Print
Email
Share

Legislature passes DUI 12-hour impound bill

Legislature passes DUI 12-hour impound bill

Hailey Huntley was injured in this crash after being hit head-on by a drunk driver. That driver had been cited earlier, but was released and caught a cab back to her car.

by KING 5 News

KING5.com

Posted on April 14, 2011 at 11:22 AM

Updated Thursday, Apr 14 at 2:33 PM

OLYMPIA, Wash. – Police will be able to impound vehicles of suspected drunk drivers for a minimum of 12 hours after the driver is cited, thanks to a bill passed by the legislature Thursday.

Senate Bill 5000, also known as Hailey's Law, now goes to Gov. Chris Gregoire for her signature.

The bill is named for Hailey Huntley, who was severely injured after her car was hit head-on by a drunk driver. Janine Parker, the arrested driver, had already been stopped once that night for DUI. A trooper had taken her home, where Parker had called a cab to take her back to her car.  It was after she got behind the wheel again that she crashed into Huntley.

Huntley suffered a broken pelvis, leg and knee, a crushed foot and collapsed lungs. She's had to undergo 15 surgeries in four years.

The law says the vehicle of a driver cited for DUI cannot get that vehicle out of impound for at least 12 hours. If there is another registered owner of the vehicle, then that person could come get it out of impound before the 12-hour deadline.

Some opponents argued a state law requiring impounds is unnecessary and that the cost to drivers is excessive. A mandatory impound is estimated to cost around $200.

Print
Email
Share
 

To add a comment, please register or login.

1000 characters remaining

Submit

We welcome your comments on this story's topic. Off-topic comments, personal attacks, and inappropriate language may be flagged and removed, and comment privileges blocked, per our Terms of Service. Thanks for keeping the comments space respectful.

Privacy Policy

You have indicated this comment should be removed.

Close

The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .

Comments: Displaying 1 - 15 of 33

freemonttroll said on April 19, 2011 at 3:26 PM

Here's what typically happens when you get a DUI - assuming you didn't cause any personal or property damage: You get pulled over, the cop questions you, you do a field sobriety test, you blow into a field Breathalyzer - if over .08% or if the cop feels you are too impaired, you get cuffed, put in the back of the cruiser and go to the police station, there you do 2 official Breathalyzers, 30 minutes apart. During this time, the cop will fill out the paper work for your arrest. After the final Breathalyzer, he will ask you who you want to call to come get you, or, if he's in a good mood, he will take you home (if you live near by). Now, if your car is not parked in a place that is a danger to other drivers, like on the shoulder, then they will not tow it... All in all, a DUI arrest takes about an hour and then you are free to go on your way. This is why some people have 2 or more DUI's in the same night.

65297972
Flag this comment

minjin said on April 15, 2011 at 7:54 PM

@ nguminh, your response is moronic. The amount of time it takes to impound a vehicle in negligible and it will not have a noticeable affect on workload and / or overtime. If you want to consider it a tax, that is fine. Don't want to pay the tax, DON'T DRIVE DRUNK. I don't smoke, therefore I don't pay the cigarette tax. @ LusciousDC, your response isn't any better. First, she didn't "get out of jail quickly", she was never booked, which many DUI drivers aren't. They are processed and released. Secondly, you need to read the article. The girl didn't die. She's had 15 surgeries over four years. Thirdly, what would possibly make you think it is OK to blame the Trooper for the actions of someone else? The woman called a cab and went back to her car. There is no way that the Trooper could have known she was going to do that. Maybe we should blame you because you weren't around to call 911 when she was going the wrong way. Lastly, go back to school. Your grammar sucks.

65042717
Flag this comment

nguminh said on April 15, 2011 at 1:21 PM

forgot to mention, this is more overtime, more work for the Justice dept. This is a way for job security. Create more work for yourself and here the tax payer pick up the tap. Let's collect more tax.

65017254
Flag this comment

nguminh said on April 15, 2011 at 1:19 PM

this is just create more money for the state and burden the justice system. I don't think this will stop anyone from drinking. if they are really want to stop DUI, state should stop selling them and stop taxing them. if you want to drink go to Vancouver BC, Oregon or Idaho. let's see who really miss out.

65017107
Flag this comment

LusciousDC said on April 15, 2011 at 8:21 AM

What I'm NOT understanding about why this bill was created anyway. IF a person is arrested for DUI, how are they getting out of jail so quickly? Okay the woman that killed the girl didn't go to jail; the officer took her home. WHY? Why wasn't this woman booked into jail for DUI? I sincerely hope that officer was fired for his part in this girl's death. Had he done his job she would have died.

64988947
Flag this comment

tomma206 said on April 15, 2011 at 8:12 AM

This wont stop anyone from drinking and driving.Its all just a con to make the family of hailey satisfied.What would stop this person from getting behind the wheel of a different car?Nothing.

