Front Page  »  

CCN reporter arrested on DUI charge for .06 blood alcohol level

August 21, 2013
Josh Walsh

Josh Walsh

By JOSH FRIEDMAN and DANIEL BLACKBURN

CalCoastNews reporter and co-founder Karen Velie was taken into custody on Aug. 13 after a San Luis Obispo police officer arrested her on suspicion of driving under the influence. Officer Josh Walsh placed Velie under arrest after her blood alcohol test showed a .06. California’s drunk driving laws require an arrest if a driver has a .08 alcohol level.

The arrest comes during CalCoastNews investigations into activities at CAPSLO, the county’s nonprofit that serves homeless persons as well as wrongdoing over the handling of hazardous wastes.

Walsh said at the time of the arrest that he would have arrested her even if she had a blood alcohol level of as little as .01, Velie said. California law prohibits driving while intoxicated no matter what the blood alcohol level.

At the time of the arrest, Velie had just finished teaching a bridge class at a San Luis Obispo restaurant.

Twenty-four people attended the class, several of whom saw Velie minutes before the traffic stop. After the arrest, Velie spoke to the majority of the class members, all of whom said she was clearly not intoxicated.

“I only saw her have one glass of wine and she looked fine,” said San Luis Obispo attorney Stew Jenkins. “She did not appear to be under the influence at all.”

Medical doctor Gary Foresman agreed.

“I witnessed her. She was coherent,” Foresman said. “She was teaching bridge to myself and my wife and she was unequivocally not drunk when I left that night.”

Foresman left the restaurant shortly before Velie did.

Former San Luis Obispo police officer Mike Brennler said the arrest of Velie was out of the ordinary.

“In my 33-year law enforcement career, the standard procedure was to release someone who submitted to a breath test that demonstrated they were under the state limit,” Brennler said.

“Bookings in such misdemeanor cases were very rare.”

The arrest and its aftermath appeared to be directly connected to the news agency’s recent reporting on county homeless issues. It came following a months-long series of articles by CalCoastNews detailing activities of Dee Torres, CAPSLO homeless services director. Torres is the fiancé of County Supervisor Adam Hill.

Since the arrest, CalCoastNews opponents have used the alleged DUI as the focal point of a smear campaign targeting CalCoastNews and its advertisers.

Hill sent text messages to CalCoastNews advertisers Tuesday morning informing them of Velie’s arrest.

The text message and email campaign targeting advertisers followed directly in the wake of CalCoastNews reporting on a slander suit filed by Torres against Brennler, who is represented by Jenkins.

CalCoastNews reported on Aug. 19 that Brennler had challenged a sworn statement that Torres filed in her suit. Torres was not truthful in her statement, Brennler said. A hearing on a motion to dismiss the suit is scheduled for Thursday morning.

CalCoastNews also recently published text messages sent by Hill to a key witness in the case, in which the supervisor attempted to get the witness to change his story. That story, which appeared on Aug. 16 showed exchanges between Hill and Ralph Almirol, a former boyfriend of Torres. In the texts, Hill tried to get Almirol to withdraw his statement that he and Torres used gift cards that were intended for the homeless for themselves.


Loading...
Subjects:             
Related:


418 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

There’s little or no information in this article, or from people commenting, or from Velie herself as to how she was driving immediately before being stopped. Was she making mistakes, driving erratically, or breaking any traffic laws? These issues are crucial in deciding whether she may have been “under the influence’ or simply whether she should have been pulled over.


If she did break any traffic laws while driving and subsequently showed herself to have a blood alcohol lievel of .06, it doesn’t seem outrageous that she would be detained and prevented from driving that evening. What if the officer let her go? Would it have been prudent for him to know she was driving erratically and had been drinking and then let her go on driving?


So, I think it would be wise for people to get more information before drawing such strong conclusions. I say this while fully acknowledging that there are also plenty of reasons to be suspicious of the officers actions. But a few more facts would go a long way in helping uncover the truth and/or the officer’s duty to take the action he did.


