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

I’m concerned that all this demonizing of Officer Walsh by Dave Congalton and folks posting on this thread will work against Karen Velie.


I’ve now heard that Karen was driving erratically and/or breaking traffic laws prior to being stopped by Officer Walsh. Considering that Karen had been drinking and blew a .06 (not way high but not insignificant) AND that local law enforcement is cracking down lately on drinking and driving following a slew of horrendous local drinking related traffic accidents recently, it does not seem unreasonable to me that the officer would feel compelled to prevent Karen from continuing driving that evening.


Now the crux of the situation: If it were not for the campaign to demonize Officer Walsh for doing his duty it is likely the District Attorney’s office would choose to dismiss the case, content that Officer Walsh prevented Karen from driving that night and possibly injuring herself or others. BUT, now that Officer Walsh is being accused in public by talk show hosts and in this forum of breaking the law, the DA may feel it is imperative that the case go to court in order to protect the reputation of Walsh and local law enforcement.


In other words, Congalton and others are backing law enforcement into a corner and law enforcement may righteously feel it is being treated unfairly and that Officer Walsh was simply doing the duty he was hired to do. And thus Karen may be in more trouble now than before the anti-Cop campaign was begun.


And can you imagine if Officer Walsh had let Karen continue driving that night and she continued driving unsafely and/or got in an traffic accident? Congalton, with his own history of drinking problems and almost being killed by a drunk driver, would likely be calling for Walsh to be fired. Ironic, isn’t it?


For Karen’s sake, we can hope I’m wrong on this. But so far no one is giving Walsh or local law enforcement in general a graceful way to exit from this unfortunate situation.


0

WiserGuy: Can you please point out anywhere on my radio show where I have demonized Officer Walsh? I have family members in law enforcement so I don’t appreciate your gross mischaracterization, sir. The other night we heard attorney Jeff Stulberg on the radio say that in 15 years of local DUI cases, he has NEVER come across anyone arrested for .06. Never. Not one. I know you have issues with Karen, CCN, and myself, but you need to get your facts straight and not make wild accusations like this. I have never called for Officer Walsh to be fired. I have never attacked him on a personal level.


And I understand perfectly why you don’t have the guts, the courage, the balls, to put your name to such rhetorical horsecrap. I wouldn’t either if this is the best argument I could make. Shame on you.


0

Plenty of people get arrested for .06%. BAC is only part of the reason a person would be arrested. While your friend Stulberg may have never seen any doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Remember what they say about when a lawyers lips are moving. It also doesn’t mean that the DA will take the case or charge her with DUI. If I were her (and you) I would STFU until they figure out what they intend on doing. It actually might work out in her favor. A little late now. Maybe her minions could protest in front of the courthouse eventually.


0

Some comments deleted for violating the guidelines.


Flogging dead livestock and repeating the comment same over and over and you will have a unsuccessful time.


Repeat offenders will have there account closed and future account attempts.


? or ! admin@calcoastnews.com


0

Awwww! But all the other kids are doing it! We never get to have any fun!


0

I this had been a Cuesta kid in a monster truck who drives like an a-hole 100% of the time and got pulled over then blew a .06 daddy’s lawyer would be saying “ha, ha” and the cop would’ve known better than to waste time, and risk a complaint, making the arrest. The driving issues are not the driving force in this debate.


0

I would absolutely love to believe what you say is true, but experience, including that specific to SLO, tells me otherwise. Way too much is ignored to make your argument.


0

QUOTING WISERGUY: “I’m concerned that all this demonizing of Officer Walsh by Dave Congalton and folks posting on this thread will work against Karen Velie.”


Yeah, the SLOFD Psycho Firefighter, John Ryan Mason, said the same thing about CCN commenters’ posts against John Ryan Mason.


These guys are not the Baby Jesus, you know.


In addition, I think you do Velie a service by pointing out how vindictive SLO City and its Police Department can be if one speaks out against them.


0

Correction: “Yeah, the SUPPORTERS of SLOFD Psycho Firefighter, John Ryan Mason, said the same thing about CCN commenters’ posts against John Ryan Mason.”


