Kid Drowns while in Police custody.

[milkdud]

http://ht.ly/xQSTE

Id like to know some of your opinions about this subject. Im guessing some of you have been transported by the water police before. How did they handle you?
A local kid died a few weeks ago when he departed the Police Boat somehow. His hands handcuffed behind his back, and the lifejacket came off of him. The Police officer could not retrieve him and he died.
Im guessing the officer did not put the lifejacket on property, but they will not say just yet. The thought of having my arms tied behind my back in a boat is scary. I know its for the officer's safety, but that would drive me nuts. Ive gone out of boats accidentally at all the wrong moments.

Ill admit this get me riled up each time I see it on the news.

C

http://ht.ly/xQSTE

[specboatops]

Wow, what a sad, tragic story, wonder what the real story is, hoping this kid didn't jump off.... Prayers outbound to his family and friends. A life cut way to short for sure.

[transomstand]

That cop NEVER should have been on patrol alone. A partner was essential to control the prisoner. You can't control a prisoner and operate a boat.

[RED ALERT]

They handcuffed a presumably innocent party who then died as a result. The cop and the dept should have their asses sued off.

[tony97gt]

They handcuffed a presumably innocent party who then died as a result. The cop and the dept should have their asses sued off.
Absolutely incorrect. He was under arrest, therefore he was a prisoner in the custody of a state officer. He should have been handcuffed, like any other prisoner, especially if he is intoxicated and the officer is alone. If the guy got up off the seat and jumps over you cannot prevent that. There is no handcuffing him to something in the boat, because if the boat capsized now he is secured to the boat and will drown for sure. Boats don't have prisoner cages like cars do.

[olboatman]

I agree with transomstand--- He should have waited for help to transport him. I bet ya that dept will change their protocal after this. Too bad its too late for this kid!!!! Gary

[racerx]

I agree with red alert they were taking him in to do a breath alizer he should of never been handcuffed or its the cops duty to make sure his jacket was on and secured so accidents like this don't happen....

[tony97gt]

FYI once you're going in for a breath test you are ALREADY under arrest. The breath test doesn't determine if you get arrested, the probable cause on scene does.

[racerx]

The problem is he never proved he was legally drunk the lawyers are going to eat him up...

[tony97gt]

Lol ok. You don't need a breath test to LEGALLY prove someone is drunk. There's a thing called Probable Cause that an officer develops on scene to determine if someone is impaired. A breath test is additional evidence that is not required to prove intoxication. Lawyers aren't going to eat anything up in terms of that. If they can somehow prove negligence from his life jacket not being secured properly then that's a different story.

[Ron V]

I don't see how you could screw up putting a lifejacket on someone so badly that it could come off if the person's arms are behind their back in cuffs. Must have cuffed him first and then wrapped the jacket around his arms and torso without putting the arms through the vest. It's the only possible way.

[tony97gt]

What if it was just the standard coast guard over your neck type?

[Ron V]

If it was the Type II vest, then the strap around the back should have still gone under his arms and been snugged up. Nobody can lift their arms above their head if their hands are tied behind them. Used Type IIs for water skiing years ago and never knew one to pop off.

[Mr. Demeanor]

Theres a thread on this over on the big CC board thats gone 70 pages. This is a tragic event. The only report is the kid was in a life jacket and cuffed behind his back. Protocol is to have them sit cross legged on the floor. Officer states the kid got up and went over the side. Cop circled and while trying t pull him in, pulled the life jacket off. This is all very loose info at this time.
Simple fact is that 99.999999 time things go as planned and the one day, something like this can happen. The kid was in the custody of the police and certainly they have a huge responsibility here.

[tony97gt]

Not that it happened here, but there is always the possibility for a prisoner to bring their legs in toward them and just slide their hands underneath and out to the front and the hands are no longer behind them. Seen it many times.

[Bodhi]

Tragic story, but there are some parts missing. The article did not state what he was doing to get pulled over in the first place. I have many friends in the law enforcement field who will attest to some marine patrol cops trying to "justify" they're existence by pulling people over at random or "on a hunch" and looking for a problem, this might not be the case here but a bunch of kids on a boat would be considered an easy target when looking to find a problem. As far as a life jacket coming off.....inexcusable, any seasoned boater knows how to use ALL types of pfd's. As the article stated, the officer was used to highway patrol not marine. No certification class can make someone an educated boater over night, so the fact that he was out busting people and arresting by himself should raise the most questions. Its unfortunate that this young man lost his life in all of this.

