Meet Erin James, 58, of Brookfield, Illinois. She was pulled over and found with a blood alcohol level that was twice that of the legal limit. That is bad enough. However, James exclaimed that she was just out celebrating . . . the end of her probation on her earlier DUI conviction and the return of her driving privileges.
Erin had an alcohol content of .155, almost double the legal limit of .08.
To make matters worse, she allegedly took a friend’s car to avoid the breath alcohol ignition interlock device (BAIID) on her car. She was charged with felony aggravated driving under the influence of alcohol.
Her license was suspended after a 2012 DUI arrest in North Riverside.
The police report stated that “Ms. James purposely drove a car that she did not own to avoid the ignition lock device and was driving back from a Forest Park bar where she was celebrating that fact that she would finally have her driving privileges back after her 2012 conviction for DUI. Ms. James is exactly the type of motorist I want kept off the road permanently under a new proposed habitual DUI law that I will be proposing in the very near future.”
That raises the interesting question if the friend could be charged with abetting the crime of DUI or some form of endangerment in allowing her to circumvent the BAIID.
Prosecutors will seek the loss of driving privileges for 10 years, confiscation of vehicle and a mandatory seven year sentence upon conviction for repeat offenders.
23 thoughts on “Illinois Woman Arrested For DUI After Celebrating The End Of Her Prior DUI Suspension”
PSmith, We’ve gone over this “revocation” issue previously. It DOES NOT STOP incorrigibles from driving, only confinement does.
All of those things are gaining increasing scrutiny as the danger becomes better understood. Not a GD one of them is an excuse for not enforcing drink driving limits.
So you admit they make laws without even understanding WHAT they are making them about?!?
My point is it’s crap to send someone to prison for seven years on arbitrary drinking limits.
So what if they lower it to .02, they now “discover” that a person is considered ‘impaired’ at that level?
It might interest you to know that that IS the level for pilots. So a pilot could drive at that level, but not fly…so WHY do we let them drive!??
I have lived long enough to be affected by drunk drivers also. But if they are going to make a law, they should understand what they are doing, before doing it. And it should be uniform…not different for one than another.
Comments are closed.