0

Before drawing conclusions can we get a few more facts please?


Can anyone tell us whether Karen was driving erratically, unsafely or broke any traffic laws just prior to her being pulled over by the officer?


Any valid information regarding this would be appreciated. And if Karen would like to address this point, that would be welcomed, naturally.


0

ya know we use to be able to smoke on airplanes, it was legal, but it didn’t make it right. Just because something is legal, it doesn’t make it right. So, just because it is legal to have a glass of wine at a restaurant, and it is legal for them to serve it to you, doesn’t make it right, especially when millions jump in a vehicle and drive home and hundreds of thousands die each year because of it. Many people just can monitor themselves or have a problem with alcohol. Why do we keep ignoring that fact?


0

I wonder if there has been any kind of study, to where an investigative unit camped outside a popular establishment that served alcohol, offered those patrons a small stipend (for a cab) to participate in blowing, to see what they registered and how they planned on getting home. No names, no cops, no tickets, just money to get home and an answer to the question.


0

And we used to arrest unlicensed drivers and impound their vehicles when they were stopped in DUI checkpoints, it was legal to do but the powers to be decided no more. Now we just give them a ticket and hope they show up in court and men their illegal ways.


0

The Graduate used to have a 50 cent coin-op breathalyzer that dispensed sanitary cardboard tubes to blow through. The took it out when the frat boys turned it into a ring the bell contest.


0

i loved living in big cities like Chicago or New York (mid town Manhattan) you walked/stumbled home. in Southern Illinois you drove off the road and stumbled home. i really hate drinking & driving (oak tree you’re in my way)


let’s bring back prohibition?


0

ac·ces·so·ry (k-ss-r)

n. pl. ac·ces·so·ries

1.

a. A subordinate or supplementary item; an adjunct.

b. Something nonessential but desirable that contributes to an effect or result. See Synonyms at appendage.

2. Law

a. One who incites, aids, or abets a lawbreaker in the commission of a crime but is not present at the time of the crime. Also called accessory before the fact.

b. One who aids a criminal after the commission of a crime, but was not present at the time of the crime. Also called accessory after the fact.

adj.

1. Having a secondary, supplementary, or subordinate function.

2. Law Serving to aid or abet a lawbreaker, either before or after the commission of the crime, without being present at the time the crime was committed.


Forgive me, I’m not that smart and I’m the first to admit it, but given the legal definition of accessory, then isn’t any person or establishment that serves (sells to the benefit of seller) an intoxicant to an individual that knowingly drove to that location and knowing that it is most probable that they will leave in a vehicle after consuming that intoxicant an accessory when that person subsequently get charged with a crime because of the consumption of that intoxicant?


IDK help me out her folks, I’m not that smart and I never claimed to be


0

Your logic is flawed; the only thing that an establishment would be accessory to is the CONSUMPTION of alcohol, which is completely legal. It is completely on the would-be driver after that point.


0

I’m not sure I agree with you, but in a civil world, we can agree to disagree and I accept the notion that I am flawed, as I’m sure you’re not the only one that thinks so, but that ok with me. Rock on.


0

Does anyone know if Karen had been driving erratically or broken any traffic laws just prior to being pulled over? Has Karen spoken to this issue?


Before I would dare pile on and denigrate Officer Walsh and accuse him of VERY serious breaches of his duty, I would want to get some answers regarding this.


And if Karen was driving unsafely and was found to have a .06 blood alcohol level, do most of us truly think the officer should have let her continue driving that evening? I think this is a fair question deserving of honest answers from all who have been so quick to potentially slander and libel Officer Walsh in such an extreme manner, accusing him of actions that, if proven, should have him lose his job. On the other hand, if Karen was driving unsafely and having at least that much alcohol in her, it could very well be considered a serious lapse of duty to let her continue driving. The officer may very well have saved Karen’s life as well as others.


