Posted on 08/29/2005 6:16:24 PM PDT by wagglebee
A driver for the Rev. Al Sharpton led Ellis County sheriff's deputies on a nine-mile chase at speeds up to 110 mph before state troopers stopped the car, authorities said.
The driver was rushing Sharpton to the airport after his visit with anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan on Sunday at her camp outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford. The car carrying Sharpton and two other passengers was clocked doing 110 mph in a 65 mph zone on Interstate 35 in Ellis County in North Texas, said Lt. Danny Williams.
The car ignored deputies' attempts to stop it and continued speeding and weaving in and out of traffic before it was stopped, Williams said.
Calls Monday to Sharpton's spokeswoman were not immediately returned. A spokesman for his attorney, Michael Hardy, referred inquiries to the spokeswoman.
Deputies arrested Jarrett Barton Maupin, 43, of Phoenix. Maupin told the officers he was hurrying to get Sharpton to the airport. Deputies impounded the rented 2005 Lincoln.
Williams said his officers offered Sharpton and the other, unidentified passengers a ride to a hotel across the highway, but they declined and walked there instead.
Maupin posted a total of $1,000 in bonds on charges of evading arrest with a vehicle and reckless driving.
So... did Al make his flight or not?
I don't think J.B. Maupin II was the driver, since another site I found says he's only 18, and the JBM mentioned in the article was described as 43. The driver might be JBM II's father.
I don't see that Al is to blame. This guy has plenty of attitude on his own.
Well, that's not exactly true..the Right Rev should have ordered the driver to stop immediately.
Not quite. If the driver was an employee, on Sharpton's payroll, that may be true. But even if ordered, and the driver failed to stop, the driver would still be responsible, and arrested, as he was.
I would like to have been inside that limo and heard the conversation.
I can help you with that. I went something like this, "F the cops!"
Agree, that's what I said earlier. The driver is clearly no friend of law enforcement, and clearly proved this today.
You could always pull over, take a few puffs of loco weed, then take a nap like Willie Nelson. Same part of I-35 I think.
I once got lucky, and tucked in behind a Deputies car just south of Dallas. The only time we slowed down to less than a 100 was in Austin. He had a steady following of about five cars all the way to San Antonio.
You should be careful. ErnBatavia might think you into the cornfield...
Newsmax. I'm sure AP and Reuters pick it up directly. Ha!
What were YOU driving? More worried about tires than the make of car, though.
Bing, bing, bing!!! You get the prize!! Driver was hired (contracted) to do a job. If contractor violates the law, and the person letting the contract is aware of it (as Sharpton obviously was), and doesn't take corrective action, he too is at fault, and not merely an innocent bystander...
the infowarrior
Amos....non sequitur. Murder has NOTHING to do with Texas Motor Vehicle Laws. The driver is responsible for control of the car. Period. Unless Al has a gun to his head, he is responsible -and he alone- for the operation of the vehicle. If his employer asks him to do something illegal, the driver stops, quits the job, and can sue employer for damages in civil court.
You'd LIKE to think that the law holds Sharpton responsible for this, and morally, he really is,.... but LEGALLY the buck stops at the wreckless driver.
Did I miss it on FOX?
BT, you are correct. But the main reason rich folk have drivers (or cannot drive themselves) is specifically for liability. If they have an accident, and someone is killed, then the floodgates open in a civil trial. The primary way to protect themselves from liability is that they hire a professional driver.
Look. Forget about my 'splainin. Do you think the State Troopers are ignorant of Texas Traffic Law? Do you think they just arrested only the driver because they only had room for one more in jail? C'mon! If there was a criminal statute potentially violated by Rev Al, he'd be in jail. Since there was no wreck, and nobody injured but an affront to the People of Texas through the law, then there is no civil case to be brought, either.
Does not matter if he's an employee, son, husband or godfather of Al. The driver is ultimately responsible for control of the car. Short of a gun to your head, the driver is responsible for following traffic laws. Period.
You shoulda sent your Buddy from Hutto after him;)
And this man was our presidential candidate? The highest representative of law and order in the land? What a joke.
Sorry, IW. As much as we'd LIKE al to be held responsible, he's got no criminal liability. And there are no injured parties to bring a civil suit. See #172-174, etc.
IH-35, Lead, Follow or get the H&ll outta the way!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.