November 2008 DUI Report | Napa Valley Register

Home » News » Dui

November 2008 DUI Report

Sunday, December 07, 2008

Comment

By Register Online Staff

DUI coverage

November 27th, 2009

DUI checkpoint scheduled for Friday

November 26th, 2009

DUI arrest in North Napa

November 18th, 2009

Collision leads to DUI arrest

November 11th, 2009

DUI patrols out Saturday

November 6th, 2009

Accident spurs DUI arrest in American Canyon

NapaValleyRegister.com publishes monthly statistics on arrests and convictions for driving under the influence — and so-called “wet reckless” convictions — in Napa County.

Arrest information is from the Napa County Sheriff’s Department. Convictions, names and blood-alcohol levels are from Napa County Superior Court.

Convictions include cases in which the person pleaded guilty or no contest to one or more drunk driving charges, or where one or more such charges resulted in a guilty verdict at trial.

Vehicle code violations considered are: driving under the influence (Vehicle Code section 23152), reckless driving while under the influence (23103.5) and causing injury to another while driving while under the influence (23153).

The blood-alcohol levels provided by the court are based on a variety of tests — some taken at the scene of the arrest or county jail, others through a later blood test — and have not necessarily been proven or admitted in court. It is unlawful for any person to operate a vehicle if that person has a blood-alcohol level of .08 or more, according to the California Vehicle Code.

Names listed below are for those convicted in November 2008.

Convictions/pleas: 60

Reported blood-alcohol below .10 or unavailable: 10

Reported blood-alcohol between .10 and .19: 37

Reported blood-alcohol between .20 and .29: 13

Click here to load this Caspio Bridge DataPage.

53 comment(s)

reason-ator wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:00 PM:

" Two seconds after I re-iterated in the Octoberlist that these lists do more harm than good, the list disappeared.

So I figured I'd see if I could make this month's list disappear.

But I doubt it. Some people have a pet peeve. And they become so obsessed, they will make themselves look bad and have no clue. "

krusty wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:56 PM:

" Short list this time. Good. "

old_napan52 wrote on Dec 3, 2008 8:13 AM:

" Just a reminder to all those who have a first offense conviction in the last three years and still on informal probation, beginning Jan 1, 2009 the .08 limit no longer applies. If you test at .01 or higher, you will be cited for a second DUI. Even over the counter night time cold medicines contain enough alcohol to register on breathilyzers. "

juls wrote on Dec 3, 2008 8:48 AM:

" Why is it that most of the people who get popped are from Napa when there are millions of visitors from all over the world here who are drinking and driving? "

wipemedown wrote on Dec 3, 2008 9:38 AM:

" Oh Mamma I'm in fear for my life from the long arm of the law.
Lawman has put an end to my runnning and I'm so far from my home.

DUIs are not as bad as the NVR makes them with the monthly list of "Oh look at what so and so did, how horrible!" We all like to point out the faults of everyone else and think about how we are so much better than someone, when the truth of it is no one is any good at all.

SO lets point out some more people while were at it.

VP Cheney had two DUIs within a 8 month period
Mel Gibson had one DUI
Warren Moon Had one DUI
All Gore III had one
Matt Roloff had one
Mickey Rourke had one
Heather Locklear had one
Ray Liotta had one
Mike Tyson had one

To anyone on the list plead NOT GUILTY.

Lawyer up and keep your head up. "

selim wrote on Dec 4, 2008 1:48 PM:

" Hey wipemedown, there isn't one person on your list who should be a role model. Are you trying to say that it's ok to drink and drive and "fight the man" because Heather Locklear does it? Are you serious?

Mike Tyson & Cheney, yeah, real paragons of humanity. Next you'll try to tell us that DUIs are ok because Jorg Haider loved to sauce n' spin. Dummkopf uber alles.

Over 12,000 people died last year in alcohol-related traffic accidents. That's over 4 times the number of people who died in the 9/11 attacks...EVERY YEAR. And you think people are making it out to be a "big deal"?

