overview of the statutes and charges leads me to think that Perry has some real problems going forward.
It looks like they got him on this one. I'm interested in hearing from lawyers in TX, but me brief overview of the statutes and charges leads me to think that Perry has some real problems going forward.
That's the way I read it too. Funny how prosecution of the law on this level seems to be politicized and one sided. If the Dems can keep this up, we'll have Harvey Mushman as the Rep nominee in '16.
From my understanding, she almost hit several cars head on traveling in the wrong lane on a service road next to a major hwy/interstate and was called in, and stopped by a deputy.
And when in jail she kept demanding they "Call Greg!" as if Greg Hamilton, Travis County Sheriff, would be stupid enough to give her a Get Out Of Jail Free card.
That's the way I read it too. Funny how prosecution of the law on this level seems to be politicized and one sided. If the Dems can keep this up, we'll have Harvey Mushman as the Rep nominee in '16.
If I'm reading this correctly, he would have been well within his authority to veto the funding had he not tied it to Lehmberg's resignation. He should have vetoed their funding and kept his mouth shut; let them read between the lines.
That's the way I read it too. Funny how prosecution of the law on this level seems to be politicized and one sided. If the Dems can keep this up, we'll have Harvey Mushman as the Rep nominee in '16.
They have got nothing. Govs and POTUS can veto legislation and give their reasons. Obama routinely tells Boehner legislation will be vetoed if he sends it to his desk.
Perry said he would not fund the Public Integrity Unit if it is headed by a convicted criminal. He has the moral high ground.
Looks like Perry screwed the puppy on this one.
He should have vetoed their funding and kept his mouth shut; let them read between the lines.
And that indeed is the problem - slick Rick's mouth. Payback is a bitch!
Bullshit. pure Bullshit. That woman is unqualified to hold her job as keeper of the public trust. And funding her "office of public integrity' with her running it is a travesty. I applaud Perry for doing the right thing, and I think the voters of TX would agree 100% if the entire story gets out. On top of that, the Dems trying to pull this stunt just futher shows what kind or pieces of shit they really are, and MAYBE the voters of TX will also figure THAT out.
What the heck is this country coming to?
That woman is unqualified to hold her job as keeper of the public trust.
True, for sure, but the the dems needn't have done anything as it is my belief that Rick would have self destructed all on his own.
MountainRaven
08-16-14, 10:04
Nobody has mentioned that at the time Perry was threatening the Public Integrity Unit's funding, they were investigating Rick Perry's pet agency which had handed out 3 billion dollars of Texas taxpayer money.
They have got nothing. Govs and POTUS can veto legislation and give their reasons. Obama routinely tells Boehner legislation will be vetoed if he sends it to his desk.
Perry said he would not fund the Public Integrity Unit if it is headed by a convicted criminal. He has the moral high ground.
I would agree with you that in truth, they have no case. But... this is Austin and they are liberals, so what does truth have to do with the law? Taking a very narrow interpretation, it does look like he exceeded his authority by making it appear "political" even if it wasn't.
Averageman
08-16-14, 11:10
Bullshit. pure Bullshit. That woman is unqualified to hold her job as keeper of the public trust. And funding her "office of public integrity' with her running it is a travesty. I applaud Perry for doing the right thing, and I think the voters of TX would agree 100% if the entire story gets out. On top of that, the Dems trying to pull this stunt just futher shows what kind or pieces of shit they really are, and MAYBE the voters of TX will also figure THAT out.
What the heck is this country coming to?
I've never been in trouble, never had more than a ticket and that was 20+ years ago; BUT if I had a DUI and She as much as touched the paperwork, we would be going back to court.
I would guess anything She touched is now suspect. I can see this costing the taxpayers a lot of cash before it is over and Perry is right to do this.
She was swerving all over the road that night and had an open bottle of vodka in the front seat when She was pulled over. There was a report that someone had got a hit and run and described Rosemary's car, we havent heard a lot about that since the third day after this happened.
http://www.myfoxaustin.com/story/22574682/travis-co-investigates-lehmbergs-possible-involvement-in-hit-and-run
As of 061313, the statement requested from the victim, Mr. VanGorp, has not been provided. All attempts to obtain said statement have been unsuccessful and there will be no further requests.
I have personally examined Mr. VanGorp's vehicle and measured the damage height. The damage to Mr. VanGorp's vehicle is between 1.9 and 2.4 feet. I have also examined Ms. Lehmberg's vehicle and measured the height of the damage. The height of the damage to Ms. Lehmberg's vehicle is 1.4 to 1.75 feet.
http://www.statesman.com/news/news/crime-law/sheriffs-office-no-evidence-ties-lehmberg-to-hit-a/nYLjx/
Lehmberg was charged with DWI on April 12 after deputies responded to a report that a Lexus sedan was driving erratically near RM 2222 and FM 620, near the scene of a hit-and-run also under investigation. In video and audio footage from that night, deputies can be heard questioning Lehmberg about the crash and discussing damage on a front corner of her car.
Campaign time is getting near. To preempt any desire by Perry to run for POTUS again, the dems/Hillary are behind this. Keep Perry tied up in this stuff so he won't have time to run. They brought Sarah Palin down with all those ethic charges and Herman Cain with the sexual harassment crap.
montanadave
08-16-14, 11:41
Nobody has mentioned that at the time Perry was threatening the Public Integrity Unit's funding, they were investigating Rick Perry's pet agency which had handed out 3 billion dollars of Texas taxpayer money.
That's the nut of it. I don't see a lot of folks rallying to support a drunk DA, but Perry's response to her arrest seems very opportunistic.
That's the nut of it. I don't see a lot of folks rallying to support a drunk DA, but Perry's response to her arrest seems very opportunistic.
Opportunistic?
I think it is standing policy for most Govs that drunken convicted criminals should not be Chief Law Enforcement Officers or run public agencies, much less a Public Integrity Unit. I know that would be my policy.
montanadave
08-16-14, 12:05
Opportunistic?
I think it is standing policy for most Govs that drunken convicted criminals should not be Chief Law Enforcement Officers or run public agencies, much less a Public Integrity Unit. I know that would be my policy.
Pressuring the DA to resign by withholding the funding of an agency which just so happens to be investigating your ass? That's a tad opportunistic.
Opportunistic? I think it is standing policy for most Govs that drunken convicted criminals should not be Chief Law Enforcement Officers or run public agencies, much less a Public Integrity Unit. I know that would be my policy.
