Introduction

On March 21, 1999, Sarah Towery and Chip Smith were killed by a drunk driver (Jeffrey A. Trout) in Lafayette, Indiana. Trout also died. He was a repeat drunk driving offender with a long history of contempt for the judicial system. This tragic incident need not have happened. Since the crash, we have learned a lot about how the judicial system works and about the lack of communication among various law enforcement agencies, different states, and even neighboring counties. Although Trout was the primary cause of the crash, there are numerous individuals, government agencies, and the judicial system that allowed this tragedy to occur and must share some of the responsibility. 

Drunk driving reform actions will reduce future drunk driving tragedies, assign financial responsibility for irresponsible behavior, and create a more efficient judicial system. Some changes are fairly simple and should be fairly easy to enact; others require a major shift at either the state and/or federal level. 

Each one of these initiatives is a direct result of this one particular incident. A detailed version, which provides additional background material, is available. 

1) Complete computer records and digital fingerprint analysis for tracking and fraud prevention

The technology is currently available for digitizing fingerprints, taking digital photos, doing records checks, and having the complete file of an individual within a matter of seconds. The biggest challenge for this to be effective is that every law enforcement agency would need to be linked into a central nationwide system. It is even possible that a law enforcement officer could do a fingerprint scan in the field and have the results back in seconds. The ease of using false names and fake identification to hide prior arrests and convictions would be eliminated. The advantages of such a system would be enormous.


2) Mandatory ignition interlock devices for OWI offenders

Everyone convicted of drunk driving must have an ignition interlock device installed on his or her car for at least two years. There are no exceptions. This will not only reduce the number of repeat offenders but also cause the casual drinkers to consider the consequences of having too many beers and driving. Texas recently passed legislation requiring the ignition interlock for every OWI in the state.

3) Mandatory dram shop (liquor liability) insurance in order to obtain a liquor license

Why is there legislation requiring automobile insurance while dram shop insurance is not required in some states, like Indiana, in order to obtain a liquor license? A state statute should require a minimum of one million dollars dram shop insurance for any establishment that sells alcohol. A sliding scale could be used to determine the actual amount of dram shop insurance based on total alcohol sales. Adjustments could be made for package versus bar sales. Perhaps then bar owners would think about the potential repercussions of selling additional alcohol to intoxicated people. Also, if there were repeat claims against a particular bar, dram shop insurance rates would increase, perhaps making the bar owner act more responsibly. On the other hand, bar owners could receive a discount on the insurance if they adequately train their bartenders and servers.

4) Mandatory bartender training

Bartender training is at the discretion of the bar owner in Indiana. It is in the interest of public safety to ensure that bartenders receive adequate training in recognizing if someone has had too much to drink, knowing when to cut off the alcohol, and taking the appropriate actions to ensure intoxicated people don’t leave their bar and drive.

In this case, James Irwin received no training. Moreover, even after the facts of the crash were known--and the whereabouts of the drunk driver just minutes before the crash--the bar owner did not bother to call his employees together to caution them about serving intoxicated people.

5) Deny or refuse to renew bartender's license for habitual offenders 

Habitual substance offenders are unlikely to enforce laws such as not serving an intoxicated person. An alcoholic is an alcoholic for life. While one has to make a living, there are many other choices. A court-declared habitual substance offender should not be allowed to obtain a bartender’s license, ever.

6) A bartender convicted of serving alcohol to an intoxicated person must forfeit his/her bartender’s license.

Bartenders convicted of serving alcohol to an intoxicated person should be ineligible to retain or obtain another bartender’s license.

7) Auto insurance waivers with accountability

There are legitimate reasons for auto insurance waivers. However, there also needs to be accountability so people don’t abuse the option. I look at it much like when someone cosigns a loan. One can cosign but realize that if the person defaults then you are left to repay the loan. If you sign your name for insurance coverage in which there is a waiver for a particular driver, then it must be with the understanding that if the convicted driver operates the vehicle anyway, and causes bodily harm, you will be held legally responsible for restitutions.

The other option is to simply disallow any vehicle ownership or coverage for anyone who has had multiple OWIs. Their vehicles are confiscated. New York State is currently doing this upon arrest for OWI.

Another option would be to have the state bureau of motor vehicles require the license plates to be turned in upon conviction of a second OWI.

8) Penalties for delaying the court process

If the BAC is over .15, the accused asks for a continuance, and he/she is found guilty, then fines are doubled, ignition interlock time is doubled, house arrest time is doubled, and work release or jail time is doubled. 

9) Adequate funding for probation department

The probation department needs the resources to properly oversee those on probation. Any system is only as good as its weakest link. An oversight committee should be established to ensure that the probation department has adequate resources in the context of the number of cases it handles.

10) Uniformity in charges and sentences across the country

Set the national BAC of .08. 

Create uniform standards such as the following:
First OWI: ignition innerlock or home detention required on all individuals with BAC over legal limit for two years; fine plus court costs; 20-100 hours of community service depending on level of intoxication; mandatory drug and alcohol counseling.

Second OWI: mandatory ignition interlock for 3 years; 90 days home detention or 30 days in jail; 20-100 hours of community service (depending on level of intoxication); fine plus court costs; mandatory drug and alcohol counseling.