With all that said, i am willing to entertain the notion that Officer Walsh may have erred, but I certainly will not draw any conclusions on this matter without more substantial information. i would hope others here might take a similar attitude for the sake of all involved and the community in general.


0

Please everyone go to KVEC Dave Congalton show and listen from Karen’s own mouth what happened in the day/evening of the event!!! Then you can comment on the issue. I was very suspicious at first and my suspiciousness still stands!!! Go get inform, then comment!! I Thank you for allowing yourself to be well informed.


0

Is KVEC going to give the opportunity for the people busted this weekend for DUI to come and complain as well?


0

As I understand it, the radio show CONFIRMS that Karen was driving erratically AND breaking traffic laws prior to be stopped by Officer Walsh? Correct? And Karen admits to drinking that evening. Correct? If so, then what was Officer Walsh supposed to do?


Sure, it could have gone either way that night. If Walsh was buddies with Karen or feeling particularly generous (or reckless) he could have let Karen continue driving that night. But in case you haven’t noticed, there have been numerous alcohol related traffic deaths in SLO county recently. So, we should not be too surprised that the pendulum swung the way it did for Karen and that she might not be the “victim” of some sort of political conspiracy. And what a nightmare for Officer Walsh, who is now being accused in public and on the radio of breaking the law and being part of this alleged conspiracy!


At the very least I think it would be prudent for us to reserve judgment until more of the facts are in.


0

Have any of you that are so vehemently in support of Karen ever lost a loved one to drunk-driving related incident? If you have, there’s not the slightest shred of a chance that you would throw your support so fanatically behind someone who was driving with a BAC of .06 (measured after a significant amount of time had passed from the initial traffic stop), who by their own admission failed at least one of the field sobriety tests, and who then immediately launched a smear campaign trying to implicate as many others as possible, all while accepting absolutely no responsibility whatsoever herself.


0

murph- There are laws that we all follow. A .06 is legal and not considered a DUI. She was 25 % below the legal limit. Don’t give us any crap about how she was tested “after a significant amount of time had passed from the initial traffic stop”. The SLOPD is right down the road where she took the breathalyzer test. It takes all of 10 minutes to administer the FS test. Also perhaps you forget that 24 citizens were in her company just minutes prior to her being stopped including a medical doctor. They all claim that she was not intoxicated. Now good luck with that one.


0

A .06, in and of itself is not considered a DUI. A .06 in conjunction with unsafe driving is absolutely a criminal offense.


I wonder, if the officer had let her go on her way, and she happened to cause an accident resulting in injury or death, would that officer have been just as demonized then as he is being now?


0

Is that all you have, a world of “What if’s”?, if so please get back in your patrol car and head to the donut shop


0

Driving impaired and failing a field sobriety test. Blowing less than 0.08 becomes irrelevant. Lets focus on personal responsibility and stop the crazy dot-connecting. Or not. I think Karen was on a call with Kevin Bacon who starred with Sarah Jessica Parker in Footloose. Sarah Jessica Parker and her friends drank too much in Sex in the City. I think Gibson looked like a guy walking down the street near their outdoor drinkfest.


0

“would that officer have been just as demonized then as he is being now?”


I do have to admit that every time I open this page and see Walsh’s photo I have to laugh.


Here is the bad guy every body. This is the bad cop who arrested the good girl. LOL it really is funny to see a media site do that on an arrest article. I guess it says 1000 words about what they think of this arrest and this officer.


0

They might as well have run a photo of Opie Taylor and be done with it.


0

Source?


0

“Opie Taylor,” a very young, wholesome character on “Andy of Mayberry” show.


0

Wonder if this is her first DUI offense?


0

YES, IT IS.


0

I wonder if this is his first DUI arrest?


0

I’d bet it will turn out to be his most memorable DUI arrest….


0

Yowzer.


0

You ever have a DUI Cindy? Sounds like you have experience at this. If this was a cop being stopped you all would be howling for blood. Pitchforks at the ready.

How about seeing whats going to happen in court. Fact is she got caught driving impaired.