Calling for her resignation is not the problem, but he had no power to remove her, which is why he didn't. The problem is what he said he would do if she didn't, and she didn't and he did.
montanadave
08-16-14, 12:32
Two sayings come to mind: "Politics ain't beanbag" and "Sometimes you eat the bear and sometimes, well, he eats you".
Texas politics is a world unto itself and I certainly don't presume to have any more than a casual bystander's insight into the internal workings of the Lone Star political machine. Just a drive-by comment from somebody in the cheap seats.
Calling for her resignation is not the problem, but he had no power to remove her, which is why he didn't. The problem is what he said he would do if she didn't, and she didn't and he did.
That is what I'm getting from this. There were other legal mechanisms to remove her from office. Granted, the Dems were blocking all of them. However, you can't tell a public official to resign or you will block funding to their agency. Imagine if a democrat governor told republican, pro-NFA sheriffs to resign or they would block funding to their jurisdictions. Not a perfect example, but the general principle applies.
If Perry was smart, he would have left her in office, cut the funding without a personal ultimatum, and had a field day with that mug shot and video in November.
Dashcam footage. I hope she burns.
http://youtu.be/JrxsCH_p1oc
It might be worth digging into what county DA's office took it into the grand jury, and why.
I'll offer a small data point: Austin and Travis county is the most liberal/democratic city and county in the entire state of Texas. There is a LOT of backstory on this.
ETA: Oh, and I have no enormous love for Perry. But I have a lot less for the folks behind this.
This has been driven by a leftist political action group here in texas. This is once again prosecution for political retaliation, something the dallas DA is being investigated by the FBI for as well, along with many many many other wrongdoings.
The integrity unit has a long history of turning a blind eye to serious issues surrounding democrats in texas, many of which have been under investigation by the FBI. Recently some of these people have also been indicted.
It looks like they got him on this one. I'm interested in hearing from lawyers in TX, but me brief overview of the statutes and charges leads me to think that Perry has some real problems going forward.
It's a stretch on its face, however if they showed something substantive in the grand jury proceedings, you might be right.
My guess? This indictment will be quashed unless the state makes a showing that supports it, so far, I have f seen anything.
Anyone want to start a "Lehmberg for President" PAC? Seems to be as well qualified as many of them (think Teddy K-who kept getting the terms "philanthropist and philanderer" confused) and with her heroic fight against Big, Bad Perry, she should be a winner.
Dashcam footage. I hope she burns.
http://youtu.be/JrxsCH_p1oc
I do too, and I don't want my skepticism of Perry's actions to sound like an endorsement of this hag.
Pressuring the DA to resign by withholding the funding of an agency which just so happens to be investigating your ass? That's a tad opportunistic.
Not if it is standard policy. Can you name any other situation where he continued to fund a unit run by a convicted criminal?
Can you name any other jurisdiction in the United States where the Chief Law Enforcement Officer is a convicted criminal?
He did not create the situation, she did.
Calling for her resignation is not the problem, but he had no power to remove her, which is why he didn't. The problem is what he said he would do if she didn't, and she didn't and he did.
Can you name any other Gov or President who will fund an agency run by a Convicted Criminal?
What he did is the norm.
I do too, and I don't want my skepticism of Perry's actions to sound like an endorsement of this hag.
It didn't come off that way at all. I don't get too wound up about a "minor" DUI type thing where no accident or injuries occur. Most people, like it or not, probably shouldn't have driven at one point or another in their life and that doesn't make them a criminal. However, when someone in her position, or anybody in the legal system, gets popped for it, I have no patience for them. That bitch has burned plenty of people at the stake for less and now it's her turn to pay the piper.
I watched the whole video and those guys were extremely patient, polite and treated her with kid gloves the entire time. They should be commended for their professionalism, dotting their i's and crossing their t's.
It didn't come off that way at all. I don't get too wound up about a "minor" DUI type thing where no accident or injuries occur. Most people, like it or not, probably shouldn't have driven at one point or another in their life and that doesn't make them a criminal. However, when someone in her position, or anybody in the legal system, gets popped for it, I have no patience for them. That bitch has burned plenty of people at the stake for less and now it's her turn to pay the piper.
I watched the whole video and those guys were extremely patient, polite and treated her with kid gloves the entire time. They should be commended for their professionalism, dotting their i's and crossing their t's.
Considering the amount of DWIs Texas DAs prosecute, especially in Travis county, getting a DWI and acted like that is pretty bad. I can tell you that anyone who works in DA office who is arrested, is normally fired on the spot. However, that assumes it is a competent, respectable office.
Considering the amount of DWIs Texas DAs prosecute, especially in Travis county, getting a DWI and acted like that is pretty bad. I can tell you that anyone who works in DA office who is arrested, is normally fired on the spot. However, that assumes it is a competent, respectable office.
In Texas the DA is elected, not appointed and that is why she was not fired. The law clearly allows for a drunk to be removed from office, but the county is pretty much 100% Democratic so it is not going to happen:
Sec. 87.012. OFFICERS SUBJECT TO REMOVAL. The district judge may, under this subchapter, remove from office:
(1) a district attorney;
Sec. 87.013. GENERAL GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL. (a) An officer may be removed for:
(1) incompetency;
(2) official misconduct; or
(3) intoxication on or off duty caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage.
(b) Intoxication is not a ground for removal if it appears at the trial that the intoxication was caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage on the direction and prescription of a licensed physician practicing in this state.
Yes you read that right. There is no provision to remove convicted criminals from office. Go Texas.
ETA:
Here is another Texas gem. Murder someone before the election and you cannot be removed even if convicted. You can continue to serve right up until the syringe goes in your arm and you are pronounced dead.
Sec. 87.001. NO REMOVAL FOR PRIOR ACTION. An officer may not be removed under this chapter for an act the officer committed before election to office.
Considering the amount of DWIs Texas DAs prosecute, especially in Travis county, getting a DWI and acted like that is pretty bad. I can tell you that anyone who works in DA office who is arrested, is normally fired on the spot. However, that assumes it is a competent, respectable office.
I had a brief foray into federal LE and it was made abundantly clear that a DUI would have nixed my background investigation, or resulted in termination if it happened after I was hired.
In Texas the DA is elected, not appointed and that is why she was not fired. The law clearly allows for a drunk to be removed from office, but the county is pretty much 100% Democratic so it is not going to happen:
Sec. 87.012. OFFICERS SUBJECT TO REMOVAL. The district judge may, under this subchapter, remove from office:
(1) a district attorney;
Sec. 87.013. GENERAL GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL. (a) An officer may be removed for:
(1) incompetency;
(2) official misconduct; or
(3) intoxication on or off duty caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage.