64988037
Flag this comment

skok_cush said on April 15, 2011 at 7:43 AM

DUI's are not just $200 for impound, Gotta Pay Lawyer(For those of us with a job) Pay interlock on Car, Rehab, Probation,New License, and a few more things ive forgotten, in all, first offense is $5000-$7000 easy. Honestly if i knew all involved in DUI's i would have thought twice. But in my earlier years, drinkin=EZ Girls. I know the Nazi's will preach what a horrible person i use to be, enjoy. . . . . .Point bein if i REALLY knew what all was involved, i woulda never got a DUI. I figured it was just "pay a huge fine", and on with my life, . . . .WRong!. . . . Bank Robbers get off with alot less then Simple DUI's by a long shot. . . . . . . .Need to run Some State Patrol Commercials warning drivers that DUI's are $5-7000 for first offense and Life completely interupted for at least the first year, and DUI's will go down in a hurry, those that still get DUI's deserve them. But then Govt revenues would go down.

64985347
Flag this comment

smoocher1 said on April 14, 2011 at 10:17 PM

I say impound the car on first offense 30days so the fools who drive drunk have time to sober up. Then post their pictures on the nightly news and if video is involved it should be mandatory the drunk watches it to see what idiots they are under the influence. Can't afford the tow and impound fees... lose the car. A second offense seize the car and sell it with the fee going to the victims of drunk driving and detox. Add required community service in the county morgue for thirty days. Third time...mandatory LONG term jail time with mandatory detox program. California cops say they can't keep repeat offenders off the road no matter what they do to them. Current law is a slap on the hand. The lives they take and the damage they do is deadly serious and the first time should be a serious wake up/sober up call. A $200 fine is nothing to these selfish individuals. The public can help by calling police whenever one suspects a drunk driver. The life you save could be yours.

64963462
Flag this comment

esther414c said on April 14, 2011 at 10:10 PM

The more costly they make it, perhaps more people would think twice before getting behind the wheel drunk. What it costs the person who gets the DUI is SMALL compared to taking a person's life, or completely messing up a person's life. And someone who was able to pay for a cab to go back to get her car should have paid the cab fare home & kept the car parked. There is far too much drunken driving going on these days, because people think they can handle it. For some reason, its enbarrassing these days to do the responsible thing - call a cab, call a friend or have a DD along. Man up people. It's about saving lives, not about your ego.

64963254
Flag this comment

Sir_Real said on April 14, 2011 at 9:38 PM

Good thing I drive a vehicle from our company's motorpool... cannot tow me then! Oh and I also manage the motorpool, so the notice that the vehicle was stopped would come to me anyway... ha ha.

64962187
Flag this comment

nickc said on April 14, 2011 at 9:15 PM

unnecessary! that's bologna! First of all if the person is stupid unuf to drive drive drunk they should be off the street and allot longer then 12 hours, and deserve to have there car impounded. Second when you drive drunk you are gambling with your life and the life of others, as will as property. You do have the right to gamble with your life, and your property, but not the life and property of others. This law reduces you gambling with other peoples lives and property, but I don't think it gos far unuf.

64961387
Flag this comment

logic14 said on April 14, 2011 at 8:43 PM

Seize the car and shoot the driver on the spot. I bet a lot more cabs would be called within the week of that law going into effect!

64959887
Flag this comment

logic14 said on April 14, 2011 at 8:42 PM

"Opponents argued a state law require impounds....cost to drivers is excessive." Are you kidding me?! Costly when the drunks kill twice as many people as ALL violent fcrimes combined? Cost when they drive again and kill or maime? The only thing they care about is their car not going to jail! This is a self imposed cost. If you drive drunk, get arrested, it is gonna cost. Everyone knows this but it still happens in huge numbers.

64959799
Flag this comment

kak55 said on April 14, 2011 at 8:14 PM

@ Equilizer...so what? If someone choses to drive drunk, they should have to pay the price. Whether it's $200 or $400, it doesn't matter. Drunk driving shouldn't happen. Period. Maybe if a drunk driver has to pay $400 to get their car back, they will think about their actions the next time they are tempted to make that mistake.

64957852
Flag this comment

equilizer said on April 14, 2011 at 6:39 PM

IF YOU GET YOUR CAR IMPOUNDED IN EVERETT WASH IT IS NOT 200.00 MORE UP TOWARDS 400.00 THE TOW YARDS CHARGE WHAT THEY WANT AND END UP KEEPING PEOPLES CARS BECAUSE THEY CAN NOT PAY THE BILL AND THE TOW COMPANYS KNOW THAT.

64951617
Flag this comment

ltc67 said on April 14, 2011 at 5:19 PM

Personally I think the vehicle should be confiscated, crushed, and sold as scrap. I also think anybody caught driving while under the influence should be charged with attempted aggravated murder with a deadly weapon.

