Leaving the scene

[Nikanit]

If a person who has already had a DUI before in the past, does it again, smashes a few cars in the process, and leaves the scene so he won't have to do a breathylyzer, what are this person's chances of going to jail now?

[brslk]

Depends on a lot of things.

[Johnny G1]

Should go to jail reguardless , Just my thoughts.

[CNP]

Failure to remain or return to the scene of an accident

The law requires that you remain at the scene of an accident, or that you immediately return to the scene. If you are involved in a motor vehicle accident, you are legally obligated to give your name, address, phone number and insurance information to people involved in the accident. Depending on the situation, you could be charged under either your provincial or territorial Highway Traffic Act or the Criminal Code of Canada. Under most provincial highway traffic legislation, penalties may include a fine, demerit points, a maximum amount of time in jail, and a suspended licence. If convicted under the Criminal Code, you may be liable for imprisonment up to five years. In addition, you will have a criminal record.

...

[troutbug]

I think people that drink and drive should lose there drivers license for good, along with a good stint of jail time, huge fine etc.

How many people, familys, innocent are killed by total morons who decide to drink and drive?

Anyone who decides to drink and drive is a total waste of skin and I do not care who that may offend.

[Dewey Cox]

67%

[Hunter1602]

Originally Posted by Nikanit

If a person who has already had a DUI before in the past, does it again, smashes a few cars in the process, and leaves the scene so he won't have to do a breathylyzer, what are this person's chances of going to jail now?

Not enough info..
Was that individual arrested and charged? Or just leave the scene and your assumption is that offender was intoxicated during the offence.?
2nd time offence can jail time ( depending time frame on the last conviction )if found guilty for the DUI alone., not to mention the summons, and additional criminal charges which would show aggravating circumstances depending on the story of course..

[CaberTosser]

Hopefully they do some time. If you were witness to anything call it in. If the person continues their idiocy and winds up killing a family or such would you want that on your conscience. People like that deserve the inconvenience of riding the bus everywhere, after their jail time that is. One of my wife's best friends was killed by a drunk driver long ago.

The aspect of leaving the scene just adds an exclamation point to their stupidity and cowardice.

[Twist]

Originally Posted by troutbug

I think people that drink and drive should lose there drivers license for good, along with a good stint of jail time, huge fine etc.

How many people, familys, innocent are killed by total morons who decide to drink and drive?

Anyone who decides to drink and drive is a total waste of skin and I do not care who that may offend.

I agree with you.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by troutbug

I think people that drink and drive should lose there drivers license for good, along with a good stint of jail time, huge fine etc.

How many people, familys, innocent are killed by total morons who decide to drink and drive?

Anyone who decides to drink and drive is a total waste of skin and I do not care who that may offend.

Well said.

[kingrat]

I would say slim especially if there is no other criminal record just the previous DUI.

[Bushrat]

Unless someone was injured or killed he will not get much more than suspended licence and a fine.

[Takemeoutside]

If a person who has already had a DUI before in the past, does it again, smashes a few cars in the process, and leaves the scene so he won't have to do a breathylyzer, what are this person's chances of going to jail now?

You should really call a lawyer.

[kingrat]

Better call Saul

[.257Weatherby]

Originally Posted by Nikanit

If a person who has already had a DUI before in the past, does it again, smashes a few cars in the process, and leaves the scene so he won't have to do a breathylyzer, what are this person's chances of going to jail now?

It is best you ask Your Lawyer these questions....

Originally Posted by troutbug

I think people that drink and drive should lose there drivers license for good, along with a good stint of jail time, huge fine etc.

How many people, familys, innocent are killed by total morons who decide to drink and drive?

Anyone who decides to drink and drive is a total waste of skin and I do not care who that may offend.

troutbug, while it is a very noble thought and I agree wholeheartedly, but simply put the chronic drunk driver does not need a DL or own a Car for that matter.
They still have the ability to get into a vehicle and start it up.
Either with keys or by hot wiring it...come to Vancouver or Surrey BC for that matter and you will see the carnage of the idiots who drive daily and should not drive, then there are the public shamming a couple times a year where the insurance company posts details of the number of repeat offenders of course they have the Police poo pahing about what they can and can not do, but their hands are tired ...
The Government controls the money to pay crown council, the time for courts and then there is the control of the judges... they let these repeat offenders out because there is little they can do to stop the circle of Impaired Driving.

I know of several people who have been killed by repeat offenders , not to mention Monty who went home to have a shot and returned to the scene with his LEO Id and DL after striking a motorcyclist and the kid dying.

They tried to blame the dead guy for getting hit too.
There was some question as to speed and conditions and even some Blood Alcohol Count too.
But, he was dead and couldnt tell his story or clear his name.

I dont have the solution, but sure do despise Drunk Drivers.

It may appear that this is a rant, but it isnt really just a statement of opinion.
Rob

[Scott N]

Originally Posted by troutbug

I think people that drink and drive should lose there drivers license for good, along with a good stint of jail time, huge fine etc.

How many people, familys, innocent are killed by total morons who decide to drink and drive?

Anyone who decides to drink and drive is a total waste of skin and I do not care who that may offend.

While no one in their right mind would disagree with you, don't leave out the distracted drivers and fatigued drivers, who do an equal amount of carnage on the roads.

[bat119]

Its sad fact I don't know anybody that has ever won a large lottery prize but I do know a lot, a whole lot that have been affected by Impaired driving.
I'ts almost impossible to stop some people from driving, a friend's father never had a DL for 26 years, drove every day even to and from the courthouse. He just didn't care, went to jail for 6 months the day after he out got a DUI. Judge gave him 2 years that time, served a year went to a halfway house and left to go the bar one afternoon it went on and on until he passed away.
The family suffered the most living through all that, some of kids wrote him off dividing the family further.
Is there an answer?