0

Yes I had a DUI 5 years ago in August 2008. Mine was a bit different. The officer who stopped me said that an off duty SLO cop saw me and my friend (a name that I won’t mention) laughing it up too much at the Carlton Hotel and he called the APD and said he suspected that whoever was driving would be DUI. Then the off duty SLO cop followed us until the APD caught up with me. I thought I was fine but as it turned out my blood test was a .10, although I didn’t think I had any problems on my FS test. I plead guilty because I was guilty according to the law at a .10 BAC. I had to attend DUI classes and when everything was over and after I went 3 years following the 0 tolerance rule/law (people with a DUI can not drive with any alcohol in their system for 36 months), I decided that drinking and driving wasn’t worth it. I don’t drink at all if I’m driving anymore. I don’t like alcohol anyway so it was an easy choice for me to make.


I don’t pass any judgement on people who drink and drive if they are below the .08% BAC. They are not impaired below a .08. The problem is that many don’t realize that they don’t have to be feeling impaired to reach a .08%. People need to be careful and pay attention to the ounces they drink rather than how many glasses.


0

“The problem is that many don’t realize that they don’t have to be feeling impaired to reach a .08%.”


By this very same logic, you don’t have to be at .08% to be impaired.


0

That is where the law comes in. What part of .08% don’t you understand?


0

Cindy read 23152(a) of the California Vehicle Code. wait better yet let me post what it says:

23152. (a) It is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug, to drive a vehicle.


That is the law she violated, if you go back and look at your DUI you will see that you too where charged with that section. Being over a .08 is a seperate charge

b) It is unlawful for any person who has 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a vehicle.


Now I know you are confused, probably asking yourself if 23152(a) is illegal than anyone can be arrested with one sip of alcohol. Well that is true they can, one sip and you can be arrested

but….. In order to understand how someone can be prosecuted for just 23152(a) you must understand the Cal Crim (which is what they refer to a big book which contains jury instructions


The jury instructions for 23152(a) are as follows

To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that:

1. The defendant drove a vehicle;

AND

2. When (he/she) drove, the defendant was under the influence of (an alcoholic beverage/ [or] a drug) [or under the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and a drug].


A person is under the influence if, as a result of (drinking [or consuming] an alcoholic beverage/ [and/or] taking a drug), his or her mental or physical abilities are so impaired that he or she is no longer able to drive a vehicle with the caution of a sober person, using ordinary care, under similar circumstances.

The manner in which a person drives is not enough by itself to establish whether the person is or is not under the influence of (an alcoholic beverage/ [or] a drug) [or under the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and a drug]. However, it is a factor to be considered, in light of all the surrounding circumstances, in deciding whether the person was under the influence.


Based on Miss. Velie’s own admissions she displayed a poor driving behavior and she failed at least one field sobriety test. That is what Miss. Velie has admitted to.


I hope you now see how it is possible to be arrested at a .06 BAC


0

A whole lot of explaining to justify a traffic cop taking the law into his own hands and arresting someone for a DUI when their BA was 0.06.


0

MaryMalone says:

08/22/2013 at 9:40 pm


“A whole lot of explaining to justify a traffic cop taking the law into his own hands and arresting someone for a DUI when their BA was 0.06.”


Thought I would quote this as being one of the more idiotic statements thus far.


0

This is the law, folks. Notice it never mentions .08 or .01 or .0anything. It is the law. Thanks, RUserious..


0

People with more body mass can usually tolerate a higher blood-alcohol level before being impaired. Smaller people usually cannot tolerate what would be a tolerable blood-alcohol level by “average”-sized people.


People with impaired heart function also take longer to clear alcohol (or other toxins) from their system.


There are a lot of variables.


0

Source?


0

P.S. I should add that the APD officer who stopped me said that there was nothing wrong with my driving and he didn’t stop me for that. Then he told me why he stopped me! Knowing that I was driving perfectly at a 0.10% BAC is part of why I don’ believe that Velie was impaired or driving irregular at a .06%. I think Walsh is full of it, personally.