If the prospect of public humiliation is enough to get at least one potential DUI off the road, then I say go for it. "

tiredofcomplainingnapkins wrote on Dec 4, 2008 3:35 PM:

" To Juls, I don't believe there are millions of people here drinking and driving every year. Many people come here and don't drink at all. Many more come here and use cab and limo and bus services. Many come here with groups where one person doesnt drink and is the DD. Your statistics have no backing. "

napagirl1970 wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:56 PM:

" To Selim:

Awesome point...I love it...Every month when this list comes out, and I read a name of someone I know, I think twice about getting snockered up when I know I have to drive to pick someone up, etc…, but it does make you think twice, choosing a DD, or taking a taxi is less embarrising for sure!!! Although. I have to somewhat agree with the tourist not getting on the list, I guess it brings in too much rev’s from the wineries for the city to stay off of 29/silverado for the time being, I would guess they could double their revenue if they did this, set up the next dui checkpoint on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday and wow, we could be out of debt??? When I think I need to have a drink I get that DD or arrange for something else….just a thought??? "

juls wrote on Dec 5, 2008 8:07 AM:

" tiredof.... I do have first hand experience, I drive those limos and busses. I see people everyday at wineries that should not be driving get into cars and drive off to the next winery. The past statistics say that we, napa valley is the number two destination in California behind Disneyland for tourist, we have millions of visitors a year and they, not all but many of them drink and drive. I have had clients that had been stopped the night before and was let go, he told he was drunk and was glad he had not gotten popped. "

snowmom2 wrote on Dec 6, 2008 7:12 AM:

" When I was in nursing school, the saddest case I had was a 40 year old that was paralyzed at 18 years old from the neck down. He and his best buddy were coming home from a high school football game and was hit by a drunk driver. The driver was fine; his life was forever changed.
If you drink, please call a friend, walk, or just don't drive. "

napawineo wrote on Dec 6, 2008 2:47 PM:

" NVR how about a list of FELONY arrests as well...oh---- say for METH....I am sure All of Napa would love to see how many loser METH users live on their street.... DUI in most cases misdemeanor, possission of METH/METH USE FELONY....Is it the $$$$ collected from DUI that gets these names listed??? -(that most people can pay) Or is that most METH losers can't/Don't pay the fines so you just ignore it???????? (no job, living with MOM and DAD)
You got some explaining to do.....Dan-O "

NVR-Dan Ross wrote on Dec 6, 2008 3:41 PM:

" napawineo:
Due to the large volume of DUI arrests and convictions, we publish the convictions on a monthly basis.
Felony arrests for other crimes are reported on as we receive them, and we write them up as articles when they happen, rather than waiting to only write them up once a month. "

napawineo wrote on Dec 6, 2008 5:58 PM:

" DAN, so are you saying there isn't a LARGE amount of arrests and convictions for METH???? come on, I know you don't live here in town but those of us that do know that there are far more METH arrests then DUI's - Please just give us a detalied list once a month for all the METH convictions...(FELONYS) rather then just dui convictions... I feel all of us NAPANS have a right to know who lives on our street and what they are up to....OR are the courts not convicting the METH users and just letting them walk???
This needs a follow up...not your standard spin that you from time to time list felony convictions as METH rules this town...just ask any COP. "

Old Time Napkin wrote on Dec 7, 2008 7:28 AM:

" napawineo,NVR does report the meth arrests. They report the DUI convictions. Arrests and convictions are two different issues. What would be interesting is to see is how many felony convictions are reduced to misdemeanors by the District Attorney. Might give some insight as to what type of job the local DA is doing in keeping the community safe. "

reason-ator wrote on Dec 7, 2008 11:57 AM:

" Yeah, we only write about it once a month......which is fine and legitimate reporting.

Where it strays from legitimacy is the tabloidish push to publish it every day. drunk drivers get their names published every day, while the mere child-molesters, murderers, etc. are daily publishing.

It must be nice to have pet-peeves, personal agendas, and a newspaper to use as a tool to reach the masses.