(b) Intoxication is not a ground for removal if it appears at the trial that the intoxication was caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage on the direction and prescription of a licensed physician practicing in this state.
Yes you read that right. There is no provision to remove convicted criminals from office. Go Texas.
ETA:
Here is another Texas gem. Murder someone before the election and you cannot be removed even if convicted. You can continue to serve right up until the syringe goes in your arm and you are pronounced dead.
Sec. 87.001. NO REMOVAL FOR PRIOR ACTION. An officer may not be removed under this chapter for an act the officer committed before election to office.
I am very aware of the law. My point was that this lady should have resigned if she had any shred of integrity or ethics. Sadly she is not the only corrupt DA in texas who refuses to step down.
montanadave
08-16-14, 13:53
Not if it is standard policy. Can you name any other situation where he continued to fund a unit run by a convicted criminal?
Can you name any other jurisdiction in the United States where the Chief Law Enforcement Officer is a convicted criminal?
He did not create the situation, she did.
I'm not defending the woman, for chrissakes, but get real. It's a DUI. There are thousands of elected officials and public employees in the United States that have been arrested, charged and convicted of DUI. And they stayed in office or kept their jobs.
Perry was within his rights to veto the funding. And it was just fine for him to call on this gal to resign. Where he ****ed up was tying one action to the other. Like Sensei commented earlier, Perry should have just kept his mouth shut. Read this piece from the Texas Tribune: It's Not the Crime, It's the Politics. (http://www.texastribune.org/2014/08/15/analysis-its-not-crime-its-politics/)
What does have a certain rotten fish smell to it and led me to use the term "opportunistic" is the investigation by the Public Integrity Unit of the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, one of Rick Perry's signature projects. Multiple officials at the CPRIT, appointed by Governor Perry, have been indicted on felony charges related to financial malfeasance (http://watchdogblog.dallasnews.com/2013/12/former-high-ranking-cprit-official-indicted-on-felony-charge.html/). Had Perry been able to coerce Lehmberg, the Travis County DA convicted of DUI and titular head of the Public Integrity Unit, Perry would have been able to appoint her successor and, quite possibly, quash the investigation of the CPRIT and saving Perry from some public embarrassment.
Wheels within wheels and lots of fingers in the pie.
It might be worth digging into what county DA's office took it into the grand jury, and why.
The Travis County DA's office, and she is the DA.
Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cWnubJ9CEw
[QUOTE=montanadave;1971443]I'm not defending the woman, for chrissakes, but get real. It's a DUI. There are thousands of elected officials and public employees in the United States that have been arrested, charged and convicted of DUI. And they stayed in office or kept their job. [\QUOTE]
But they are not the ones prosecuting people for DWI (DUI is for minors in tx)
I am very aware of the law. My point was that this lady should have resigned if she had any shred of integrity or ethics. Sadly she is not the only corrupt DA in texas who refuses to step down.
Well I did post it for the benefit of others who might wonder she was not fired.
As for others, I see we have Craig Watkins and the motor vehicle accident coming to light this week.
Well I did post it for the benefit of others who might wonder she was not fired.
As for others, I see we have Craig Watkins and the motor vehicle accident coming to light this week.
He absolutely has to be voted out of office this year, he has destroyed that office beyond belief, if Susan hawk wins almost the entire staff will have to be replaced
I
Where he ****ed up was tying one action to the other.
This is what he was charged with. He did neither:
§ 39.02. ABUSE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY. (a) A public servant commits an offense if, with intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) violates a law relating to the public servant's office or employment; or
(2) misuses government property, services, personnel, or any other thing of value belonging to the government that has come into the public servant's custody or possession by virtue of the public servant's office or employment.
Line item veto is within his power so (1) is out, no property, services, personnel, or any other thing of value was involved so 2 is out. Thus this charge is bogus.
§ 36.03. COERCION OF PUBLIC SERVANT OR VOTER. (a) A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he:
(1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant's known legal duty; or
(2) influences or attempts to influence a voter not to vote or to vote in a particular manner
Asking someone to resign is not attempting to influence them in a specific exercise power, so (1) is out. Did not influence a voter so (2) is out. Thus this charge is bogus.
These charges have no legs and will be tossed soon enough (most dems probably know it), he will be a lame duck in ~75 days and out office in January, so this will not have any effect on his office, but probably will make it impossible for him to effectively run for POTUS.
MountainRaven
08-16-14, 14:24
But they are not the ones prosecuting people for DWI (DUI is for minors in tx)
In Montana, the offense of DWI is called DUI. Just as many people know CWP as Concealed Weapons Permit and others Concealed Without a Permit.
This is what he was charged with. He did neither:
§ 39.02. ABUSE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY. (a) A public servant commits an offense if, with intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) violates a law relating to the public servant's office or employment; or
(2) misuses government property, services, personnel, or any other thing of value belonging to the government that has come into the public servant's custody or possession by virtue of the public servant's office or employment.
Line item veto is within his power so (1) is out, no property, services, personnel, or any other thing of value was involved so 2 is out. Thus this charge is bogus.
§ 36.03. COERCION OF PUBLIC SERVANT OR VOTER. (a) A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he:
(1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant's known legal duty; or
(2) influences or attempts to influence a voter not to vote or to vote in a particular manner
Asking someone to resign is not attempting to influence them in a specific exercise power, so (1) is out. Did not influence a voter so (2) is out. Thus this charge is bogus.
These charges have no legs and will be tossed soon enough (most dems probably know it), he will be a lame duck in ~75 days and out office in January, so this will not have any effect on his office, but probably will make it impossible for him to effectively run for POTUS.
I beg to differ. Demanding someone who is leading the investigation into your pet project or you'll cut their funding fits perfectly under 'influencing a public servant to violate the public servant's known legal duty.'
montanadave
08-16-14, 14:27
This is what he was charged with. He did neither:
That certainly seems open to discussion.
Here's what Perry said after he vetoed the funding for the Public Integrity Unit: "Despite the otherwise good work the Public Integrity Unit's employees, I cannot in good conscience support continued State funding for an office with statewide jurisdiction at a time when the person charged with ultimate responsibility of that unit has lost the public's confidence."
Many would interpret that as directly tying the decision to defund the agency with the refusal of Lehmberg to resign. And the fact that Perry had said what he was going to do if she didn't resign before he vetoed the funding only further supports the quid-pro-quo nature of these events.