[Tom D.]

Crazy world we live sometimes.

[milkdud]

Protocol is to have them sit cross legged on the floor.

The article interviewed the IOWA DNR on how they transport people in custody. The IOWA DNR responded that they make people in custody sit on the floor of the boat. They also said its mandatory that the lifejacket goes on first then cuffs.

This happened in Missouri, and as far as I know Missouri has not said a darn thing. But I have not been in the loop the past two days to see if anything new has been released.



C

[milkdud]

If the following snippet from the news is correct, then the officer is at fault most likely. Kinda makes me sick thinking about it.


Once Ellingson was arrested and handcuffed, the trooper planned to take him to a zone office for further tests.
“The police officer threw a life jacket around his shoulders — that’s what the boys said,” said Gloria Ellingson, who was with family a week ago when some of the boys replayed what had happened. “He just draped it over his shoulders.”
The trooper used a Type III flotation device, Reinsch said. That device is pulled on like a vest, with the wearer’s arms going through armholes. It is still unclear how the trooper placed the device on Ellingson.
“Normally you place the life jacket on and then the handcuffs on — that would be the proper order,” Reinsch said.
Piercy reportedly told the others on Ellingson’s boat that Ellingson would meet up with them later, Gloria Ellingson said. Four hours would pass before they realized something had happened to their friend and cousin.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article501599/Drowning-of-boater-at-the-Lake-of-the-Ozarks-sparks-questions-about-his-arrest.html#storylink=cpy
http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article501599/Drowning-of-boater-at-the-Lake-of-the-Ozarks-sparks-questions-about-his-arrest.html

[tony97gt]

At least that article gives a bit more detail. But nothing is for sure until the official report comes out. It's a difficult situation to be in as a marine patrol officer I'm sure. If the officer didn't properly place the life jacket on him because he was being lazy then there's a huge problem there. If he didn't place it on properly because the young man (don't think he's a kid at 20 years old) was being combative or resistant due to his impairment (I don't say intoxication because impairment includes other substances besides alcohol that could be combined with alcohol) then there's some type of justification for his actions. I know the article said they have a different type of vest if someone is combative but it doesn't say if that boat had one or not. Unfortunately, until the official investigation is complete we are all left to ASSUME the missing details. All I can say is that it's tough dealing with people who are impaired sometimes, much less being in a uniform and telling them you are arresting them in front of all their friends. I've been called everything, kicked, punched in the face, spit on, etc by impaired drivers on land. The young man was told to sit and remain seated I'm sure until they reached their destination. Why he got up and went overboard as well as how his life jacket came off will hopefully all be discovered in the official report.

[milkdud]

I know the article said they have a different type of vest if someone is combative but it doesn't say if that boat had one or not.

That quote was from Minnesota officials. This happened in Missouri. I don't think Missouri has officially said squat. But I am not totally up on this as I have been gone for a day.

I will be very interested in Missouri's official report. Until then who knows. Its a tough thing any way you look at it.

C

[whipper]

That cop NEVER should have been on patrol alone. A partner was essential to control the prisoner. You can't control a prisoner and operate a boat.

Yes thats for sure!! When I was 17 years old camping on an Island in the pacific the cops took me from my camp site left my boat at the wharf and took me hand cuffed hands behind my back in a police boat to the main land and I never did a thing? Even at 17 years old i knew this is messed up. I said to the one cop its dark out I have no life jacket on and if you hit a reef or a log and I go over Im screwed! Can you please take these cuffs of and give me a life jacket. They looked at each other and agreed.

There is no way this person should have his hands behind his back in a boat. Its just wrong and if they cant see that then there blind and nothing you can do about dumb. They should have to wear a life jacket and as you said no way be transported without help. If ya cant have the assistance of another person you just have to let the criminal go if he even was a criminal until you have the proper help unless he is a serial killer then good he drowned. Just another power tripping pussy uncaring case of concentrating on the general public instead of the real criminals that rule our governments and municipalities. if public safety was such a concern then the guy who probably doesn't have a boaters licence who killed the kid should go to jail for manslaughter. If not why shouldn't he? He was trusted to protect this person and the person died. Therefore he killed the kid. Case closed. Thats what would happen if was anyone else but a cop ,politician or drug dealer. They all have to be let go because they keep these guys in business unfortunately these days.