Meanwhile, all the people who are horrified to hear of those doing what they are too perfect to do are out jeopardizing everyone on their trendy smart phones behind the wheel of a speeding projectile guided by a phone-impaired driver. But we can't talk about that, because we don't want to admit we are as much a danger to the motoring public as a drunk driver. After all, phone-driving is something WE do. We're better than those other equally dangerous motorists. "

YOUNGNAP wrote on Dec 9, 2008 11:15 AM:

" As Napawino pointed out the meth convictions are published on the register. And about the same time they are published the offenders are right back on the street because of Prop 36. They can opt to take a rehab stint and their felony arrest goes right out the window. All the hard work law enforcement does to combat drugs, mainly meth, is undone about as fast as we can arrest them. So instead of state prison they get to walk out of the jail about the time the report is completed. Thank your state lawmakers for that. "

reason-ator wrote on Dec 9, 2008 12:55 PM:

" YOUNGNAP, are the names of the meth convictees printed EVERY day, or just once ?

I guess we don't want to discourage unplanned meth use or child moelesting. Just drunk driving. You know, drunk driving, where a light goes on and says " you're over the legal limit ", so it's really obvious that you're breaking the law. Not one of those vague notions where you're not sure whether meth is illegal or where you don't know for sure if the 7-year-old boy is of legal age of consent.

That's why we don't publish the names of the child molesters. The standards are vague. Not so with DUI. EVERYONE knows whether they're 0.07 or 0.08. "

mALO wrote on Dec 9, 2008 1:40 PM:

" Hey, is this the right list for the businesses and people I'm supposed to Boycott? "

gatekeeper wrote on Dec 11, 2008 3:26 PM:

" wipemedown-
You forgot Ted Kennedy. "

NapaConservative wrote on Dec 12, 2008 11:14 PM:

" selim said it best... great point and well taken "

toobuff wrote on Dec 14, 2008 9:44 PM:

" lets just agree that dui's and meth are a big problem in our community. the problem is that napa is known for guess what, wine! so dui's of course are gonna be a big issue and well known. i'm glad the register posts these reports, they are lucky all they did was drink and drive, because much worse can happen from drunk driving, to innocent people. meth is a huge problem in our community, but why would the city, the second biggest tourist stop in the state want to address this issue, thereby possibly steering away tourists. they also won't address our growing gang violence. a man shot another man in my neighborhood last week, how many people heard about that? "

seriously wrote on Dec 28, 2008 10:36 AM:

" can't wait to see how many are on next months list. I know last night i was behind someone who slowed to 5mph on lincoln by napa high and behind a REALLY drunk person on 2nd to Main. it's too bad i didn't have my phone on me or i would have called 911. "

reason-ator wrote on Dec 29, 2008 1:24 AM:

" Seriously, don't get too excited. I know you can't wait to see how many are on the list, but you don't need to be to worried about missing it. You'll get 30 more chances next month to see it if you miss it the first time.

We may never get any follow-up stories about traffic accident stories that are woefully lacking in details, but you'll get to see the NapaVal Enquirer DUI list over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

February is the month you need to be anxious about missing it. "

Civil Rights Advocate wrote on Dec 30, 2008 1:18 PM:

" One only has to open any phone book or do a "People Search" on the web find several individuals sharing exact same names who risk being the victim of mistaken identity and discrimination because the Register released their name in a DUI list, in which case an innocent person's reputation and good standing has just been ruined! A civil rights issue because anyone who successfully serve their sentences and probation time has the civil right to sealed records, no longer public. Once posted on the world wide web, out there for eternity, stripping people of all the benefits that accompany rights to sealed records. Will the Register be checking daily to ensure that the names are removed from their web archives, I doubt it. I am very concerned that social profiling predators may even use use the information in a harmful way, selling people's information, personal and public, is big business. They have no idea who on that list will internalize shame so deeply that they will be unable to cope or move on, who suffers from mental illness, co-occurring psychiatric disorders like social phobia. No evidence proves that printing the list deters, however tons of of scientific evidence based research proves how shame can trigger responses such as anger, anxiety, depression, violence, and emotional trauma and stress, the resources and references were provided to the managing editors for consideration months ago and hear have been reviewed. Even MADD does not support the practice of publicly outing offenders, preferring to use legislation to prevent drunk driving. The blogs reveal people's careers were ruined. Is it ok to drive while impaired or over the limit, NEVER! "

civil rights advocate wrote on Dec 30, 2008 4:55 PM:

" Is there anyone else who is concerned about people's civil rights to privacy. The more personal information released, the greater the risk of iidenty theft. Is it legal for the paper to print the name of someone convicted of a DUI when someone else legally has the same name but has not been convicted of a crime? "

reason-ator wrote on Dec 30, 2008 6:39 PM:

" civil rights advocate,

The Register feels they are doing the right thing by ruining innocent people's lives.