0

The BAC charts I read (on the DMV site and others that show up in a Google search) say that .05-.07 is impaired driving. Many say “Driving Skills Significantly Affected” at those levels.


So Karen herself said that she was in a double turn lane and didn’t know it was a double turn lane. And she turned into the wrong lane in front of the cop.


The questions I have are these:


What street was she on with this double turn lane and had she been on this street before? I’m assuming since it was in SLO, she probably had been at that intersection before, probably many times. Why didn’t she know it was a double turn lane? Didn’t she see the signs on the signal? Why wasn’t she aware of her surroundings?


Why couldn’t she stand on one foot for a count longer than 5? I’m old, out of shape, and my balance isn’t that good anymore but I tried it earlier today and quit when I reached a count of 70. (p.s. I did the test sober).


Lastly, in CA, the BAC limit for commercial vehicles is .04. Why isn’t it .08 if you aren’t impaired until .08?


0

There are a lot of differences between what you can do with commercial vehicles compared to what you can do to passenger vehicles.


0

The point is that there is obviously a gradually growing level of impairment between .00 and .08 BAC. You don’t go from being completely unaffected all the way up through .079 and suddenly “become drunk” upon reaching .08.


Source: Seventh-grade science class


0

“And she turned into the wrong lane in front of the cop. ”


Karen didn’t say that she did that, she said that is what Walsh said that she did. Lets wait for the video so we can all see for ourselves what really happened.


0

A psychic police officer.


Oh, well. We already have a psycho firefighter in SLO City.


0

QUOTING MTS: “…(measured after a significant amount of time had passed from the initial traffic stop)…”


Source?


0

Apparently I’m teaching science now. Time, you see, is linear. Well, it’s actually not, but our limited human senses can only perceive it that way. Seeing as how human beings cannot be in two separate places at the same time, it logically follows that time continued to flow from the point of Karen imbibing her drinks, from being pronounced “not drunk” by 24 of her closest friends, to getting into her vehicle, to driving it away from the restaurant, to her being pulled over, to her being questioned, to her being field sobriety tested, to her being breathalyzed.


From this point forward, I will assume that every one of your subsequent comments will include an annotated bibliography.


0

I was hoping you would be able to quantify what you consider “significant.”


If your idea of “significant amount of time” is the time lapse between when Velie had her one glass of wine (per witnesses) to when she underwent breathalyzer testing (including getting into the car, driving, undergoing field sobriety testing, etc.), then it would seem that the vast majority of people who undergo breathalyzer testing after being pulled over while driving an automobile or other motorvehicle would be assumed to have had about the same amount of time lapse.


Otherwise, the breathalyzer testing could not be assumed to be accurate because of the widely differing amounts of time possible between the time lapse between drinking and testing of individuals.


0

So, you’re telling me one glass of wine leads to a .06 BAC…?


0

You’ve about discredited yourself from having any ability to post using any logic whatsoever.


You have used the description “significant” for the amount of time between when Velie consumed one glass of wine and when she underwent breathalyzer testing.


“Significant” can be highly subjective.


Therefore, please state what amount of time you believe is “significant.” If you are referencing the time lapse between drinking one glass of wine and then having to undergo breathalyzer testing, how much time is that?


Otherwise, your statement “…(measured after a significant amount of time had passed from the initial traffic stop)…” is meaningless because we cannot even reference information regarding rate of drop of blood alcohol and then extrapolate to what the actual BA was when the person was driving.


0

You still haven’t responded to my point: You’re telling me that “Velie had her one glass of wine (per witnesses)”, and then later proceeded to blow a .06? That math just doesn’t add up. One glass of wine doesn’t get you that drunk, and if it does, you sure as hell shouldn’t be driving after one.


0

Look at the sequence of posts. I am still awaiting your estimation of amount of “significant” time it would take between drinking and testing. Your inference was that Velie, had the testing been done more promptly, would have been higher. We don’t know that until we know what “significant” is. Even then, since the time lapse would presumably be the same for most drivers, I don’t even see the relevance in your comment…other than to troll.