0

So, I’m quite curious: If the police in-car video comes out and shows that things went down EXACTLY as Officer Walsh described them, do all of you conspiracy theorists recant?


0

Yes, I will recant but keep in mind that Velie has a clear and well known speech impediment.


0

I’ve talked to her on the phone a couple of times and detected no impediments, maybe it was her

Days of no drink?


0

If her speech impediment is not discernible when heard over audio transmission, it probably is not discernible over a phone, which also works by audio transmission.


0

I’m much more concerned with how safely she was operating her vehicle and how she performed on the field sobriety tests.


0

An altered speech pattern is a sign for being impaired. I believe that is why Cindy brought up the issue.


0

murphthesurf says: “So, I’m quite curious: If the police in-car video comes out and shows that things went down EXACTLY as Officer Walsh described them, do all of you conspiracy theorists recant?”


And what about you if all charges are dropped? Or are you a one sided troll?


0

All charges being dropped would not necessarily mean that any of the underlying information had changed. That being said, if the in-car video did show that Karen was not driving unsafely and did not fail any of the field sobriety tests, I would be the first to support her innocence in this regard.


0

It is a subjective call on the part of the officer when it comes to combining behavior and testing to establish a DUI charge.


So the most you could say is that you believe in the officer’s interpretation.


0

Murph… in the post above you state “…and did not fail any of the field sobriety tests,”. With your comment you have already set her up for failure, rather innocent or guilty, because she already stated she failed one test because she could not stand on one leg for 60 seconds. I, a non-drinker, would also not be able to pass this test as I couldn’t stand on one foot either at all. I do not think any one factor will resolve situation which is why we have a legal system.


We are all trolls here, stating our views, comments, theories and certainly opinions but we are not the judge or jury. The jury will review the dash tape, police report, tests, testimony from witnesses, server, and what the law states is legal.


It is unfortunate, but everyday people will have alcohol and then drive and it is not illegal. It is legal based on certain regulations established by law for our protection but unfortunately, people abuse the law.


Instead of vehemently going after Karen I think you should be focusing your cause and energy on Vicente Muniz Montes of Shandon who just killed two people while driving drunk claiming he only had “four Tecate beers over a 3-hour span prior to the crash”. Four hours after the collision, Montes had a blood alcohol level .048.after eluding CHP, running through fields, etc. had no driver’s license, insurance or registration on the car and had a prior arrest for DUI with a .14 alcohol blood level while driving 100 mph. I notice you did not stand at the pulpit and preach against Mr. Montes, not one comment from you, but you have a lot to say about Ms. Valie. A little hypercritical on your part I think.


0

You are trying to demonize a normal human behavior–entering into conspiracies.


Any time two (or more) people unite to do something in secrecy, specifically excluding at least one other person, then it is a conspiracy.


When two high-school girls meet in secret to exclude another girl from an event…that is a conspiracy.


When two people have an illicit sexual affair, with the understanding that others will not be informed of the sexual affair, that is a conspiracy.


In an employment situation, when one person meets in secret with others to ensure the outcome of a vote on a project, job hiring, or anything else…that is a conspiracy.


Even little kids conspire. When two or more do something for which they believe an adult will be angry, that is also a conspiracy.


And you know what? Because our world is FULL of conspiracies, it is very, very appropriate for people to have theories about conspiracies. If we didn’t pay attention to connections between people, watching for evidence of conspiracies, we’d all be completely at the mercy of those with power over us. For instance, without conspiracy theorists, Richard Nixon would not have been removed from office for his role in the Watergate break-in and coverup.


So attempt to eek out promises to recant whatever you want, but don’t demonize what is normal, and beneficial, human behavior.