When David Axelrod and ThinkProgress think the indictment of probably the most prominent Republican governor is perhaps a bit sketchy, well...
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/08/15/3472049/what-you-need-to-know-about-texas-governor-rick-perry-being-indicted/
In Montana, the offense of DWI is called DUI. Just as many people know CWP as Concealed Weapons Permit and others Concealed Without a Permit.
I beg to differ. Demanding someone who is leading the investigation into your pet project or you'll cut their funding fits perfectly under 'influencing a public servant to violate the public servant's known legal duty.'
I feel like that should have been included in the indictment. There is also a bit of a stretch concerning the first count. It will be interesting to see how far it goes.
Edit, the known legal duty has to specific as well. If the threat was to resign not to stop an investigation, I think the second count also is facially insufficient.
In Texas the DA is elected, not appointed and that is why she was not fired. The law clearly allows for a drunk to be removed from office, but the county is pretty much 100% Democratic so it is not going to happen:
WTF?! Thanks for posting this, I had no idea.
I beg to differ. Demanding someone who is leading the investigation into your pet project or you'll cut their funding fits perfectly under 'influencing a public servant to violate the public servant's known legal duty.'
You missed where it said "person". He did not do this as a person, he did it as Governor. A "person" like me has no veto power.
You left out the part where it said "in a specific exercise of his official power". There were no specifics.
There is a hundred+ years of case law on this.
The public servants known legal duty is not being violated. She is still head of the unit and can still investigate all she wants, she just will not be re-imbursed by the state. The county can pay for it if they want. She still has the same legal authority. Any other LEO in Texas or FBI can also investigate.
Also, the fact he did this in the public eye and nobody complained at the time, filed an lawsuit, etc., shows he had no criminal intent another requirement.
This is all silliness. What next, when a Gov demands money to fight drug/human trafficking at the border he gets indicted for trying to influence?
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-16-14, 15:18
In Texas the DA is elected, not appointed and that is why she was not fired. The law clearly allows for a drunk to be removed from office, but the county is pretty much 100% Democratic so it is not going to happen:
Sec. 87.012. OFFICERS SUBJECT TO REMOVAL. The district judge may, under this subchapter, remove from office:
(1) a district attorney;
Sec. 87.013. GENERAL GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL. (a) An officer may be removed for:
(1) incompetency;
(2) official misconduct; or
(3) intoxication on or off duty caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage.
(b) Intoxication is not a ground for removal if it appears at the trial that the intoxication was caused by drinking an alcoholic beverage on the direction and prescription of a licensed physician practicing in this state.
Yes you read that right. There is no provision to remove convicted criminals from office. Go Texas.
ETA:
Here is another Texas gem. Murder someone before the election and you cannot be removed even if convicted. You can continue to serve right up until the syringe goes in your arm and you are pronounced dead.
Sec. 87.001. NO REMOVAL FOR PRIOR ACTION. An officer may not be removed under this chapter for an act the officer committed before election to office.
How are all politicians not guilty of either of these everyday?
How are public service unions and their supported politicians not guilty of this by their very existence?
All I can say is that election years suck ass.
How are public service unions and their supported politicians not guilty of this by their very existence?
Exactly or anyone who contacts their legislators.
[(1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty]
I call up my Rep and tell him he will lose my vote and campaign contributions this November if he votes for gun control, and suddenly I am in violation of coercion. I don't think so. Our entire system is based on attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty! Obviously there is more to it than what is written or we would all be in jail.
.46caliber
08-16-14, 16:04
If Perry was smart, he would have left her in office, cut the funding without a personal ultimatum, and had a field day with that mug shot and video in November.
Bingo. If he would have kept his mouth shut and vetoed the funding bill, it looks like she would have cooked her own goose sooner or later.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
Bingo. If he would have kept his mouth shut and vetoed the funding bill, it looks like she would have cooked her own goose sooner or later.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
Nope. She pled guilty, refused to step down, and would gladly be re elected by Austin voters...
Nope. She pled guilty, refused to step down, and would gladly be re elected by Austin voters...
Yep
http://www.co.travis.tx.us/district_attorney/
Pressuring the DA to resign by withholding the funding of an agency which just so happens to be investigating your ass? That's a tad opportunistic.
What you have is a liberal enclave DA who's been given the power to investigate and indict statewide, who has a reputation for going after Republicans but not Democrats. She's caught acting an a manner that's entirely inconsistent with commanding a sizable "public integrity" unit. Rather than accepting responsibility and resigning, she's refusing.
Now Rick Perry is supposed to approve a large budget for her to continue her documented behavior? Why would he do that? Why would he give her money to continue her sham of a job after she's been convicted of an impeachable offense? Further, after doing the right thing and defunding this woman, liberal Travis Co. comes to her aide and indicts him for doing his job? Yep, there's an opportunistic action here, but it's not Perry's! So I would ultimately ask, what is the season and bag limit on Republican officials in Travis Co.?
FWIW, I can't stand Perry and I desperately pray he doesn't run for POTUS again. This however is beyond the pale. :mad:
Cincinnatus
08-16-14, 16:39
What you have is a liberal enclave DA who's been given the power to investigate and indict statewide, who has a reputation for going after Republicans but not Democrats. She's caught acting an a manner that's entirely inconsistent with commanding a sizable "public integrity" unit. Rather than accepting responsibility and resigning, she's refusing.
Now Rick Perry is supposed to approve a large budget for her to continue her documented behavior? Why would he do that? Why would he give her money to continue her sham of a job after she's been convicted of an impeachable offense? Further, after doing the right thing and defunding this woman, liberal Travis Co. comes to her aide and indicts him for doing his job? Yep, there's an opportunistic action here, but it's not Perry's! So I would ultimately ask, what is the season and bag limit on Republican officials in Travis Co.?
FWIW, I can't stand Perry and I desperately pray he doesn't run for POTUS again. This however is beyond the pale. :mad:
This is exactly correct. Her office is also the one that manufactured an indictment to get Tom DeLay, too, by Grand Jury shopping. It is PURELY a political Democratic hack office she runs and it should be legally eradicated.
.46caliber
08-16-14, 16:47
Sad to see that shit in TX.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
I'm not defending the woman, for chrissakes, but get real. It's a DUI. There are thousands of elected officials and public employees in the United States that have been arrested, charged and convicted of DUI. And they stayed in office or kept their jobs.
It completely saddens me that anyone would be accepting of any DUI for even a single politician. The fact that their are legions of them only makes it worse. Of course I think marijuana use should also preclude elected office.