That’s okay. You can learn a lot from trolls, including what are the other side’s current talking points, and what the other side sees as being weaknesses of their talking points.


Troll away….


0

Mary, Karen said she had two glasses of wine. 2 glasses of wine will get a woman to a .06% BAC. Most bars and restaurants pour at least 6oz when they serve wine. I know the Carlton used to pour 7oz in their big wine glasses. The BAC charts that I’ve looked at and the ones distributed by the DMV say that a glass of wine is 4oz. Karen probably consumed 12-14oz of wine over 2 hours, thus the .06 BAC. She was well within the legal limit.


0

All I have had to go on is the article. I hope to be able to listen to Dave’s interview this evening.


0

Oh, so when Cindy points out you are misinformed, it’s ok. But when someone else does it, you’re indignant and demand specific quotes.


0

1. Oh, please. I was not “misinformed.” I was responding to the article to which this comment section is attached.


2. I read the LATimes daily. If I include in a CCN post info obtained in the LATimes, I ALWAYS source it, usually including a url or directions to the archive section if it is an ancient article that has been archived. I don’t just blather out information from another source and then berate others for not psychically intuiting the source from which I obtained the information.


3. Cindy is a very careful poster. I like to think I am a careful poster. Others who have just started posting here are not. When I have repeatedly asked for a source for information not contained in the CCN article, and the poster continues to say “it’s in the article,” when it is not, I don’t consider that a very careful poster…especially since all the poster had to do was to scroll up and read the danged article. So when a lazy poster tells me I’m misinformed, I’m not going to believe them until I see a source.


0

Where does it say she only had one drink.

Most bars do not our 6oz

Simple logic tells you that as time passes the body processes the alcohol out of the blood so it is reasonable to assume she could have had a higher BAC prior to the test. I doubt you are suggesting the possibility that she in fact knocked back her wine shortly before driving so as the alcohol entered her blood stream her BAC was elevating as she drove. In that case it is a good thing she was arrested. So I can only imagine that you are suggesting she had an amount of alcohol over a two hour period that by all calculators that I have found would not push the average sized woman to a 0.6. Then by some medical improbability she peaked at a 0.06 at the very moment she had a test.

Very bad “luck” indeed.


0

QUOTING 1INTHEMIDDLE: “Where does it say she only had one drink.”


Read the article.


—————


QUOTING 1INTHEMIDDLE: “So I can only imagine that you are suggesting she had an amount of alcohol over a two hour period that by all calculators that I have found would not push the average sized woman to a 0.6.”


If you are going to go by your “imaginations” of what I mean, you need to criticize yourself because you are the source of the content.


Most people who are arrested for DUI, rightfully or wrongfully, have a lapse time between when they consumed the alcohol and when the breathalyzer test was conducted. That lapse time would vary from person to person, depending on where and when the alcohol was consumed and where and when the breathalyzer was performed.


Therefore, unless you can provide an exact time lapse, you are simply speculating about how much, if any, drop in the blood alcohol level occurred.


0

P.S. Velie is not an “averaged-sized” woman. She is quite petite.


0

You have the pulse of some truth here and it is why people get pulled in with .05 to .0799 and end up with a Section(a) charge.

It is often held that if one blows a number like that then they were higher than that previously when operating a vehicle.


0

Who “held” this view?


Also, what was the exact time lapse between when Velie consumed alcohol and the breathalyzer was obtained? Unless we have exact numbers, you can only speculate how much, if any, decrease in the blood-alcohol level occurred.


0

I had a head-on collision with a drunk driver in Fresno in February 1988.


I am lucky to be alive.


I support Karen Velie 100 percent.


Next argument.


0

Then you should be ashamed of yourself.


0

Nope, MTS. YOU should be ashamed of yourself for using the subject of vehicular deaths related to alcohol consumption to make a talking point on a message board.


Certainly, the odds are at least one person reading your post had such an experience, so to use that as a talking point…besides being disgusting, shows me how desperately you are clutching at ways to express your talking points.