0

Karen Velie should talk to Santa Barbara investigative reporter Peter Lance. He did a special report on the abuses of the Santa Barbara police department in regard to DUI arrests. In particular, some officers were blocking the exit ports of certain models of breathalyzers, causing them to provide readings 40% higher than normal. They also forged Trombetta waivers, denying the arrestees the right to have a retestable blood sample taken to determine their BAC. You can read the whole article here: http://peterlance.com/wordpress/?p=1361


I wouldn’t be surprised if the SLOPD were up to similar tricks here. The real question I have is what field sobriety tests were administered to Velie and how did she perform on them? I’m surprised this isn’t mentioned in the above article, since that is really the crux to why she got arrested, since her BAC alone was not evidence enough to arrest her.


0

I will say it again: 99% of the SLOPD officers are NOT doing the bidding of Adam Hill, trying to “oppress” Karen Velie. Most of them don’t care about Adam Hill; they don’t work for the County and he has no leverage over them. Believe it or not (and I personally know many of the men and women on the SLOPD) the majority are honest and hard-working. I realize that this statement will get me a lot of thumbs down, but it’s the truth. I think Karen Velie got herself into a jam, and a .06 can and usually does result in a DUI. I don’t think this is a local replay of the Feds going after AP. If it had been me behind the wheel with a .06, I would’ve gotten hooked up too. That’s how it works, folks.


0

” a .06 can and usually does result in a DUI.”


A .06 very rarely results in a DUI. Who do you think you’re kidding? The law is .08% and every body knows it. What jury is going to agree that there are no rules that people can rely on and it isn’t about being certain that you don’t drive with a .08BAC or higher rather than worrying about who is on patrol that night?


Unless there were drugs involved which there wasn’t, then she was driving under the legal limit. I would be very interested in seeing the video, lets see if she was clearly impaired and unable to drive safely.


0

Attorney Jeff Stulberg was interviewed last night on KVEC radio. He does plenty of DUI cases. He said that in 15 years he has never seen a DUI arrest for .06. Never. Not one.


0

Dave, do you know whether Karen was driving erratically or broke any traffic law prior to being pulled over? Assuming she was driving erratically or breaking traffic laws, and subsequently was found to be at .06, do you still think the officer should have let her continue driving that evening? Seriously. I hope you will answer this straight-forward and honestly.


As for Mr. Stulberg, I have great respect for the man. But what he said does not in any way give us sufficient insight into Karen’s particular situation to make a solid conclusion. I’m certain Mr. Stulberg would agree with me on that. Karen’s case may very well be an anomaly but anomalies are, ironically, common and in this case doesn’t mean that the officer did not do what he rightly felt was his duty. If there was not something unusual about this story, we wouldn’t be discussing it. But I think you might agree that, knowing Karen, unusual things happening to her would not be unexpected and might not indicate any wrong-doing on anyones part


So, I am curious if you think Karen should have been allowed to continue driving if she had truly been driving unsafely and truly did have at least a .06 blood alcohol level. Be honest, now Dave.


0

Laughlines says: “I will say it again: 99% of the SLOPD officers are NOT ”


How would you know? I call bullshit.


0

Well, you can call bullshit whenever you like, but as I said above, I am personally acquainted with many (over half a dozen) SLOPD officers. I have lived here pretty much all my life; over 40 years, since I was five years old. SLOPD has had its bad apples, of course, just as any organization staffed by human beings will. I’ve seen some real pieces of work in the Army too, but again, the vast majority of soldiers, and the vast majority of law enforcement personnel, are decent hard-working people who’ve volunteered for the job. Most of the SLO cops that I know are actually fairly conservative and don’t have a lot of use for a lefty progressive like Adam Hill. I have seen no evidence in this article that Officer Walsh had any idea of who he was pulling over. I hate to break it to you, but I don’t think there’s a chance in Hades of a nefarious conspiracy on Walnut Street to target pesky journalists. I happen to think that Chief Gesell is the best thing to happen to SLOPD in a long time; he’s also a local who cares about his community. I realize it’s fashionable these days to vilify the public employee. Some criticisms are justified, but there’s a lot of angry crap spewed by people who never wanted the job when times were good. Everyone hates the cops until they need help. What does it say in the article? Stew Jenkins says he “…only saw her have one glass of wine…”. Did he maintain direct visual contact the whole time, with an observation log so that he can testify under oath that no way, no how did she have more? Probably not. Did the good Doctor do an actual examination to determine her level of sobriety, and had he had any drinks himself, or is his statement also completely subjective and not admissible? Karen Velie’s colleagues and friends have not done her any favors by blabbing all over the internet about this incident. Rule One: when arrested, shut the hell up! She’s in deep doo-doo now and this article, far from helping her, will only hurt her. Sorry, Word, but whether you like it or not I’m calling this one and it’s you who’s full of BS, not me.