Your logic will be falling on deaf ears. Especially since it appears that everyone there is on vacation.

I appreciate the effort, but DUIs are one of those things that causes zealots to become irrational and vindictive. While I understand the emotion ( I've had friends killed by drunk drivers ), I don't understand the blindness that some people seem to have with regards to this damaging and useless feature. "

jmo wrote on Dec 30, 2008 9:05 PM:

" c-r-a and r-a get over it!! It is a matter of public record. Everybody understands that there can be 2 Bill Smith or Jesus Garcia’s in the area.
One is clean and sober the other is not. Each ones true friends know who is who. "

reason-ator wrote on Dec 30, 2008 9:50 PM:

" civil rights advocate,

See ? What'd I tell ya ?

Running down to the courthouse and perusing public records for hours is the same as sitting in the comfort of your own home and reading the NapaVal Enquirer every day in some people's (closed) minds...... "

Is it 2012 yet? wrote on Dec 31, 2008 7:40 AM:

" ...and from this comfortable position I thank the NVR for doing this.

I second jmo.
Embarrassment is a powerful tool and an eye opener for many who might think they're invisible and invincible.

Drunks "civil rights"? LOL, who are you? An ACLU clown? "

civil rights advocate wrote on Dec 31, 2008 11:25 AM:

" reason-ator

I concur, it goes beyond (closed) minds, and particularly disturbing due to the lack of education, understanding, knowledge and awareness of psychological emotional abuse. It is NEVER OK to shame, emotionally abuse anyone and I mean anyone! JMO you really don't get it do you? Some people internalize shame so deeply they may never be able to "get over it" A very dear friend of mine has never gotten over the fact that another newspaper printed "matters of public record," in which her son was never able to get over and committed suicide, that's reality, 20 years later, she is still unable to "get over it" and holds the paper responsible for her son's death.
Shame is a form of emotional abuse, like it or not, it is, and powerful, you bet, so powerful people commit suicide over it! What is the threshold folks, one death, 5 deaths. Yes, people are also killed by drunk drivers and never ok, a tragedy, but tell me how a death at the hands of another sort of vehicle "shame," is any different? Both negligence resulting in death, ironically, the very thing everyone is trying to prevent! Now do you get it?

Capitalizing on people's handicaps and disabilities is another sort of addiction called greed, ruining the careers of people to sell another newsaper? unmeasureable and potentially so damaging it's a wonder no one has filed an SOC 341 to report emotional and financial abuse. There are some people on the list who may have DSM-IV diagnoses so disabling unable to get over it, ask any mental health expert to increase awareness/knowledge about human behaviors of which you personally have not had experiece with. Do the research before spouting off please! "

civil rights advocate wrote on Dec 31, 2008 12:08 PM:

" jmo I caution you against implying that everyone on the list is an alcoholic and kindly request that you refrain from stgmitizing or discriminating against anyone who is an alcoholic or popped for a DUI. Oh, I get it now, jmo and 2012 yet, upon further reflection, you are suggesting a social caste system, where some people's lives are more worthy than others? Ok to ruin the life and embarrass one class of folks over others? Sociologists criticize its lack of usefulness in the modern world for good reason. So now you want anyone who in your opinion, thinks they are invisible and invincible to be "untouchable" (Dalits) too? Do the research, educate yourself, they may not think they are invisible or invicible at all, but fear their response to shame so intensely. One life more worthy than another? This is worse than a caste system because there was no democratic process involved, just the decision of less than a handful of managing editors who have made a bad decision that does and sadly continue to disenfranchise people. "

reason-ator wrote on Dec 31, 2008 12:56 PM:

" It just amazes me that people think that jail and colossal expenses won't deter someone from driving drunk, but thinking about getting their name in the paper will.