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-16-14, 18:02
Bingo. If he would have kept his mouth shut and vetoed the funding bill, it looks like she would have cooked her own goose sooner or later.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
The reality is that they would have gone after him for the veto either way. With out a reason, it actually seems even more conspiratorial because then he is just shutting down the group going after his buddies. Que images of back room deals and all kind of conspiracies.
If I were the Texas GOP, I would start grand juries all over the state indicting dems for anything and everything . Scorched earth and make it stink so high that the whole process has to be changed.
Why didn't they they try to impeach him thru regular constitutional process? This is for official conduct, not something unrelated to his job.
montanadave
08-16-14, 18:27
It completely saddens me that anyone would be accepting of any DUI for even a single politician. The fact that their are legions of them only makes it worse. Of course I think marijuana use should also preclude elected office.
Let me be very clear. I do not condone driving while impaired nor do I take it lightly. But I'd be lying through my teeth if I said I'd never driven drunk. I was damn lucky. I never killed anyone and I never got a DUI. In fact, I did most of my drunk driving back in the day when cops followed you home or made you park it and gave you a ride. Not saying it was the right thing to do. It's just how it was.
That said, people make mistakes and do stupid shit. They should be held accountable and face the consequences. But I don't think a DUI on a person's record should prohibit them from holding public office. The voters can and will decide whether a person is fit to serve.
A repeat offender or felony conviction is a different kettle of fish.
Let me be very clear. I do not condone driving while impaired nor do I take it lightly. But I'd be lying through my teeth if I said I'd never driven drunk. I was damn lucky. I never killed anyone and I never got a DUI. In fact, I did most of my drunk driving back in the day when cops followed you home or made you park it and gave you a ride. Not saying it was the right thing to do. It's just how it was.
That said, people make mistakes and do stupid shit. They should be held accountable and face the consequences. But I don't think a DUI on a person's record should prohibit them from holding public office. The voters can and will decide whether a person is fit to serve.
A repeat offender or felony conviction is a different kettle of fish.
People do make mistakes and do stupid things, I have no problem with that. And while it shouldn't keep you from being hired by Wal Mart, it absolutely should prevent you from holding significant political office, becoming a judge or anything along those lines. I think it is a "minimum standard" of demonstrated responsibility.
Let me be very clear. I do not condone driving while impaired nor do I take it lightly. But I'd be lying through my teeth if I said I'd never driven drunk. I was damn lucky. I never killed anyone and I never got a DUI. In fact, I did most of my drunk driving back in the day when cops followed you home or made you park it and gave you a ride. Not saying it was the right thing to do. It's just how it was.
That said, people make mistakes and do stupid shit. They should be held accountable and face the consequences. But I don't think a DUI on a person's record should prohibit them from holding public office. The voters can and will decide whether a person is fit to serve.
A repeat offender or felony conviction is a different kettle of fish.
All good points. But she wasn't a bit tipsy, she was more than 3 times the limit. And she was violent and.combative with the arresting officers.
That's the part where she should become instantly undesirable for any public office.
montanadave
08-16-14, 20:31
All good points. But she wasn't a bit tipsy, she was more than 3 times the limit. And she was violent and.combative with the arresting officers.
That's the part where she should become instantly undesirable for any public office.
I won't argue with that. But such distinctions should be left to the discretion of the voting public.
But she wasn't a bit tipsy, she was more than 3 times the limit.
I still don't understand why you guys pulled me over?
We didn't, you were parked in a church parking lot.
Uhhh... :suicide:
The Travis County DA's office, and she is the DA.
Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cWnubJ9CEw
Actually, a special prosecutor was commissioned to bring the findings before the grand jury. I believe that it was the DA's office from San Antonio that was appointed to lead the effort. The citizens who comprised the grand jury came from Travis County.
Also, the fact he did this in the public eye and nobody complained at the time, filed an lawsuit, etc., shows he had no criminal intent another requirement.
This is all silliness. What next, when a Gov demands money to fight drug/human trafficking at the border he gets indicted for trying to influence?
I believe there was indeed a complaint file by Texans for Public Justice which is a group of liberal hacks that exists for the sole purpose of generating these types indictments against people like Perry and DeLay.
In the end, Perry will likely prevail against the charges. However, I think that the damage has been done to his presidential aspirations this season. There is no way that this get adjudicated before the GOP primaries and members of his own party will be more than happy to use it against him. Fortunately, I didn't have him making it past the first round of debates in my November Madness Brackets ;).
MorphCross
08-16-14, 21:53
Fortunately, I didn't have him making it past the first round of debates in my November Madness Brackets ;).
Crud I just busted a rib imagining betting sports style on national elections!:lol:
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-16-14, 21:59
Actually, a special prosecutor was commissioned to bring the findings before the grand jury. I believe that it was the DA's office from San Antonio that was appointed to lead the effort. The citizens who comprised the grand jury came from Travis County.
I believe there was indeed a complaint file by Texans for Public Justice which is a group of liberal hacks that exists for the sole purpose of generating these types indictments against people like Perry and DeLay.
In the end, Perry will likely prevail against the charges. However, I think that the damage has been done to his presidential aspirations this season. There is no way that this get adjudicated before the GOP primaries and members of his own party will be more than happy to use it against him. Fortunately, I didn't have him making it past the first round of debates in my November Madness Brackets ;).
A wounded bear is the most dangerous kind... He'll have nothing to loose and it I were him I'd wear this indictment like a badge and an example of the broken political system.
But I don't think a DUI on a person's record should prohibit them from holding public office. The voters can and will decide whether a person is fit to serve.
Your opinion and I respect it.
But let's be clear - not all public servants are the same. She was not mayor, dog catcher or tax collector. She was Chief Law Enforcement Officer for Travis County, which includes the capital and is the most powerful in the state. She held double duty as director of Public Integrity Unit. She took and oath to uphold the law and then blatantly violated it - WHILE IN OFFICE, not 20 years ago when a sorority sister. She had to take leave from her job to serve her jail time. She should be held to a higher standard, not a lower standard.
... She should be held to a higher standard, not a lower standard.
Seems to only apply to (R)'s and not (D)'s from what I've seen.
Seems to only apply to (R)'s and not (D)'s from what I've seen.
Such is the heavy burden of being the party of morals and traditional Judeo-Christian values.
Averageman
08-17-14, 09:12
Your opinion and I respect it.