0

The way I see it….


Officer Walsh is just a diligent soldier just following orders from his superior…


SLO CHIEF OF POLICE STEPHEN GESELL


It is obvious to me that Karen Velie was targeted by the fact Walsh stated she would be arrested even with a BAC of .01%.


CCN needs to research the public records of SLOPD and see how many DUI’s were given for a BAC of .01% or even .06%.


Chief of Police Stephen Gesell didn’t make the decision on his own to lower department standards down to .01%….hell, that would shut down every restaurant and drinking establishment in the city!


CHIEF GESELL GOT HIS ORDERS FROM ?????????????


0

First of all, the statement that soldiers will follow any order, illegal or not, is stupid and insulting, and I say that as one who has deployed more than once to various blighted spots around the world. Secondly, what factual evidence makes it “obvious” to you “…that Karen Velie was targeted…”? You have no facts to support that, it just fits with your prefabricated paradigm that all cops are out to get the little guy. I said above that I doubt that Officer Walsh had any idea of who it was that he was pulling over. And furthermore, it is NOT correct that .08 is the magic number for a DUI; check the law, or as we say in the Army, read the regs. It is quite possible to get a DUI with a BAC lower than .08. Everyone needs to calm down, especially the Velie boosters, because you’re all muddying the waters for your pal. Silence is her friend at this point. I don’t know the woman, and Lord knows we all make our mistakes, but she should be in full-hull defilade right now, not skylining on an electronic ridgeline.


0

Really? With SLO’s focus on tourism–especially wine-industry-related tourism–they want to be known as “The City Where Police Make Arrests for 0.1 on a Breathalyzer”?


I wonder how SLO’s tourist business would do if it became widespread knowledge that their officers will arrest a person who blows a 0.1?


Gosh, it would be terrible if people who are outraged about such an abuse of power started hitting tourist-site message boards with that information, especially with the local industry’s focus on winery tourism.


For instance, the website http://www.visitcalifornia.com/ web page tells us that “California Wine Month” is being celebrated on Sep 1, 13 – Oct 1, 13 this year… …plenty of time to hit the message boards alerting winery tourists that they risk being DUI’ed for even a 0.1 blow.


0

I think we should all hit every message board and publication promoting Central California wine tourism and warn people about the obviously .01, .02, .03, .04 rule that could possibly cost them great harm if they visit the regions wineries. It’s only fair to let all those know what the true law is here so they don’t violate the law. We shouldn’t let those think it’s one set of rules when it’s really another.


RIGHT ON MARY. I’m with ya.


0

I completely agree with you. We should get the message out that driving after drinking any amount of alcohol is an amazingly bad idea. I completely support your effort, even if for an entirely different reasoning than yours.


0

no really, if it is against the law to drive with any amount of alcohol in the blood stream, then every person out wine tasting or out at a bar or restaurant, where if they consume any alcohol and they get in a car can be charged with DUI. .08 is meaningless and as the officer stated grounds for arrest if you have any measure in your blood stream. It feels like the general populous is being enticed, romanced and then set up by the industry and law enforcement. The winners in this arrangement? The county and all establishments that serve alcohol. The losers? The consumer and those that die every year on the roads.


0

QUOTING TAMMY: “It feels like the general populous is being enticed, romanced and then set up by the industry and law enforcement.”


————


ITA, Tammy. It’s like the one-horse-town speed traps on long stretches of good country road.


0

Wow.