64946602
Flag this comment

elljay13 said on April 14, 2011 at 3:45 PM

$200 is not excessive for the drivers. A friend of mine recently had her vehicle stolen, through no fault of her own, and when it was found, damaged, she had to pay almost $400 in impound fees to retrieve her vehicle. DUI drivers CHOOSE to get behind the wheel. $200 is cheap. Isn't the point of the punishment to actually punish the criminal? Yes, in the perfect world all DUI offenders would be put behind bars for 24 hours. However, if you have looked at jail population statistics lately, you will see one of the huge reasons this doesn't happen. As far as I am concerned they should all be thrown in a drunk tank, and left to sit in there until they sober up. This law doesn't solve every problem associated with DUIs. It does solve one piece of the puzzle. Hopefully this law will prevent this from happening to anybody in the future. Congratulations, Hailey! I am proud of you for taking this horrible, horrible tragedy and turning into legislation that will save lives.

64940882
Flag this comment

trdell1234 said on April 14, 2011 at 3:41 PM

Maybe people will get a cab or motel. Cheaper than the 200 plus court cost.

64940684
Flag this comment

jeana121170 said on April 14, 2011 at 3:19 PM

Oh no, $200 is excessive for the drivers??? If they don't get behind the wheel drunk, then they won't have to worry about that, now will they?? Opponents, who were these opponents that thought this to be unnecessary, I would like to know who they are and their reasons behind this thought!!

64938962
Flag this comment

sunnynseattle said on April 14, 2011 at 3:14 PM

Why not make it mandatory to lock the drunk driver up for at least a 24 hour hold? They could always find another car to drive.

64938659
Flag this comment

NotSuprised said on April 14, 2011 at 3:05 PM

I'm all for the Impound because the heart of the law makes sense. However, most people have more than one car at their house or access to other cars. How about a mandatory booking law with a 24 hour hold on the arrested subject as well. A drunk cited and released to drive again does absolutely nothing and is just a drunk driver. The heart of the law is understood but mandatory holding the drunk at jail until sober (24 hour minimum) makes more sense......send the drunk the jail bill to.......just saying.....

64937989
Flag this comment

1beachperson said on April 14, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Who cares about the impound cost? If you have the $$ to booze it up and drive, then you can pay the price - jail, fine, impound at the very least!

64936817
Flag this comment

dakotanative said on April 14, 2011 at 2:50 PM

This bill was sponsored and paid for by the tow truck owners association.

64936737
Flag this comment

mellybelly323 said on April 14, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Maybe if you're afraid of having to pay out the a** to get your car back, you'll think twice before you climb behind the wheel if you've been drinking.

64930232
Flag this comment

killerwhale said on April 14, 2011 at 1:19 PM

As far as I am concerned, a person driving drunk, with prior convictions, should have his car taken away and crushed into scrap metal with him/her watching the whole thing or at least the state could auction it and make some much-needed money for law enforcement! If the drunk cannot afford another car - all the better!

64928822
Flag this comment

kong5 said on April 14, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Small impound fee compared to going to court for killing or injurying someone. If you have money to buy booze to get yourself drunk, then you'll be able to pay for the impound fee.

64925862
Flag this comment

firesoul said on April 14, 2011 at 12:22 PM

The signs of drunkenness are pretty foolproof, unless a lot of Americans can't recite their ABCs, touch their finger to their nose, or walk in a straight line. I fully support this law and, like other posters, see no problem with keeping the car for a lot longer than 12 hours. A friend of mine in high school lost family members to a head on collision from a drunk driver. Maybe if their car had been impounded on previous incidents, it wouldn't have happened.

64923597
Flag this comment

TheOtherSide said on April 14, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Good! Consequences need to be excessive otherwise people won't take anything seriously. Think before you act and possibly kill someone else in the process.

64923149
Flag this comment

noskills said on April 14, 2011 at 11:59 AM

I see no problem with this law. Im sure most of the time when DUI the driver probably is drunk. Im sure there are not a lot of mistakes with this one.

64921552
Flag this comment

w7rkd said on April 14, 2011 at 11:47 AM

Opponents are right, it's unecessary because they are in jail for 24 hours, and it doesn't go far enough, more like a month would be sufficient for them to have their car or vehicle impounded. The ones who complain about this obviously drink and drive or have had multiple DWIs and are up to get another one soon!

64920262
Flag this comment

digiwave said on April 14, 2011 at 11:38 AM

This only delays the next DUI, or worse, another fatality for 12 hours. It's not even a part of a solution to the epidemic of drunk drivers on the road. It's just some "feel good" legislation that is really meaningless.

64919387
Flag this comment

tacwilster said on April 14, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Does it seem like discrimination? YES if they are going to impound your car when you haven't even been found guilty of a DUI then will the courts reimburse the owners when they are found innocent. It is only "crime" where are guilty before you have even been to court! They should impound cars when drivers are pulled over for talking or texting on their phone, this is just if not more dangerous than DUI.

64918842
Flag this comment

freedomfrank said on April 14, 2011 at 11:31 AM

They should lose the car forever. $200???? Tough cookies,, don't drink and drive.

64918537
Flag this comment