But let's be clear - not all public servants are the same. She was not mayor, dog catcher or tax collector. She was Chief Law Enforcement Officer for Travis County, which includes the capital and is the most powerful in the state. She held double duty as director of Public Integrity Unit. She took and oath to uphold the law and then blatantly violated it - WHILE IN OFFICE, not 20 years ago when a sorority sister. She had to take leave from her job to serve her jail time. She should be held to a higher standard, not a lower standard.
I remember when being given permission to own a automobile while in the military overseas and some guidance and advice.
If you get a DUI, we will bust you in rank and put you out of the Army so fast your head will spin. No more "Career", no "Second Chance" and for damn sure no "Sympathy" from anyone here. You do it, you own it.
I do not see why this doesn't apply here.
Seems to only apply to (R)'s and not (D)'s from what I've seen.
This is what constantly bothers me about elected democratic officials, they simply believe rules do not apply to them, and they are above the law.
Actually, a special prosecutor was commissioned to bring the findings before the grand jury. I believe that it was the DA's office from San Antonio that was appointed to lead the effort. The citizens who comprised the grand jury came from Travis County.
Color me shocked! I didn't know that. And Susan D. Reed, the Bexar County DA, is a Republican, at least according to Wiki.
Edited to add: Just heard on the news that the judge presiding over the GJ is also a Republican.
I remember when being given permission to own a automobile while in the military overseas and some guidance and advice.
If you get a DUI, we will bust you in rank and put you out of the Army so fast your head will spin. No more "Career", no "Second Chance" and for damn sure no "Sympathy" from anyone here. You do it, you own it.
I do not see why this doesn't apply here.
This is often the test in the private sector as well, if you are recognized as a professional or licensed.. Even if you screw up by accident or misunderstanding the final outcome results from "You should have know" "You had the responsibility to know and do right"
I don't know how politicians continue to get way with what they do. A friend of mine used to joke that the local City Hall was the halfway house to prison.... and it wasn't far from true. I don;t think we can say it's all biased against the Right though. I mean Ray Nagan just got a new home.
This is often the test in the private sector as well, if you are recognized as a professional or licensed.. Even if you screw up by accident or misunderstanding the final outcome results from "You should have know" "You had the responsibility to know and do right"
I don't know how politicians continue to get way with what they do. A friend of mine used to joke that the local City Hall was the halfway house to prison.... and it wasn't far from true. I don;t think we can say it's all biased against the Right though. I mean Ray Nagan just got a new home.
It probably has something to do with the fact that our electorate only cares that their politicians vote in their narrow interests. Morals and standards are meaningless if a politician promises to use their power to give people free shit.
I won't argue with that. But such distinctions should be left to the discretion of the voting public.
They did. They elected representatives who passed a law against her maintaining her position after her conviction. Unfortunately, crony politics is allowing her to circumvent that law through inaction and failure to perform the duties of their offices. Simply put, the rules don't apply to them. THAT, is BS. :nono:
Our local Police CHIEF get drunk in another town, tried to get in his GOVERNMENT car and drive, was taken out and fought with the other department officers both at scene and at jail...and was...are you ready....DEMOTED. I even went to the town hall meeting and spoke to the city commission about it....
I AM NOT BASHING LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. However, given that they carry arrest powers, I expect them to maintain a higher standard than the citizens they swore to protect. Just like the standards I was expected to uphold as an Army Officer...You don't get second chances for that kind of stupid shit.
This woman no longer holds the public trust and therefore cannot do the job that she was entrusted with. She should have been GONE the NEXT DAY.
charming woman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxX-qhJTfkI
Probably hot in the sack.
Such is the heavy burden of being the party of morals and traditional Judeo-Christian values.
I don't think there is a lot of morals or values in either party. People get involved in politics for money and power. If espousing certain "values" gains them more money or power, they will.
I don't think there is a lot of morals or values in either party. People get involved in politics for money and power. If espousing certain "values" gains them more money or power, they will.
Partly, most of them couldn't keep a job in a Company where you were required to have a high level of integrity and actually do something productive. Politics now attracts those who can do precious little other than running their mouths.
I don't think there is a lot of morals or values in either party. People get involved in politics for money and power. If espousing certain "values" gains them more money or power, they will.
I was referring to the accepted notion that the GOP is often thought of as the party of Judeo-Chrisitin values. I was not commenting on whether that reputation is accurate. Sorry if I was not clear in my original post.
Probably hot in the sack.
Sir:
Might I suggest that you watch the video in the Hot vs. Crazy Matrix thread. Afterwards, you should come up with something very much in the "danger zone" - remember, we stay away from the danger zone. In fact, you had best solicit a moderator such as SeriousStudent or Sam to review your point allotments for Ms. Lehmberg before completing this assignment; beginners are often far too generous in awarding hot points and will often minimize the crazy.
I was referring to the accepted notion that the GOP is often thought of as the party of Judeo-Chrisitin values. I was not commenting on whether that reputation is accurate. Sorry if I was not clear in my original post.
Ok, now I'm tracking along.
This is worth a read: http://patterico.com/2014/08/16/jonathan-chait-is-correct-this-indictment-of-rick-perry-is-unbelievably-ridiculous-with-bonus-detailed-legal-analysis/
Also, which the above article references, Eugene Volokh's piece: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/08/16/is-the-indictment-of-texas-gov-rick-perry-inconsistent-with-a-texas-court-of-appeals-precedent-as-to-the-coercion-count/
In State v. Hanson (Tex. Ct. App. 1994), the court held that "coercion of a lawful act by a threat of lawful action is protected free expression." The state alleged that [County Judge Regina Hanson] intentionally and knowingly threatened to terminate the county’s funding of the salaries of a deputy district clerk and an assistant district attorney in an attempt to coerce the district judge into firing the county auditor and the county attorney into revoking a misdemeanant’s probation.
Averageman
08-18-14, 06:53
http://conservativehideout.com/2014/08/17/dui-d-a-rosemary-lehmberg-bought-23-gallons-of-vodka-in-15-months-at-one-store/
Rosemary Lehmberg says she doesn’t have a drinking problem. Her credit card receipts tell a different story.
"When going through filings he found receipts from seven different Twin Liquors stores. They show Lehmberg’s credit card was used to buy more than $3,000 in vodka. The 72 bottles purchased Total more than 23 gallons.
“If somebody is buying 23 gallons of vodka within 15 months’ time, is caught with it, three times the legal limit all those things, being that coherent, all suggest that Ms. Lehmberg has probably had some sort of problem for a long time,” O’Brien charged."
