Kennedy accident (another related thread)

Washington Post ^

[expatpat]

....cannot arrest or even question a Member of Congress if he is on his way to or from a debate in Congress

You have a point there. The only problem: there was no debate going on at 3am.

[geezerwheezer]

I know there is the law as you wrote, but I also think the law can be an ass sometimes too, as Shakesphere wrote. (pardon the paraphrasing, but I'm trying to make a valid point here) :0 )

[bondjamesbond]

The only problem: there was no debate going on at 3am.

True. But how is a Police Officer to determine that, conclusively, in the field? They are not allowed to detain the Congressman while they find out. Their only alternative is to let him go.

From a PR point of view, it is a disaster (as well it should be) because it looks like Patches is using his special priviledges granted under to Constitution to duck the law. There should be a heavy political price to pay, here.

But it's Rhode Island, and Patches is a Kennedy, so there will be no consequences. Patches will not be stopped until he kills somebody, and maybe not even then.

[TET1968]

"Where is the personal responsibility? It's always someone else's fault. Ridiculous."

I think this thread is discussing a corrupt system that arbitrarily enforces laws based on political affiliation.

Nice try though.

[bondjamesbond]

Oh, I think Article 1, Section 6 makes a lot of sense. If it did not exist, you could have unscrupulous local governments effecting votes in Congress by keeping Members from attending. Congressmen have to be allowed to vote.

But you would hope that your Congressman would respect the law enough to not abuse the privileges granted to him. But we're talking about Patches here, so that obviously is just not going to happen.

[expatpat]

Patches will not be stopped until he kills somebody, and maybe not even then.

Killing somebody didn't stop his father (though it did stop him from being President, so some good came of it).

[Sacajaweau]

The law may exist but there are also all kinds of precedents attached to it.

The Capitol Police can make those quick phone calls to verify the "working" status of little Pat. It was the call to the right "party" that caused the getaway.

It's like "Are you related to the Kennedy family?" "Yes, Teddy is my uncle"." Would you like to call him" before I call this in".

Bet there's a time lapse between the time he was stopped and the time it was called in. I'd guess 5 minutes.

[KevinB]

It's not just DC. People don't understand how this works. The .08 limit is the level where it is irrebuttably presumed that your were driving while intoxicated. If the breathalyzer was functional and the test was properly administered, you are guilty of DWI if you blow .08 or more (they don't need any other evidence).

What people don't understand is that that doesn't mean they can't charge you with DWI if you blow less than .08. All it means is they need other evidence to support their claim that you were impaired. If you were weaving, driving without your lights on, slurring your words, smelled of alcohol, etc., they can still charge you with DWI, DUI, reckless driving, etc. even if you don't blow the legal limit. It will be more difficult to prove, but they can do it. The legal limit is nothing more than a standard of proof.

Driving after having any drinks at all is very risky in terms of what the system can do to you (unless you're a Kennedy apparently).

[leilani]

Wonder if her arrest has anything to do with her name being "Bolton"?

Hmmmmmm. You just may be on to something there. Excellent catch, Sacajaweau!