The NVR has been degrading themselves with this small-town high-school newspaper-type gossip for a long time, and it has not curtailed DUI's at all. Meanwhile, kids are growing up without a parent becaue of it.

I supposed the kids are at fault, and should suffer because of it, huh ?

I was at a party recently, and people were laughing at this newspaper. The laughter started with this daily gossip column. And before anyone gets their panties in a bunch, everyone already had their sober drivers lined up.

Nobody their seemed to take the NVR seriously. But then, some people won't bother reading it anymore. Partly, I think, because of features such as this. "

jmo wrote on Dec 31, 2008 12:59 PM:

" Oh PLEASE c-r-a...Your need needs to stop drinking your cool -aid and acknowledge that her son is/was responsible for his actions ALL of his actions. I agree it is a sad story but he was responsible not the news paper.

There may be some people in the list with a hang nail to acne and not able to get over it. It is neither our problem nor fault. It is their issue to deal with and resolve... "

reason-ator wrote on Dec 31, 2008 2:26 PM:

" civil rights advocate,

I give you Exhibit jmo.

There are more.

Once again, I gotta say that anyone who drinks too much and drives is deplorable. But many do it with the belief that they are not legally drunk.

And then there are cell phone users. All are as impaired as drunks, and there is NO DOUBT that THEY are breaking the law. And the text'ers have reaction times triple what a drunk driver does.

And yet, there are holier-than-thou hypocrites who talk on a cell phone and text while driving and come here trashing a driver that may not have knowingly been drunk when they drove. Sure, they are right, but they are just as bad, if not worse. But they act more snobbish, because they haven't killed anybody. Yet. "

jmo wrote on Dec 31, 2008 3:54 PM:

" R-A.....I think we are actually almost on the same page just getting there in roundabout ways. I am not now nor have I ever claimed that all the names listed are alcoholics far from it. Many simply exercised very [poor judgment resulting in their conviction and ultimate name appearing in the paper.
I also deplore those folks who think that their cell phone calls, without hands free device, or texting are so almighty important to the detriment of the driving law abiding public.
Still we must all take responsibility for our actions which c-r-a's friend does not seem to think that her son is exempt from blaming the newspaper.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!!!
Here's to many fewer names on this years list. "

reason-ator wrote on Dec 31, 2008 5:35 PM:

" This thread is driving me to drink.

But I won't be driving.

Happy New Year to EVERYBODY. "

civil rights advocate wrote on Dec 31, 2008 7:43 PM:

" jmo, you really don't get it. Ignorance is blind. With all respect, please understand that people who internalize shame or have a negative response to shame are not in denial about what they have done, hold themselves far more accountable and responsibile for what they have done than anyone else, punish themselves far more than anyone else, often perceiving their actions as more serious. It is an emotional response, sometimes invoking physical symptoms as well, features may manifest such as anxiety and fear of rejection by others who will hold the same perceptions and judgements about them as they do about themselves. Stigma and discrimination play a huge part in triggering this response, it has nothing to do with accountability or taking responsibility, believe me they do and society should be responsible and mindful about making assumptions or accusing people of not being accountable or responsible for their actions. It has nothing to do with that at all. May I respectfully suggest that before any of you continue chatter that further stimitizes or discriminates against anyone, that you enroll in a few psychology classes or at least do the right thing and get off the blogs and do some real research by reading evidence based journal articles of the massive number of studies out there conducted by experts in the field to help expand your knowledge and compassion for all people. If given a chance and some support from folks like yourself, people have a better chance of reaching their full potential. Give it a try, you may just find your life more enriched in the process of creating a more loving community. If this is all blogs have to offer, then I am clearly wasting my precious time! "

Napa_Citizen wrote on Jan 1, 2009 11:23 AM:

" When what you or anyone else does something in their personal time that directly affects my life and the life of my family or friends = I dont care if you post it all over town. Simply put - Don't Drink and Drive or do anything that put someone else at risk...whether it be talking on cell phone, texting or any other thing that debilitates your competence to drive safely. Keep posting....NV Register...BRAVO "

reason-ator wrote on Jan 1, 2009 12:51 PM:

" Napa_Citizen,

Posting this list has affected the lives of many innocent people. By your logic, the people who publish this list should therefore be publically shamed every day, correct ?