I guess that's why they say "Sober as a Judge" and not "Sober as a DA"
In State v. Hanson (Tex. Ct. App. 1994), the court held that "coercion of a lawful act by a threat of lawful action is protected free expression." The state alleged that [County Judge Regina Hanson] intentionally and knowingly threatened to terminate the county’s funding of the salaries of a deputy district clerk and an assistant district attorney in an attempt to coerce the district judge into firing the county auditor and the county attorney into revoking a misdemeanant’s probation.
Thanks this is what I was referring to in post 57. I think there are more cases.
brickboy240
08-18-14, 10:03
Should a woman that gets a DWI and jail time being 3 times the legally drunk limit, BE the had of the "State Integrity Unit?"
...I don't think so.
-brickboy240
AUSTIN, Texas — A warrant won't be issued for the arrest of Gov. Rick Perry following his indictment on two felony charges of abuse of power.
Linda Estrada, a grand Jury clerk in Travis County, said Monday that the judge overseeing the case decided against issuing an arrest warrant.
http://www.statesman.com/ap/ap/political/official-no-arrest-warrant-to-be-issued-for-perry/ng4sc/
Should a woman that gets a DWI and jail time being 3 times the legally drunk limit, BE the had of the "State Integrity Unit?"
...I don't think so.
-brickboy240
..... and that is why he vetoed the spending bill.
I actually think this will backfire against the Democrats here, even with the base.
I doubt most 1st time 3x limit DUI convictions only result in 45 days of jail time. Those low information voters and others) who don't get the same treatment will be pissed.
..... and that is why he vetoed the spending bill.
I actually think this will backfire against the Democrats here, even with the base.
I doubt most 1st time 3x limit DUI convictions only result in 45 days of jail time. Those low information voters and others) who don't get the same treatment will be pissed.
In my area they usually get time served (2 days in jail with credit for the 2 days they spent in jail) I see that every day in my courtroom. It has to be your 3rd or more DUI in a set time frame for you to get jail time. Or you have to do some serious property damage (think drive into a building) to get time on a first DUI.
It may be a little different in Texas but I doubt it. DUI is a pretty common offense.
In my area they usually get time served (2 days in jail with credit for the 2 days they spent in jail) I see that every day in my courtroom. It has to be your 3rd or more DUI in a set time frame for you to get jail time. Or you have to do some serious property damage (think drive into a building) to get time on a first DUI.
It may be a little different in Texas but I doubt it. DUI is a pretty common offense.
Depending on the circumstances a jail rec from the da in tx will range from a minimum of 10 days to the maximum 180 for 1st time offense. The minimum is actually not 10, you just aren't going to get less than that.
There is also becoming a statewide resistance to offering deferred adjudication on DWI as well.
Most lawyers will advise their clients to avoid the probation, as the terms are usually pretty heavy, and go for the jail, especially if you can serve the time on the weekends.
45 days sounds right for the pain she was.
Thanks for the info Jmoney. I'm surprised they keep people for 10 days on a DUI. I would think the bigger city jails would want these people out of there.
Thanks for the info Jmoney. I'm surprised they keep people for 10 days on a DUI. I would think the bigger city jails would want these people out of there.
That don't keep you if you bond out. 90% bond out. If you are too poor, what happens next depends on if you are paired with a public defender or assigned attorney. Either way, you are not getting out of jail until your case is adjudicated. If you have been sitting in jail for 45-60 days, then yeah it's time served.
This stuff can vary wildly by location, but the days of DWI being a minor crime, are far from over.
Expect about 10k in costs and fees, fines etc....
SeriousStudent
08-18-14, 21:24
Sir:
Might I suggest that you watch the video in the Hot vs. Crazy Matrix thread. Afterwards, you should come up with something very much in the "danger zone" - remember, we stay away from the danger zone. In fact, you had best solicit a moderator such as SeriousStudent or Sam to review your point allotments for Ms. Lehmberg before completing this assignment; beginners are often far too generous in awarding hot points and will often minimize the crazy.
Nuh-uh! Don't be dragging me into the Psycho Dating Game thing. Just sign the paperwork for that 72-hour involuntary hold, and help us all out. :cool:
That don't keep you if you bond out. 90% bond out. If you are too poor, what happens next depends on if you are paired with a public defender or assigned attorney. Either way, you are not getting out of jail until your case is adjudicated. If you have been sitting in jail for 45-60 days, then yeah it's time served.
This stuff can vary wildly by location, but the days of DWI being a minor crime, are far from over.
Expect about 10k in costs and fees, fines etc....
Just to clarify, I work the first appearance courtroom in Duval county. Everybody arrested from 9a.m. today until 9a.m. tomorrow will come to my courtroom. Anybody charged with a misdemeanor will have a chance to plead out to the changes for the most part. First time DUI's have standard conditions for sentencing there is no minimum amount of jail time but there is a maximum(I think it is 60 days but not 100% sure as I've never seen anyone get that) they do get 6 months probation and several thousand dollars in fines( I think the minimum is $2500 and not sure about the max) and 6 months license suspension.
Now they can plead not guilty and bond out but most of them usually take the plea deal.
Nuh-uh! Don't be dragging me into the Psycho Dating Game thing. Just sign the paperwork for that 72-hour involuntary hold, and help us all out. :cool:
They have some wonderful narcotics in those facilities. I spent some time in one once but we're better now...
Just to clarify, I work the first appearance courtroom in Duval county. Everybody arrested from 9a.m. today until 9a.m. tomorrow will come to my courtroom. Anybody charged with a misdemeanor will have a chance to plead out to the changes for the most part. First time DUI's have standard conditions for sentencing there is no minimum amount of jail time but there is a maximum(I think it is 60 days but not 100% sure as I've never seen anyone get that) they do get 6 months probation and several thousand dollars in fines( I think the minimum is $2500 and not sure about the max) and 6 months license suspension.
Now they can plead not guilty and bond out but most of them usually take the plea deal.
In tx the max for 1st time is 180 days, 2k for fine. There is only a minimum jail sentence is an open container is found in the car. The judge must have his own little guideline because that is certainly not statutory.
Edit: saw you are in Florida, I have 0 idea how stuff works there.
There is a duval county here as well my bad
SeriousStudent
08-18-14, 22:12
They have some wonderful narcotics in those facilities. I spent some time in one once but we're better now...
A long time ago, on an ambulance far, far away.....
I took the heavy-gauge aluminum foil that we carried, and explained how the caller needed to put the shiny side facing the outside of the apartment windows, to reflect the rays. I was not referring to rays of sunshine, either.