[tony97gt]

You're right, should have never taken an impaired boater to jail until after he slammed into your boat and sent your passengers overboard I guess. At least that's what I think your trying to say. Can't please everyone.

[Chaz]

Chaz = sober 9076 days .. but I have occasionally sped in the manatee zones ... :nonod:

[olboatman]

You're right, should have never taken an impaired boater to jail until after he slammed into your boat and sent your passengers overboard I guess. At least that's what I think your trying to say. Can't please everyone.
The impaired boater slamming into my boat is a possability---Handcuffing the "Prisoner" behind his back and not having his pfd on properly -- He was "screwed" as whipper said. JMO Gary

[racerx]

He never was shown he was drunk they assumed he was and with all his friends getting together to get there storys straight about what happened that cop is done....

[Ron V]

I don't drink at all anymore for health reasons and am not defending intoxicated boating, but I'm with racerx. There is this thing called "innocent until PROVEN guilty". BWI also does not carry the death penalty and the cop isn't the jury and executioner, so he'd best do it right if he's going to cuff someone.

Bottom line here is you have a cop with minimal training in the patrol boat (though it doesn't say whether he had experience in pleasure boats or not) who threw a lifejacket around the shoulders of someone after they were handcuffed. Even if a Type III vest stays on, it is not designed to RELIABLY turn an unconscious (or handcuffed) person face up in the water, the way a Type I is. A Type II will do it most of the time but I wouldn't even want to wear a Type II vest in heavy waves if I was unconscious because the adult Type IIs float me vertical and I'm only 130 lbs. A Type III is designed for watersports where help is right there.

Truthfully the only safe way is Type I vest, no cuffs, and a second cop keeping an eye/gun on him.

[mrcrsr]

i know here in florida we have fwc, (fish,wildlife conservation) which have to be the biggest pack of undertrained idiots to roam the waterways. they'll pull people over in the river for speeding, meanwhile in the background there are clearly buoys/traps in the middle of the channel-which is their job to enforce. the best is i got pulled over at river ranch a few years back in the boat, for slowing down too quickly with someone behind me that i didn't even know was there! the fwc cop says i almost caused a wreck because of slowing down(officer looked like he wasn't a day over 25), i said to him don't you know the rules of the road, that it is the overtaking boats responsibility? the guy was clueless, at that point i said let me call the coast guard and maybe they can explain it to you. needless to say, i was let go. if they can't get the simple things right, god only knows about the rest. this isn't bashing all leo's, i have friends that are cops, but it is upsetting to read something like this, there is no reason for it. that could be your child that happened to, kids do stupid things but shouldn't have to pay with their life for someones incompetence.

[tony97gt]

He never was shown he was drunk they assumed he was and with all his friends getting together to get there storys straight about what happened that cop is done....do yourself a favor and read a law book. When someone is placed into HANDCUFFS because they're under ARREST for BUI because they failed field sobriety exercises that's your proof as well as physical observations and other factors. You don't need a breath test to prove someone is BUI. Not to mention the possibility of underage consumption of alcohol which is a criminal charge if that was observed as well. You can probably bet there will be a toxicology test done by the medical examiners office to determine exactly what was going on inside him at the time too.

[delawarerick]

Tony bottom line is a young man is dead and I challenge you to tell me you never made a mistake when you where young. If the boy was that intoxicated then back-up to ensure his safety would have been nice. I have alot of respect for law enforcement officers but yall got your bad ones also. I listen to two officers brag about giving the Coast Guard a hard time when stopped and yes they were intoxicated. When I had my stroke a neighbor a state trooper would check on me and had keys to my house. He now is with the FBI most of my wife's family is Nation Security in DC so I will say it again this just plain stinks.

[tony97gt]

Rick I'm not advocating my support for either side here, clearly something went wrong somewhere and it's a tragic event. We have all made mistakes and yes the guy did not deserve to die because of it, I don't think that outcome was anybody's plan. I just think it's funny how people who have no clue about law (or common sense sometimes) come out of left field and start spitting their legal opinion and anti government garbage. Everybody's got a story about how they were done wrong by the police at some point in their life, including me. But in every situation there's two sides to a story and most of the time you only hear one....