Yet somehow, this is probably different, because it doesn't titillate the voyeurs who love the gossip, I'll bet. They should be so proud.

You know what's amazing is that 99% of the people will read the name of someone they know on this list, but not have the guts to talk to the person face-to-face. But they WILL talk about the person on the list behind their back without knowing if it was really the person they thought it was. "

Is it 2012 yet? wrote on Jan 1, 2009 4:09 PM:

" It never ceases to amaze me how the ACLU clowns and the like will always come out to protect the lawbreaker, the criminal, in the name of "standing up for their rights".
It is rather pathetic that in a civilized society, the victim has become the "abuser".
Explain that to Ms. Clark who lost both legs to a drunk driver, explain that to her husband, kids, family and friends.

Innocent people are the ones going about their life when an idiot made the choice to go out there and taking that life, or worse, destroy it. And you are whining because a bunch of names are printed monthly that may or not coincide with "someone's"?

Shame on you!

It is not about gossip, but if you want to talk about cowards talking about people behind their backs, that's another story. "

reason-ator wrote on Jan 1, 2009 7:16 PM:

" Wow. You mean there was an accident involving a drunk driver even though we had the shame list running at the time ?

So this shame list is working ?

Again, tell me of one instance where a drunk was deterred by this DUI list from getting behind the wheel of a car.

It is absolutely amazing to me that logical people think that a drunk person could ignore the thousands of dollars in fines, the loss of a license, and the possible harm they could do to themselves and/or others when they get behind the wheel of a car or truck, and THEN decide ( in an alcohol-induced haze ) 'Oh, wait, I might get my name in the paper in a few months I better not drive and lose thousands of dollars and possibly hurt someone', as if they're thinking that far in the future.

Someone would have to be pretty vain and illogical to be more concerned about getting their name in the paper than killing someone or losing thousands of dollars. Maybe those are the kind of people who think this list does any good.

It sure does much more harm than good. "

Napa_Citizen wrote on Jan 2, 2009 12:17 PM:

" 1. I think getting your name posted publicly is a deterrent for anyone who has been previously embarassed about their drunk driving incident (even if its one time). They should be motivated by just the pure thought of possibly hurting someone...but quite often that isnt enough motivation to get them to call a cab or a friend.

2. Posting the drunk drivers names allows me to know if my child/children could possibly be driving with someone who could put them at risk. (parents of friends at school? Even the people we know have secrets. )

3. Harms them how? Embarassment? I think they'll make it through...

4. Don't want your name posted? Don't drink and drive. Its the consquence of your/their own actions.

5. I saw a friend name of mine on here this year. I talked to her about it face to face. She made a mistake, and thought she was ok to drive. (like so many do)

6. Happy New Year! ! ! "

reason-ator wrote on Jan 2, 2009 3:18 PM:

" 1. OK, yeah, sure. They don't care about getting killed or jailed, but they're afraid of getting their name in the paper.

2. Yeah, possibly. Hope nobody named John Smith or Jose Garcia is driving your kids.

3. People have killed themselves because of the shame of the list ( which DIDN'T prevent the DUI, of course ) and their innocent families have to go on without their father/mother and husband/wife because the NVR has to do nothing that prevents drunk driving. Also, people have lost jobs because someone with the same name got a DUI.

5. That's the problem with DUI. People don't know for sure if they're breaking the law, but the cell phone users know for sure. They are just as impaired, and there are many more of them, but the NVR doesn't try and stop them with shame.

6. Agreed. Happy New Year. And nobody should drink and drive.

Meanwhile, this list won't stop anybody who is drunk from deciding to drive.

I'll admit, it raises public awareness. Don't tell anyone I admittted that. But if somebody is stupid enough to drink and drive, they're not going to be smart enough to think about the major consequences. Let alone a minor one such as the NapaVal Enquirer's attempted shame list.

