Advocacy & Safety - 28 DWIs

N.M. man arrested on 28th DWI charge

Fri Mar 16, 8:18 PM ET

Bernalillo County sheriff's deputies have arrested a man on suspicion of driving while intoxicated, marking his 28th such offense. Joseph Brill, 53, was driving on a revoked license when deputies saw him park in a driveway in a northeast Albuquerque neighborhood and fall out of his pickup truck Wednesday evening. He smelled of alcohol and had bloodshot eyes and slurred speech, according to a criminal complaint.

Deputies said they tried to give Brill a field sobriety test but he could not complete the test. He then refused to give a breath test.

Deputies also found an open container of beer in his truck.

"People like Joseph Brill will never get it. They don't care," Sheriff Darren White said. "He needs to go to prison, and that's the way we're going to insure he does not drive a car drunk."

According to the complaint, Brill had 27 prior DWI offenses with at least 14 convictions before his arrest Wednesday. Records also show that he has had his license revoked five times and has spent nearly four years in New Mexico jails and prisons on DWI charges.

At the time of his arrest, he was on parole for two of the convictions, according to records.

Linda Atkinson, executive director of the Albuquerque-based DWI Resource Center, said she had never seen someone with 28 DWI arrests.

"It's pretty disgusting to see someone who can continue to defy the odds with a history like that," she said.

Brill was being held at the Metropolitan Detention Center on a $100,000 bond. His case will be heard in state district court because it is a felony.

Under New Mexico law, the maximum sentence for a seventh or subsequent DWI is three years in prison, a $5,000 fine, alcohol treatment and lifetime driver's license revocation.

new mex law needs to be overhauled in this area; put this puke UNDER the jail.

almost as bad as ATL 15 yrs ago -- guy on the front page went down for his 43rd DUI, quoted as saying, "i don't care...i'll drive again." license had already been revoked for life.

whaddaya do...?

whaddaya do...?

Make the sellers of cars responsible when they sell a car or loan a car to someone who has been banned from driving for life. That will force them to say that the guy stole the vehicle. An added car theft conviction would keep Mr 28 DUIs off the streets longer.

Make the sellers of cars responsible when they sell a car or loan a car to someone who has been banned from driving for life. That will force them to say that the guy stole the vehicle. An added car theft conviction would keep Mr 28 DUIs off the streets longer.
Oh that will really work.lock him up,he's a menace to society same as a killer or molester.

We have the technology to detect alcohol on a driver's breath. Some jurrisdictions now require first-time DWI offenders to pay to have their cars so equipped. Yes, they can beat the system by borrowing or renting another car or by having the interlock disabled, and yes, I consistently support stronger penalties for DWI, but I am always looking for effective new tools in this life-and-death struggle.

new mex law needs to be overhauled in this area; put this puke UNDER the jail.

almost as bad as ATL 15 yrs ago -- guy on the front page went down for his 43rd DUI, quoted as saying, "i don't care...i'll drive again." license had already been revoked for life.

whaddaya do...?

Start seizing the cars they are driving and sell them off, after a few times of that happening then he will resort to stealing cars and can be charged with a felony and pull extra jail time. Or put him under a full time house arrest monitoring type system with a remote Breathalyzer that has to be used on demand when his parole officer tells him to...

Aaron:)

But what about when police officers are the criminals?
A Detroit Police officer is being implicated in an extreme case of road rage. The nine year veteran of the force is accused of shooting his gun on the highway and having open intoxicants in his vehicle. No one was injured, and he is currently suspended with pay.
This is his second DUI as a Detroit police officer! SECOND!!!
Yes, ladies and gentlement, this is one of the people that are supposed to be out here protecting my rights. What is really stupid here is that he is suspended with pay.

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=2685231&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=3.2.1

There is a blurb on our local news about a 45 year-old man in Victoria B.C. who received a condional 6 month sentence for his 7th DUI conviction.

What does it take to convince judges to jail these menaces for 20 years+? What does it take for law-makers to enact serious penalties for multiple offenders?

Oh that will really work.lock him up,he's a menace to society same as a killer or molester.

Yep. Just like that.

But what about when police officers are the criminals?
A Detroit Police officer is being implicated in an extreme case of road rage. The nine year veteran of the force is accused of shooting his gun on the highway and having open intoxicants in his vehicle. No one was injured, and he is currently suspended with pay.
This is his second DUI as a Detroit police officer! SECOND!!!
Yes, ladies and gentlement, this is one of the people that are supposed to be out here protecting my rights. What is really stupid here is that he is suspended with pay.

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=2685231&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=3.2.1


Suspension with pay happens because suspension without pay could be considered as punishment by the courts. The courts could reason that the decision to suspend without pay (especially prior to a hearing ) constitutes a judgment of guilt and punishment by authorities and any further attempt to fire or punish him could be considered double jeopardy. Better to suspend him with pay, have a hearing of facts, and then fire him.

Oh that will really work.lock him up,he's a menace to society same as a killer or molester.

I like that idea, registered dui offender. Also make the penalty similar to drug offense, after the 3rd strike it's 3month, 6, 12, 24, 48, 96 etc...

In some ways, I think that revoking one's license is actually a bad thing, unless there are other penalties attached to it.

For instance, take the average Canadian or American suburbanite. He drives to the trial, has the judge revoke his license immediately... then drives home. He usually feels guilty at that time yet he has no other choice because he doesn't have any friend who is ready to take a cab for 50 km (or drive with a third friend) during business hours to retreive his car. And if you wait until the evening, we have a few court houses where the private towers will remove your car and impound it. So what happens? The newly convicted learns right there on day 1 that driving without a license isn't so bad after all.