[J0HN_R1]

This might help...

Sentencing

See also: Criminal sentencing in Canada
A person convicted for any drinking and driving offence (which includes a refuse to comply offence) faces an automatic Canada-wide driving prohibition, and either a fine or jail sentence and the possibility of probation.

The minimum sentences are:

For a first offence, a $1000 fine and a 12-month driving prohibition,
For a second offence, 30 days of jail and a 24-month driving prohibition, and
For a third or subsequent offence, 120 days of jail and a 36-month driving prohibition.

Drinking and driving offences are prior offences for refuse to comply offences, and vice versa.[10]

If no one is killed or hurt, and the prosecutor is proceeding by summary conviction, the maximum sentence is 18 months of jail. If no one is killed or hurt, and the prosecutor is proceeding by indictment, the maximum sentence is 5 years of jail.[10]

If another person suffers bodily harm because of the offence, the maximum sentence is 10 years in jail.[10]

If another person is killed because of the offence, the maximum sentence is a life sentence.[10]

If a person is convicted of both impaired operation/care or control and operation/care or control with a BAC in excess of 0.08 percent, the defendant can only be sentenced for one of the offences (the prosecutor chooses which one).[12] The same does not apply if a person is also convicted of a refuse to comply offence.

A province is allowed to set up special ignition interlock device programs specifically to limit criminal driving prohibitions. Not all provinces have such specific programs, but if they do, and a person is enrolled in one, then they can drive during their prohibition period with an interlock device, beginning as follows:

For a first offence, 3 months after the day of sentence,
For a second offence, 6 months after the day of sentence, and
For a third offence or subsequent offence, 12 months after the day of sentence.
Driving otherwise while on a driving prohibition is a criminal offence.

[Nikanit]

BTW..it's not me that did the offence...justbsomeone that I wish would learn their lesson thats all

[mikebossy]

drunk drivers rarely learn their lesson, imo fines and sentences are way too lenient, along with other crimes committed in Canada, seems mostly due to judges relunctance to ever give anyone anywhere near a maximum sentence, the garbage statement people(and judges) come up with that the drunk who killed so and so has to live with it the rest of their life is complete crap, they couldn't care less, seems to me best defence of at least 95% of crimes in Canada is that you were drunk, gets you off murder, driving drunk causing death(homicide), etc as you couldn't possibly compute or think at the time thus it wasn't really your fault, for some crazy reason a persons'(criminals') past behaviour can't be held against them most of the time, treated as if its first time even if they've done the same crime a million times and been convicted a million times before, JUSTICE SYSTEM NEEDS A SERIOUS OVERHAUL, PERHAPS CRIMINALS SHOULD HAVE TO PUT UP A DEFENCE AS TO WHY THEY DONT GET THE WORST POSSIBLE SENTENCE, AND WORK FROM THERE

[Johnny199r]

Former prosecutor here, this person has a very very high chance of going to jail. If he was caught driving impaired for the 2nd time in under 5 years, it will be automatic jail time.

[Nikanit]

Originally Posted by Johnny199r

Former prosecutor here, this person has a very very high chance of going to jail. If he was caught driving impaired for the 2nd time in under 5 years, it will be automatic jail time.

This person was drunk and left the scene because he didn't want to get caught again. Police went right to his place but they couldn't wake him up for a breathtylizer...thats why I'm wondering if this person will get jail.time or not

[thumper]

Then we have those that leave the scene, rush into their house or a bar and have a drink, and then quickly return to the scene. The breathalizer test is then meaningless, as it can't be proven that the driver was over the limit at the time of the accident.

If I recall, one of the cops involved in tasering that poor guy to death at the Vancouver airport pulled this one off.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...article535569/

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by thumper

Then we have those that leave the scene, rush into their house or a bar and have a drink, and then quickly return to the scene. The breathalizer test is then meaningless, as it can't be proven that the driver was over the limit at the time of the accident.

If I recall, one of the cops involved in tasering that poor guy to death at the Vancouver airport pulled this one off.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...article535569/

Whether it's true I don't know but have heard of people/habitual drunk drivers who always keep a bottle of hard liquor in the vehicle with them that will get out of the car after an accident or when pulled over and start guzzling it before the police even get out of their cruiser. Makes it hard to prove they were drinking before they got pulled over or had the accident and the witnesses/police can only prove/claim they were drinking after the accident.

[schmedlap]

The smart repeat impaired driving one is definitely going to leave the scene, hide out until sober, and then take the punishment for leaving the scene. Generally, in the absence of very good hard evidence of impaired at the time, there is no chance of conviction for "impaired" and the punishment for leaving the scene is far less.

The problem is not with average first time or very occasional offenders. They are not generally the ones who cause major carnage. And the penalties for them are relatively severe. The problem is the chronics who no longer really care about being caught. They don't care about being suspended or fined, because they are never getting licenses, being insurable, or joining normal society anyway. They know that when thay are caught and charged with driving while suspended, no insurance, impaired, etc, they are only going to spend a few months at most in nice comfy minimum security jails, being well fed and coddled at the expense of the taxpayers. They are never paying their fines, nor do they have any "official" resources to do so - they laugh at such notions.

What we need to do is make the penalties for repeat offenders, especially third or more times (in our analogs there are offenders with up to 14 repeat convictions who have not done much real jail time?) so severe that they might take notice and think about actually "reforming". They are "dangerous offenders" by any measure, and should be incarcerated indefinitely on the same basis as repeat sexual assault and murder offenders.