[RNM018]

Why this young man was arrested , or how he ended up in the water , isn't the issue as much as How His Life Vest Came Off !
Perhaps people being transported by water , wearing handcuffs should have vest , with leg restraints also . And officers trained to use the life vest properly , and this would have never happened . Regardless of how this young man ended up in the water .

Problem here is Equipment , and Training !

Rich Martin 018

[milkdud]

Rich we posted at the same time I agree :iagree:

Ive had to deal with many types of LEO's . Some you wonder how they get their pants on in the morning.
but, most are just average Joe's just like everyone else working for a living.

The point of this whole thing is not why he was arrested. If he were detained, charged, found guilty, paid his fines, or if he was detained, found not guilty and went on with life nobody would care too much.

People need to concentrate on how he was handled during transport. That is the main thing.

And it may need a major overhaul.

[Mr. Demeanor]

Ive been bashing my head against the computer screen for a couple days over at THT so Ill just say this....

Sometimes life throws you a curve, You can plan and do things the best way you think right at the time and then something goes terribly wrong. Maybe a completely cooperative kid, in a moment of intoxication, does something completely irrational. Maybe your steering arm breaks, etc etc...
Simple fact is this played horribly wrong. The officer was out trying to protect people and I can almost 100% guarantee he is devastated by what happened. Give me a 100 ways this could have been done different and Ill give you 100 ways it could have had the same outcome. Sometimes very bad things happen and we do our best to avoid it.
You can be pretty sure there will be some policy changes as a result of this. Not that it changes anything but most of us only learn form out mistakes after something goes wrong.

[milkdud]

I agree Mr D. But...

"Acts of God" and Negligence are two different things.

You could have a 100 ways that the kid could have died via "acts of god" while in custody and the general public/enforcement would say all was done and these were unforeseeable events. No one to blame. Crap happens.

But, this could end up being a very stupid mistake that the LEO made.

foreseeable/unforeseeable.

A lifejacket not properly placed on that young man could kill him in a 100 different events that could occur in a boat.

The events that lead him to the water are unforeseeable, but the fact that he will drown without a jacket on is VERY foreseeable.

C

[Mr. Demeanor]

Im not saying acts of God killed him or the cops dont have a responsibility to ensure the safety of someone in custody. Just want that clear. I really dont know what happened out there. I dont know if the jacket was put on wrong or if it failed when he was trying to drag him back into the boat (thats what was reported). Could the cop have forseen the kid would go over the side and the jacket would break when he tried to save him? I dont know, Did that happen, I dont know,,,,

[milkdud]

it failed when he was trying to drag him back into the boat

I have not seen that reported. Please post the link to this if you can, Id like to read that.

If the LEO patrol boats are using such cheap jackets that they break when you pull on them, then they have more than one issue.

It will be interesting to see the official report. If it is a type III with armholes then I don't think any breakage can allow the jacket to come off with cuffs behind the back.

Unless they are using jackets made out of sugar.
C

[Mr. Demeanor]

Independent first hand witness who was part of the attempt to rescue the kid. Whether it broke or wasnt attached properly shoudnt be hard to figure out. Im not going to conjecture about what type of jacket etc etc. I dont know. It just illustrates my point that you cant take what happened on what the story in the media you happen to read.

"At first I didn't know what (the Missouri State Highway Patrol trooper) was doing," Bascue said. The boat "slowed down pretty quick. I saw somebody in a life jacket to the side. The boat was turning to get into position to help. I didn't have a clue what was going on.
"I got closer and realized (the trooper) was trying to help the guy, get him out of the water. I saw the life jacket and person separate in the water."
The Register's Editorial: Answers needed in Clive man's drowning (http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/editorials/2014/06/02/registers-editorial-answers-needed-brandon-ellingson-drowning-clive/9893563/)
Bascue said he threw a life ring to Ellingson, but Ellingson couldn't reach it. Each time Ellingson disappeared underwater, he seemed to sink a little deeper, Bascue said.
The trooper, who was operating the boat from which Ellingson jumped or fell, jumped into the water to try and rescue Ellingson, Bascue said. The trooper, however, lost his grip on the Clive man and then couldn't find him again, Bascue said.
"I got the life ring, and my main concern then was the officer. He was totally exhausted by this point."