Either this is the predicted display of retaliation doofusicity which predictably occurs every time Hill, or his “fiance,” Dee Torres, humiliates themselves by their own nincompoopery….or one (or both) of our local police agencies are taking a page from Adam Hill’s creed, “I, Doofus,” and abusing the power of the police to harass and seek retaliation for CCN’s coverage of local police scandals.


You know what would make a Trifecta? If Lisa Solomon was “involved” with either Hill or Walsh.


0

“You know what would make a Trifecta? If Lisa Solomon was “involved” with either Hill or Walsh.”


LOL


Lisa Solomon’s husband (Chitty) is most certainly involved with Walsh. Chitty is on the SLOPD and was hired by Linden when she was the chief. Karen reported on the fact that Chitty was given preference by Deb Linden and hired over other more qualified LE who had applied for the position.


0

Cindy, I so much appreciate your posts. Truly.


0

Well, SLO coouncil just gave the o.k. for more bars, etc., in SLO

Now, Paso can be knows as ‘wine city’ and Slo can be known as ‘booze city’

Just think of all the more tickets the law enforcement can give with more bars, etc.

And all the more police needed to be outside every bar on every block.

The ‘happiest place to llive” is right -if you are a member of the ‘good ole boys network’.

Does anyone know if this officer is a friend of Adam Hill?


0

1. Vallybear, it could possibly be that the local police agencies were just waiting for a reason to abuse the power of the shield and harass CCN staff in retaliation for CCN’s coverage of the abundant local police scandals.


2. Your concerns about the proliferation of bars is valid since our local government agencies, including the police agencies, are such consistent screw-ups.


It appears SLO wants to make itself a “L’il New Orleans,” which would be both ironic and a disaster.


Ironic, because the city caved to the pompous mommies and stopped the very mild New Orleans parade festivities SLO used to have.


A disaster, because the local police agencies are completely incompetent (as evidenced by Officer Joe Walsh’s waste of time, energy and taxpayer resources’s arresting ANYONE for a 0.1 breathalyzer blow) to even handle the current crime in SLO.


My god, we would have them calling out the SWAT unit every time a tourist blew a 0.1 on a breathalyzer.


0

No they did not, they merely decided not to outlaw more bars, big difference!


0

I remind everyone that here is the DUI policy as publicly stated by the SLOPD. Are we to believe that Velie just so happens to be a person who is impaired at .06%? I might add that for those who haven’t met Karen, she has a speech impediment that isn’t detected on the radio but is clearly and immediately detected in person. When she gets hyper or stressed the impediment gets worse. Many can attest to that fact and I’m sure that she informed Walsh of that FACT.


SLOPD Captain Staley directly denied that such a policy existed in this Mustang Daily article:

http://mustangdaily.net/downtown-slo-where-the-party-never-ends/


“Citations for driving under the influence (DUI) are also common, Staley said. But San Luis Obispo’s rumored “zero-tolerance policy” — supposedly putting those 21 and older at the same risk for a DUI as minors — is a myth.

“Lots of rumors get started out there that have no valid basis,” Staley said.

The city enforces the same laws that apply throughout California: 0.08 percent blood alcohol content is the legal limit for those 21 and older, unless the driver shows serious signs of being impaired.”


0

What do you bet the SLO dash cam “quit working” during Velie’s arrest?


0

I can’t wait until this in-car video becomes available. How will you react if everything went down completely on the level?


0

“… unless the driver shows serious signs of being impaired.” Such as failing a field sobriety test. Which she did.


0

What statutes state that failing one of many field sobriety tests constitutes being impaired?


0

Another thing that hasn’t been brought up, but she is a small person. The idea of a big cop picking on a small person for something he wouldn’t pick on other people for is just BAD.


It raises the question of whether he would have arrested a big pro-football player for a .06 blood alcohol.


0

So, no police offers should ever arrest anybody smaller than them? That puts a LOT of criminals out on the street.


0

I didn’t say that. Is that what you believe?


0
1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10