0

A talking point on a message board… ABOUT A (SUSPICION OF) DRUNK DRIVING ARREST.


0

I am not ashamed to support good people like Karen, Dan, and Josh — people who put their names on their work (unlike you, sir, who hide and just toss out personal, baseless attacks like hand grenades). You don’t know Karen Velie. You don’t know anything about her. But you’re content to be judge, jury, and rhetorical executioner.


Not me. Yes, I used to be a heavy drinker. I was almost killed by a drunk driver. I hate drunk drivers. However, Karen was not drunk that night. Read the article. Read what medical doctor Gary Foresman is quoted as saying. The facts will come out shortly and Karen will have another legal victory just like she had this morning.


0

Dave, without a few more facts, we might rationally assume YOU are acting like a “judge, jury and rhetorical executioner” in regards to Officer Walsh.


I don’t claim to be in a position to know who is at fault here. What I would like to know is whether Karen was driving erratically, unsafely or broke any traffic laws just prior to her being stopped by the officer. I think that information in crucial to determine.


Dave, you have a long history of basing your support of people and things on to what degree you personally benefit or what happens to please you, regardless of the truth of the matter. So, all the self-righeous statements you make in this situation don’t hold much water without FACTS to back them up. And most would agree that the crucial facts include knowing how Karen was DRIVING< not how well she was teaching people to play card games that evening.


0

Source???


0

Source = The Dave Congalton Show


0

I can only assume you support her 100 percent because you have a pre-established (even if completely platonic) relationship with her. This makes you biased. Those with a personal bias cannot, in good conscience, accurately report news.


0

QUOTING MTS ABOUT CINDY: “(even if completely platonic)”


lol. What a maroon.


0

I was referring to Karen.


0

MIRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY ONLINE: “1: the state of being related or interrelated


Note the plurality of the word “relationships.” The word “relationships,” by its definition, includes at least two people.


0

Are you losing it?


0

No, I’m not “losing it.” Are you?


Try to follow the string.


======================


MTS quote in a reply (08/22/2013 at 3:15 pm) to a post to Cindy:


“I can only assume you support her 100 percent because you have a pre-established (even if completely platonic) relationship with her.”


(bold and italic emphasis are mine)


———–


My reply to MTS (08/22/2013 at 3:58 pm):


“…lol. What a maroon.”


———–


MTS’ response (08/22/2013 at 5:40 pm) to my post


“I was referring to Karen.”


———–

My response (08/22/2013 at 10:25 pm) to MTS points out that it takes at least two of anything to have a “relationship.”


MIRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY ONLINE: “1: the state of being related or interrelated.”


Note the plurality of the word “relationships.” The word “relationships,” by its definition, includes at least two people.


0

By the way, what’s your source for this claim?


0

“What a maroon.” — Bugs Bunny


0

Some of you good folks have swallowed the political kool-aid that both Hill (malignant dwarf) and Gibson (Wienerwannabe) are dishing out. The revulsion that people are expressing about these fellows is not entirely based on politics. I am a lifelong New Left Liberal from the 60’s and should be in the Hill/Gibson camp. However they are such filithy human beings with such obvious distain for the rest of us I can only hope for their demise. The local Democratic party had best take note of this and hopefully the Republican party will come forth will Liberal republicans such as Blakelee to run against them. My preference would be for the Democratic party to man up and dump these petty tyrants and run decent people for the office but i doubt they are that smart.

Gibson is already starting his reelection campaign by embracing the notion that a few extreme Tea Party idiots like Matt Kookyon are going to smear him. Well his behavior is in fact beneath contempt and is wide spread and not limited to Tea Party folk. I cannot imagine he could be re-elected unless the Republicans mount a far right campaign with a nut-case for a candidate.


0

Yeah Yeah I know….this is a little off topic but i am out wine tasting and texting this into my iphone.


0

Gibson seems to be getting his campaign strategy from the supervisors’ resident doofus, Adam Hill.


His new approach is shocking, to say the least.


0
1 … 5 6 7 8 9 10