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-arizona-state-student-drowns-missouri-police-20140603-story.html

[olboatman]

I personally think that cuffing a person in a boat is a road to death if the person can exit the boat in any way! Safety has to be #1--Always. Thats why he was detained in the first place. Gary

[tony97gt]

Well there aren't many options to restraining someone who is arrested. Last thing an armed officer wants is to try and wrestle a drunk off him to retain his firearm while driving a boat, etc. In a perfect world the prisoner behaves but that's not the case sometimes.

[300x Stoker]

It takes one person to run the boat and at least one more to do the serving and protecting. This seems to be a perfect example of how not to do it.

[racerx]

Tony so your saying on a DUI its the cops word against yours if your drunk legal or not???

[vnemous]

Tony so your saying on a DUI its the cops word against yours if your drunk legal or not???
There are roadside sobriety test to help the officer determine if a person is under the influence. The outcome of these test are enough to take a person into custody and take them in for a breathalyzer test. So in answer to your question at this point it is the officers word against the persons actions. JMO

[dumbnfun2]

Cop shoulda left the kid alone in the first place .....,.. It's all about dollars ..... They don't seem to care about the 5 crack dealers leaned against the wall at my local jiffy store ..... But they sure will write a school teacher ( my 65 year old mother) a ticket for a few miles over speed limit ...... They don't want to deal w some crazy crackhead in the back of there car screaming and spitting so they go after the easy targets ...... If cops would do there job instead of wasting people's time would b a better country ..... Sorry had to vent ..... Read the article ..... Sounded like good white kid with all kinds of good ahead of him ..... But lets ruin his life and giv him a DUI ...... Instead of cleaning up our society of crack dealers , pill mills, and meth labs ...... Sorry again had to vent .... I'm sure that there's a lot of cops doing good out there ..... Just wish they would focus more on real problems and hey ..... I don't know story kid coulda drove by spraying beer in the air and mooning the cops ..... But I doubt it .......

[tony97gt]

There are roadside sobriety test to help the officer determine if a person is under the influence. The outcome of these test are enough to take a person into custody and take them in for a breathalyzer test. So in answer to your question at this point it is the officers word against the persons actions. JMO
:iagree: I will speak on the laws of Florida because that's where I'm certified. Although most laws throughout the US parallel each other, with a few minor variations. A DUI/BUI arrest is based on several things, although some might not be present at times due to different circumstances. The first thing is a driving pattern (swerving, speeding, hitting curb, etc). Sometimes this isn't observed due to someone being found asleep at the wheel, being stopped for a traffic infraction before suspecting impairment, or in the case of the young man who drowned the article states the officer observed someone drop a beer can into the water (littering). The second thing an officer looks for is the physical observations of the subejct. This can include but not limited to: slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, lethargic movements, smell of alcohol, inabilty to perform divided attention tasks like finding your license and answering questions at the same time, etc. The third thing and officer observes in the investigation is physical performance of the roadside exercises known as FSE (Field Sobreity Exercises). Once the officer has gone through all of that he is then tasked with making a decision to arrest the person based on the totality of the circumstances or to find them a ride home/let them drive away if not determined to be impaired to the point of being illegal. If the subject is arrested, the breath test is then offered to the subject. Most people who know they will fail it refuse to take it. No sober person who is trying to prove their innocence is going to refuse that test, generally speaking. Keep in mind that DUI/BUI also includes controlled substances and chemical substances (illegal drugs, prescription drugs, etc). So just because a person blows under a .08 doesn't mean they aren't impaired. That's when we request a urine sample or blood sample based on the situation. Lots of people refuse the breath test, and there is this big misconception that if you don't have breath results you can't prove I was impaired. Well I can tell you that's not true, the arrest is based on all the evidence gathered on scene (probable cause), not on the breath results. People take the breath test because the state says you have to, or you lose your license for a year. Hopefully that clears up what I've been trying to tell you about your comment of having to "prove" he was drunk/impaired. If you have more questions, ask me and I'll answer them for ya. But that's the short version of the 4 hour DUI Class I teach every month.

[vnemous]

Also since it's a Motor vehicle violation you have no rights, at least in NJ. Again I agree none of us here know what happened and can only speculate.