Then the next day, the guy realises that he lives 5 km away from the closest bus stop, and that the bus takes two hours to get to his workplace. Not because bus is bad per se, but rather because the person chose a house in a deep cul-de-sac. So why not take the car? It's sitting there in the driveway! Now you have the vicious circle fully on.


What I would suggest? In most cases, the drunk driver is a first- or second-time offender and he isn't drunk all the time. So he's not a hazard on the road... or he is, but for reasons unrelated to drinking.
So let have the judge give him a 1-month delay before his license is revoked. But during that month, he would have to submit a plan to the judge (or police) about how he will organise his life afterwards, and most importantly he would have to sell his house or resign from his job and find a new one so that house, work, school and all other necessities are within 2-3 km radius. I.e. the judge would require that everyting be within walking distance. So then the carless lifestyle becomes a realistic one and is therefore more likely to be followed.

There is a blurb on our local news about a 45 year-old man in Victoria B.C. who received a condional 6 month sentence for his 7th DUI conviction.

What does it take to convince judges to jail these menaces for 20 years+? What does it take for law-makers to enact serious penalties for multiple offenders?

Recall that the Premier of BC has a DUI conviction in Hawaii - BC voters did not take this very seriously, and Campbell remains in office. To put it in perspective Clark was booted out of office for taking a bribe in the form of a deck worth 5 000 bucks. I know, i'm simplifying the story a bit, but my concern is that the one (DUI) is seen as something that can be shrugged off (It was a misdemeanour in Hawaii - in BC it would have led to a criminal conviction), compared to corruption.

I'm not saying that corruption is not bad, I'm saying that Campbell got off really easy because people are prone to think that driving is something everyone must do all the time - that there are no alternatives to driving. So if someone is caught DUI, it's because they made a mistake that could happen to anyone - a proposition I disagree with.

I like Michel's suggestion. Perhaps someone convicted of multiple DUI's should prove to a judge that they live in a location without any parking, with nearby services. (Maybe they should prove to the court that there is a good pub a short walk from their abode:)) There are many such living arrangements in major cities (suburbs and rural areas are definitely more difficult...)

Oh man, you people are too negative. This guy's living proof drunk driving never hurt anyone.

That was a joke. Where are those damn smiles?

I think we need to find a way to make bar/store owners liable for serving people they know are going to drive drunk. Like a book full of their photos at each bar/store, or a special mark on there drivers' liscence, or my own personal favorite some sort of tatoo on their face. Then you face the seizure of your bar by the state for serving a repeat DUI.

Essentially we should make it a crime to enable a DUI driver by supplying him liquor.

Once their supply dries up how are they going to do a DUI?

Once their supply dries up how are they going to do a DUI?
Supply will never dry up. Even if friends don't buy for you, brewing your own is easy and cheap. I did it for many years myself.

When people on driving despite having their license revoked, the only way to keep them off the road is to confiscate their vehicles and make it clear that they will forfeit any other vehicle they acquire. Meanwhile, there needs to be a disincentive for people to lend their vehicles to such people.

If that doesn't work, the only think you can do is lock them up. Expensive and undesirable, but better than killing and maiming the innocent.

There is a blurb on our local news about a 45 year-old man in Victoria B.C. who received a condional 6 month sentence for his 7th DUI conviction.

What does it take to convince judges to jail these menaces for 20 years+? What does it take for law-makers to enact serious penalties for multiple offenders?

20+ years, when voluntary manslaughter rarely gets over 5 years? I don't think so.

Start seizing the cars they are driving and sell them off, after a few times of that happening then he will resort to stealing cars and can be charged with a felony and pull extra jail time. Or put him under a full time house arrest monitoring type system with a remote Breathalyzer that has to be used on demand when his parole officer tells him to...

Aaron:)

Finally a workable idea.

In this guys case he may be going away for quite a while this time. He was out on parole for two previous violations. He has for sure violated that parole. Add 3 more years for this offence. He may be gone for 7 or 8 years.

One idea I'd add is for DWI of any kind any driving before the license is restored should be violation of parole.

28 DUIs? what a waste of life. for this guy, i think this would be a good solution:
http://z.about.com/d/civilliberty/1/0/n/-/-/-/firingsquad.jpg

When people on driving despite having their license revoked, the only way to keep them off the road is to confiscate their vehicles and make it clear that they will forfeit any other vehicle they acquire. Meanwhile, there needs to be a disincentive for people to lend their vehicles to such people.


As good as it sounds in theory, there are two problems with that:

1. Vehicles tend to be a family possession. The vehicle may be used by the spouse, maybe even for very important purposes. Hey, it may even be the spouse's or the child's vehicle (assuming the child is old enough for that).

2. In many cases, if the "permanently" drunk person is an aggressive male, alcohol tends to release inhibitions. Therefore the person becomes much more aggressive, maybe even violent when drunk. If the wife is either punished by the law because he takes the car or beaten by the beast because she hides the key, then she is not is a comfortable position to say the least.
One may say that she should leave ASAP with the kids, but apart from financial problems, there are many situations where the beast finds his former wife, regardless of court orders and other "security" measures.

If Big Brother isn't big enough or powerful enough to control such people, why put an added burden on family and friends? And then, do we want an even more intrusive Big Brother?

in MN, 3 strikes (dwi's) and your license is gone forever. 28 times? rediculous law enforcement.

in MN, 3 strikes (dwi's) and your license is gone forever. 28 times? rediculous law enforcement.

They already said that his had been revoked for life. But just because you don't have a license doesn't mean that you're incapable of driving. People do lots of illegal things. :eek:

This IS a situation where the arresting officers should be empowered to serve as judge, jury and (yes) executioner on the spot and leave the corpse of the vermin on display at roadside. No humor or irony intended at all.

No humor or irony intended at all.

Oh, believe me there's a bit of both in that statement.