Senator Wants DUI Charges Dismissed Citing that Lawmakers are “Privileged from Arrest” - Polidicks

[QUOTE][IMG]http://www.dcclothesline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/senator-claims-above-the-law-dui-600x312.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Frankfort, KY — A Kentucky state senator is having no reservations about proclaiming his political privilege. In fact, he’s simply citing a section of the Kentucky constitution that claims politicians are in fact, above the law. Sen. Brandon Smith (R) was charged with driving under the influence and wants the case dismissed citing that lawmakers are “privileged from arrest.” His attempt to circumvent the hand of justice have thus far proven to be successful too. On Wednesday a judge delayed Smith’s arraignment after his attorney filed this request. “(Smith) has raised a serious constitutional issue regarding his immunity in this case,” attorney Bill Johnson wrote. Smith and his attorney are citing a century-old rule, Section 43 of the Kentucky Constitution, which is still on the books and states: “The members of the General Assembly shall, in all cases except treason, felony, breach or surety of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance on the sessions of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House they shall not be questioned in any other place.” The Senator was arrested on January 6, by a Kentucky state trooper, just after 9 pm — on the opening day of the legislative session. Smith was charged with DUI and speeding 20 mph over the posted limit. The State Journal reports that according to the citation, Smith was stopped on Village Drive after he was seen driving 65 mph in a 45 mph zone on Leestown Road, near the intersection of Copperleaf Boulevard. The trooper described several failed field sobriety tests and said Smith blew a .088 on a preliminary breath test. Once in the custody of police at the Franklin County Regional Jail, he refused an official breathalyzer. Under state law, refusing a breathalyzer is an automatic suspension of one’s license. However, Johnson claims that Smith didn’t refuse. Instead he claims that the phone in the jail malfunctioned, “He was instead told that he had ‘refused’ after fifteen minutes of attempting to get the phone to work to contact his attorney,” said Johnson. Johnson is requesting that the license revocation be held off until the judge rules on the motion to dismiss the charges altogether, based on the assertion of the senator, that he is above the law.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/01/23/senator-wants-dui-charges-dismissed-citing-lawmakers-privileged-arrest/[/url]

oh send him to jail pricks like this piss me off.

They should strip him of office and jail him instead now.

Fucker oughta get recalled and locked away. Going 20 mph drunk... fuck him. Look at that smug douchebag. He's an embarrassment to his office and more.

I'm sure if they bothered to check his trunk they would have found some dead hookers in there. That's a felony right?

He does realize that he's not [i]supposed[/i] to be some kind of monarch or nobleman... Right? Right?!

I have to admit I don't know much about US law, but in the UK you can be quite easily be be arrested for being in breach of the peace by being drunk. Why not charge the guy for the same? (which, as a member of the general assembly, he can be according to the article.)

-snip-

DUI is a pretty scummy thing to do, cause it puts others in danger. He can drink as much as he likes and I wouldn't care, but DUI puts innocent people, children into danger.

Just shows how disconnected these people are. Someone like him has no excuse for DWI, he has the means to get travel arrangements. Then to say he is above the law, fuck this loser.

The law should treat everyone equally. If this guy gets away with no punishment, there would be a terrible hypocrisy with this government.

[QUOTE=BCell;47004307]The law should treat everyone equally. If this guy gets away with no punishment, there would be a terrible hypocrisy with this government.[/QUOTE] Dick Cheney shot a dude in the face.

I don't see the problem here. I generally do 15 over, and he was going to an assembly, so what if he is a little over the limit.

[QUOTE=draugur;47003846]They should strip him of office and jail him instead now.[/QUOTE] I don't know about the US but here you get treated with the law as it was at the time of the offence, so that wouldn't work I don't think? Also what's the difference between a felony and a crime?

Specifically, the Constitution says that lawmakers may not be imprisoned while performing their Congressional duties while Congress is in session, unless their conduct constitutes a breach of the peace. Essentially, they cannot be jailed or brought to court for civil matters, such as failing to pay child support for instance, but only when they are in session. Essentially, he does not have a legal or constitutional basis for insisting he is immune, because drunk driving should be considered a breach of the peace (i.e. criminal, albeit a misdemeanor.) I would not be surprised if, should this go to the Supreme Court, that section of the Kentucky Constitution should be found to be in error and amended. There is also the question of why he did not call a cab, why he was going to a session of Congress while inebriated, etc... He will almost certainly be censured by the Senate and his political career is also down the toilet. [editline]24th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=James xX;47004330]I don't know about the US but here you get treated with the law as it was at the time of the offence, so that wouldn't work I don't think? Also what's the difference between a felony and a crime?[/QUOTE] Felonies are more serious crimes which can be punished by over a year in prison or more than $1,000 in fines. All other criminal offences are called misdemeanors. Drunk driving on their first offense is considered a misdemeanor, unless he injured someone.

Judge: Ayy lmao

"I don't have the follow the rules. I just make them."

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;47004329]I don't see the problem here. I generally do 15 over, and he was going to an assembly, so what if he is a little over the limit.[/QUOTE] I don't even know where to begin with this, besides that I really hope you're trolling. First, "Because I regularly break the law and get away with it," isn't a very compelling defense. 20 miles isn't a minor increase in speed as well, he was on a 45 mile road, that's nearly 1 and half times the speed limit. And even disregarding the speed limit part, intoxication severely impacts a person's decision making skills and response time. Driving can be very dangerous if you screw it up, what with most vehicles weighing in excess of two tons, he could have very easily hurt himself or someone else as a result. Do you have any idea how many people die each year while they themselves were obeying traffic laws because some asshole who had to much to drink decided it would be a good idea to get into a car that day?

[IMG]http://cdn3.epictimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/713021_orig.jpg[/IMG] "DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY!" Edit: [IMG]http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rXYnwwv0AbA/hqdefault.jpg[/IMG] "It's just been revoked."

Um no there's a specific article of the constitution that says government officials are not in fact exempt from the law

Snip I'm dumb

[QUOTE=Sableye;47004664]Um no there's a specific article of the constitution that says government officials are not in fact exempt from the law[/QUOTE] Actually part of it states that they must follow the laws everyone else does.

[QUOTE=Hilton;47004907]Actually part of it states that they must follow the laws everyone else does.[/QUOTE] If that's true, than shouldn't federals laws supersede the state's constitution?

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;47004329]I don't see the problem here. I generally do 15 over, and he was going to an assembly, so what if he is a little over the limit.[/QUOTE] Uh, he was fucking drunk..? Or is that okay with you?

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;47004329]I don't see the problem here. I generally do 15 over, and he was going to an assembly, so what if he is a little over the limit.[/QUOTE] The fact that he was speeding is not the issue, the fact that he was legally drunk is.

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;47004329]I don't see the problem here. I generally do 15 over, and he was going to an assembly, so what if he is a little over the limit.[/QUOTE] Are you fucking insane?

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;47004329]I don't see the problem here. I generally do 15 over, and he was going to an assembly, so what if he is a little over the limit.[/QUOTE] Ah, another quality post from JohnFisher89. "drunk driving is fine if you're wealthy, or hold a position of political power".

It's like they legitimately think they're nobility.

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;47004329]I don't see the problem here. I generally do 15 over, and he was going to an assembly, so what if he is a little over the limit.[/QUOTE] Either you didn't read the article part about him being drunk, or you're incredibly stupid. Probably both.

[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;47006121]Ah, another quality post from JohnFisher89. "drunk driving is fine if you're wealthy, or hold a position of political power".[/QUOTE] He didn't mention anything about wealth or status though.