[Ron V]

Tony, it's been awhile since I got 100% on both the federal and state constitution tests in school, but help me with something. Is an arrest the same thing as a trial and conviction? Didn't think so. What you're implying is that they can be convicted based on observations without actual physical evidence (breath/blood test)? Never heard of anyone being tried and convicted of DUI without a BAC on record. I think there are some variations of "impaired" where it may not be an actual DUI but I don't know all the loopholes as they really don't concern me.

I think here in IL they can basically strap you down and force a blood sample now. Gotta be a reason why they felt it necessary to get that on their side.

[milkdud]

Ill repeat,

What he was arrested for is not really the problem. Not for us to judge honestly at this point. Thats between the state and the arrested. We all should agree we don't want dunk people driving cars/boats and possibly killing others. Your dumb to think its ok to get hammered and expect to get off when other peoples lives and yours are at stake. Was he drunk? We don't know. Honestly it does not matter. If they find out he was sober from the autopsy then he is still dead isn't he?

-------------
Now focus on this.

The manner in which this officer transported a person in handcuffs is very much open to public criticism if it comes out that policy or the officers oversight caused a death.

1. If the the department policy caused this then it needs to be addressed
2. If the officer caused this then he needs to be with accordingly by his superiors.
3. If it was an unforeseeable event then we there is nothing that can be done.

IMO its going to be 1 or 2. Or a combination of both.

C

[tony97gt]

Tony, it's been awhile since I got 100% on both the federal and state constitution tests in school, but help me with something. Is an arrest the same thing as a trial and conviction? Didn't think so. What you're implying is that they can be convicted based on observations without actual physical evidence (breath/blood test)? Never heard of anyone being tried and convicted of DUI without a BAC on record. I think there are some variations of "impaired" where it may not be an actual DUI but I don't know all the loopholes as they really don't concern me.

I think here in IL they can basically strap you down and force a blood sample now. Gotta be a reason why they felt it necessary to get that on their side.
Ron, yes that is what I'm saying. If you've never heard of anybody being tried and convicted on a DUI without breath results then you should go spend a day or two in your county courthouse. It happens all day everyday across the country. Again, the standard for probable cause on scene to make and arrest is lower than the standard for a conviction at a trial. So with regard to your statement above, no they are not the same. If Florida we can take blood by force (whatever means reasonably necessary) after a search warrant is secured.

[racerx]

So Tony if pulled over its best not to say nothing refuse FST and don't blow, so now you lose your license a year but you don't need to go to school pay a lawyer lose your license for 6 months anyways and its going to save you 5 plus grand is that how it works?

[tony97gt]

I'm not going to fall into the trap of giving legal advice on a public forum. Nor would a blanket statement be applicable to each scenario someone reading this thread might find themselves in. Best advice is if you're at the point you even have to consider any of your questions, find a ride home or toss out the anchor and sleep it off.

FYI- I've gotten a guilty verdict from a jury on someone who refused FSE and breath test.

[racerx]

That's what I thought1 its good to ask questions to someone who rights tickets for a living thanks for your input and hope that skaters running good, did you ever put the ramps in it when I did my 21 with twins it made a big difference on water pressure ..

[tony97gt]

That's what I thought1 its good to ask questions to someone who rights tickets for a living thanks for your input and hope that skaters running good, did you ever put the ramps in it when I did my 21 with twins it made a big difference on water pressure ..
Not writing too many tickets these days unless someone really needs it. Skater is in dry dock right now, had some delaminating on the bottom of a sponson and snapped/twisted the 5" extension that was on my 15" driveshaft. So...looking for a 20" shaft and boat is at glass shop getting repaired. Small spot where gel coat came off at high speed. Other than that, those diamond boys build some angry motors that run like raped apes. Ramps helped out quite a bit with more water.

[Mr. Demeanor]

In Illinois, unless the law has changed since I was an LEO there, your are arrested for DUI based on observations of the officer (driving, interview, sobriety tests). When you are back at the police station and you blow over the legal limit, you are charged with an additional crime of being over the legal BAC. If you blow under, your still under arrest and charged with DUI.
You can be under the legal BAC and still be arrested, charged, and convicted of DUI. I have seen young kids completely hammered with a very low BAC. It doesnt happen often . In Illinois, DUI and being over the legal limit are two separate charges.

I know some think it's all about the numbers and I agree. About 10,000 people die in drunk driving related crashes every year. Think about that number. Thats triple the number of our service members killed in Afghanistan since 2001! Over 100,000 American civilians have died from drunk driving during the same time period as the war. The good news is the numbers are down. I dont know if its enforcement, safer cars, better education, etc. probably all of the above.

[tony97gt]

In Illinois, unless the law has changed since I was an LEO there, your are arrested for DUI based on observations of the officer (driving, interview, sobriety tests). When you are back at the police station and you blow over the legal limit, you are charged with an additional crime of being over the legal BAC. If you blow under, your still under arrest and charged with DUI.
You can be under the legal BAC and still be arrested, charged, and convicted of DUI. I have seen young kids completely hammered with a very low BAC. It doesnt happen often . In Illinois, DUI and being over the legal limit are two separate charges.

I know some think it's all about the numbers and I agree. About 10,000 people die in drunk driving related crashes every year. Think about that number. Thats triple the number of our service members killed in Afghanistan since 2001! Over 100,000 American civilians have died from drunk driving during the same time period as the war. The good news is the numbers are down. I dont know if its enforcement, safer cars, better education, etc. probably all of the above.Interesting info on Ill DUI law. To be exact, in Florida approximately 10,839 people will die each year from DUI crashes, or one every 50 minutes. Car crashes are the leading cause of death for teenagers, and one in three teenage car crashes are alcohol related. This isn't even bringing the boating aspect into play. I know people say that LEO's are screwing up people's lives by arresting them for DUI, but your life is much better off with a misdemeanor (no pun intended) DUI charge than a felony DUI Manslaughter charge. Pay an attorney, spend a night in jail, do your classes and community service, and move on with your life. Or the alternative, if you're lucky to survive an alcohol related crash, spend 10 years in prison. I've been hit by a drunk, had friends killed by drunks, had friends die drunk (one was decapitated, killed herself and an innocent driver on the highway), and taken lots of drunks to jail. Been on midnights for nearly 13 years so I'm probably a little biased from witnessing so much death and destruction at the hands of mostly good people who made bad decisions.

[milkdud]

Missouri has chosen to sweep it under the carpet. SHOCKER!!! :shock:


The family is looking for federal assistance to investigate at this point. The Gov of Iowa and Senator Grassley say they will help if possible to move this up the ladder.


http://whotv.com/2014/09/23/grassley-to-recommend-federal-investigation-into-ellingson-drowning/


http://videos.venturebeat.com/family-wants-federal-investigation-into-drowning-death-518411457


Officer on phone with supervisor seems like a winner. He lost the SD card for the camera recording as well!:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZTjM5ZGkOU

[olboatman]

This sounds more like law enforcement chose to sweep it under to CTA!!!! Gary

[pyro]

They protected and served the sh!+ out of him.

[milkdud]

Just a quick update on this case.


Special Prosecutor Grellner asked to step away from the investigation after 8 months on the case. IMO, I think she just didn't want to be the person coming down on the Missouri State Patrol and got out of the way...


http://m.newstribune.com/news/2015/mar/15/grellners-departure-likely-prolong-investigation/#.VQdhm8Y-CV4

[olboatman]

Thanks milkdud------ One f---ed up case! Gary

[milkdud]

Another update.

After the first Special Prosecutor recused herself and 18 months of broom sweeping by the department the new Special Prosecutor is going to charge the MO Trooper with involuntary manslaughter.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article50468195.html

[wickedwitthestix]

46 mph handcuffed in a boat? Can you say ruff ride? The officer had no business driving that fast with a handcuffed passenger. Alone no less? I couldn't fathom that. Not to mention the officer probably couldn't drive a boat half as well as most of us. What was the rush? I understand the crack down on boating while intoxicated but I'm just as scared driving around clueless boaters as I am drunk boaters. And a clueless boater with a badge is even worse.

[baja200merk]

http://youtu.be/lbOtyWTRZ_g

[milkdud]

http://youtu.be/lbOtyWTRZ_g

There are literally thousands and thousands of laws on the books. Eventually people find themselves breaking one. It it asking too much to live through the ticket or arrest? Yes the kid needed to be arrested I don't doubt. Please get drunks off my waterways for sure.

But the officer ignored so many basic safety measures. And a kid died from his neglect.

C