"C'mon, Larry, think about it. The shiny side is more reflective, that's why you do it that way. You keep this foil, we got more on the bus. Now let's go watch you take your meds."
montanadave
08-19-14, 07:57
The editorial staff of the New York Times, no fans of Governor Perry (as evidenced by their remarks), goes on record stating the recent indictment of Perry is "the product of an overzealous prosecution."
Excerpt from the NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/opinion/is-gov-perrys-bad-judgment-really-a-crime.html?ref=opinion&_r=0):
Gov. Rick Perry of Texas is one of the least thoughtful and most damaging state leaders in America, having done great harm to immigrants, abortion clinics and people without health insurance during his 14 years in office. But bad political judgment is not necessarily a felony, and the indictment handed up against him on Friday — given the facts so far — appears to be the product of an overzealous prosecution.
Perry to turn himself in at 5 p.m. Tuesday
http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/perry-may-turn-himself-in-this-afternoon/ng5Ys/
I don't care for Perry, but I don't see this going very far. I don't see how he doesn't have the power to say "you aren't going to get State funding".
Perry to turn himself in at 5 p.m. Tuesday
http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/perry-may-turn-himself-in-this-afternoon/ng5Ys/
I'll give him credit. He's getting out in front of this and taking it head on it seems. Instead of dodging and hiding.
Which he should, it's not doing anything else but firing up the base.
brickboy240
08-19-14, 17:09
Most people I know around here are very supportive of Perry denying funding for that unit...because of the woman heading it up.
She is a vile human being and this was NOT her first bout of public drunkenness and bad behavior.
If anything...this indictment has helped Perry. He is seen here as trying to stop a corrupt department head.
-brickboy240
I'll give him credit. He's getting out in front of this and taking it head on it seems. Instead of dodging and hiding.
The current occupant in the WH could take a lesson from Perry.
Sir:
Might I suggest that you watch the video in the Hot vs. Crazy Matrix thread. Afterwards, you should come up with something very much in the "danger zone" - remember, we stay away from the danger zone. In fact, you had best solicit a moderator such as SeriousStudent or Sam to review your point allotments for Ms. Lehmberg before completing this assignment; beginners are often far too generous in awarding hot points and will often minimize the crazy.I enjoyed the Hot vs. crazy Matrix video . It was so enlightening yet so true. But like riding a horse the spirited ones are sooooooooo much fun to ride. A horse that likes to buck is the most entertaining to ride so you fall off once in a while.Just so the bucking is good.
Gov. Perry will be having his CHL suspended until this crap is settled.
Kind of want to buy one just because.
http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/171201-pac-rick-perrys-mugshot-political-comedic-genius/
SilverBullet432
08-26-14, 19:23
in real news: Perry was in town at a groundbreaking ceremony today. Supporting our GREAT economy 100%!!!
http://cbs7.com/news/article_e2ec6ab4-2d67-11e4-b099-0017a43b2370.html?mode=jqm
thopkins22
08-26-14, 19:56
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CN/htm/CN.4.htm#4.14
I think Perry is a slime bucket(albeit in my experience extremely personable and fun...just like WJC,) and I'm ready to see him leave. But he has a fair amount of latitude to veto whatever he wants, for whatever reason he wants. As was stated in an article I read somewhere, can a Republican legislature pass a law making it illegal to veto abortion restrictions? Or a Democratic legislature pass a law making it illegal to veto gun control? No, it's another example of the kinds of things that happen when two politicians butt heads who both have been there long enough to think they're untouchable...but it's not illegal.
ramairthree
08-26-14, 21:32
In tx the max for 1st time is 180 days, 2k for fine. There is only a minimum jail sentence is an open container is found in the car. The judge must have his own little guideline because that is certainly not statutory.
Edit: saw you are in Florida, I have 0 idea how stuff works there.
There is a duval county here as well my bad
There is a minimum jail sentence for an open container in a car?
WTF?
Someone can have a legal BAC, driving fine, drinking one or two beers on a drive out to the lake or whatever but since they have an open container it is a big deal?
Is it like this in other states?
Someone can have a legal BAC, driving fine, drinking one or two beers on a drive out to the lake or whatever but since they have an open container it is a big deal?
Is it like this in other states?
I thought that was the norm.
thopkins22
08-26-14, 22:06
I thought that was the norm.
Open containers only become a big deal if you're also guilty of DWI. In and of itself, a roadie is only a ticket.
Open containers only become a big deal if you're also guilty of DWI. In and of itself, a roadie is only a ticket.
Gotcha. I've lived in Vegas so long, the land of roadies, and never thought too much about it.
ramairthree
08-26-14, 23:18
I thought that was the norm.
Christ, I just googled it and it looks like open container for a driver is as big a deal as a DUI.
How the hell can I sit down, drink three beers, drive home legal, but if have no beers , then
you have a single beer during the drive it is some huge blot on your record and a big legal deal?
God forbid I was driving a vintage Land Rover, open top with a dog not strapped down with no collar, drinking a beer, uttered the N word when some high gangster wannabe in an uninsured POS almost wrecks me, with an NRA bumper sticker, and a box of homeschooling books on the seat and got pulled over.
Is there no otherwise free, legal thought, action, or activity that cannot have huge criminal consequences now and has been regulated to serious illegal activities?
SeriousStudent
08-26-14, 23:46
Texas has had open container laws for a long time, about 30+ years.
Meanwhile, let's keep the thread focused on the original topic. If somebody wants to start a thread about the wacky laws we have down here, feel free to start another thread.
Averageman
08-27-14, 06:23
Texas has had open container laws for a long time, about 30+ years.
Meanwhile, let's keep the thread focused on the original topic. If somebody wants to start a thread about the wacky laws we have down here, feel free to start another thread.
I dont think it's been 30+ years more like the early 90's. I don't know how I feel about it really, I think it should be in a case by case basis there is a big difference between what she did at 3X the normal limit with an open bottle of vodka and someone transporting a open bottle of 20 year old scotch with 0 blood alcohol.
You're either drunk or you're not, thats the intent, to get drunks off of the road. All the rest is a way to feed fines and taxes in to the system and keep Attorneys working.
I'm a lot less worried about the Billy Bob's having a cold beer on the drive home than a Milf with a cell phone in her ear as she screams at the kids in the back seat, all while she eats a burger and merges in to my lane.
All that being said, if you're in Law Enforcement and especially if your digging in to ethics, you sure don't need to be doing any of the above. These folks have been given a job that holds them to a higher standard, that didn't happen in this case.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.