I think if I was a kid and my father killed himself because of this list, I'd cancel my subscription. At least. Who knows, I could end up buying oven cleaner in bulk, if I was a kid who lost a parent. The kids could end up being drunk drivers themselves because of the lack of guidance.

What a desirable outcome.

It does more harm than good. What makes that hard to comprehend ? "

Napa_Citizen wrote on Jan 3, 2009 8:43 AM:

" If getting your name posted in the paper for having a DUI tempts you to take your life, you have more problems going on then just the newspaper printing your name. Maybe they took their own life because of the people they disabled or killed?

What ideas do you have to motivate someone not to drive under the influence???

Well I guess we agree to disagree on the printing of names - but we do agree on the key thing:

"Don't do anything in your vehicle that impairs your judgement to drive safely" "

NAPADAD wrote on Jan 3, 2009 1:55 PM:

" what about napas most wanted? Im sure they vare embarassed too, no one ever says that is messed up "

reason-ator wrote on Jan 3, 2009 6:03 PM:

" I just know that I've seen someone say that a man had gotten a DUI. No mention of an accident at all. The man later took his own life, reportedly because of his name being on this list. I'm sure that his widow and orphaned children would have to tell you if there were other reasons.

Ideally, just the DUI offense itself should have been adequate. But the widow and orphans were innocent, and I got the impression that if the good old NVR had not had this list, those innocent people would not be widows or orphans.

Of course, it's possible that the shame list may have prevented deaths of other innocent people. It's impossible to prove, and I doubt it, since I doubt whether this list is a deterrent to drunk driving at all from reasons I've stated ad nauseum.

Remember, the people who choose to drive while drunk are impaired. If they're too impaired to think about killing themselves or someone else, I'm sure they're too impaired to consider some obscure list such as this.

Now, let's lobby for a shame list for cell-phone usage if we;re so concerned. I just heard a CHP officer claim that cell-phone usage is the #1 reason for accidents now. ANd someone who chooses to use a cell phone is supposedly not drunk and able to make a well-thought out decision to break the law.

But there's no shame list for that. I guess we'll just have to wait for a NVR employee to suffer a loss because of a cell-phone user so the NVR will have another pet peeve and axe to grind.

Again, this list does more harm than good. And I've used too many words, which some people said 200 words ago......... "

napagirl1970 wrote on Jan 3, 2009 6:21 PM:

" I feel extremely bad that someone took their life for being on this list, but being a survivor of suicide I find this hard to believe that this would cause someoneto take their own life??? They must have had some serious other issues going on! "

reason-ator wrote on Jan 3, 2009 6:39 PM:

" NAPADAD,

I'm sure if the people on 'Napa's Most Wanted' knew that they were going to get their name in the paper EVERY DAY for a WHOLE month, they'd stop batering their domestics and possessing their controlled substances. They'd think about getting their name in the paper before they battered or possessed.

And pigs wouldn't fly if they thought they'd get outted in the paper, also. Oh, WAIT. Maybe THAT's why pigs don't fly as much as they used to...... "

jpcrash wrote on Jan 4, 2009 3:47 PM:

" More information is released on booking sheets "

reason-ator wrote on Jan 4, 2009 3:58 PM:

" Tonight, 60 minutes has a snippet about penalties for drunk drivers if anyone is interested. I'm sure the NVR will be highlighted.

They'll also have a snippet about mind-reading. There are probably some readers here who already know all about that part, too.

Sorry, the NVR censors have taken away some of my pleasantness. I apologize.

It would be nice if the NVR told us why they censor what we say, since it doesn't make journalism seem very impartial unless we know what their motives are. "

jmo wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:24 PM:

" All right every body move on over the DEcember report so we can start this again and again and again......... "

reason-ator wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:30 AM:

" jmo,

I did. Sorta. Someone else started it, though. "

NVR-Dan Ross wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:46 AM:

" reason-ator:
These are moderated forums, with clear guidelines for you and everyone to read. Should you still not understand the comment guidelines, contact me by e-mail at dross@napanews.com and I'll go through them with you.
--Dan "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: