The fact that they call it the "Wall of Shame", and that the county executive admits they're using it to make DWI less 'socially acceptable' proves that they are using this as a tool to punish the suspects. The judge got this one right. We do not punish people before they've gotten a trial.

i dont think its right to put the pictures up.
Pedophile pictures are okay to put up but DUI'S? what are they going to warn everyone that they should rive away from these people?

If they put these pictures up AFTER conviction I might not have a problem with it. Public shaming is a powerful tool.

I appreciate what they're trying to do, but there are more responsible ways of going about it. I do think that the "Wall of Shame" is punishment beyond their sentence. Might as well brand their foreheads with DWI. It is a matter of public record after all.

Exactly Michelin...couldn't have said it better. These people haven't been convicted of anything yet.

I don't know, Mich. People seem to have a high tolerance for being shamed on the internet these days. The pictures that some people will post on their MySpace and Facebook can be pretty unbelievable.

Mariner I love all the people who video tape themselves committing crimes and then post them on youtube and get caught.

Its like seriously, who told you that was a good idea.

Haha, MM, that's sad but true.

It's the timing of the pictures and not the pictures themselves that's in question. Also DWI/DUI is in some cases an subjective crime technically even if you aren't at or over the legal limit a peace officer can determine at their discretion that you are too impaired to drive and can take you to jail ( therefore they should just make it illegal to drink and drive across the board forget the numbers). But to the point.... punishing people prior to them being convicted of a crime is insane. So yes placing their pictures up prior to trial taints the jury pool and in essence doesn't allow the "suspect" a fair trial and waste tax payer money and time.

I had an old roommate who seriously put a picture of herself peeing outside while she was drunk on her MySpace, pants down and everything. I don't get the point. It's like look I'm a lush who think it's awesome to have people take pictures of me while I urinate! This is how I want people to judge me!

She should have been found guilty before the pictures got posted. However, I think a Wall of Shame is a good idea. DUIs are a big problem here at my base, and I've always thought posting offenders pictures on a billboard at the entrance gates would be a good deterrent. After all, drunk drivers clearly care about themselves first and would probably be mortified at having their unflattering mug shots plastered for all their co workers and NCOICs to see.

The crackdown on it probably stems from how last month, they posted a woman on it who crashed because she was having a reaction due to the fac that she was a diabetic in need of insulin. Her breathalizer showed she had no alcohol in her system but they posted her mugshot anyway.

bastylefilegirl, I completely agree with making it illegal across the board, or at least set the limit at .02. So many people do complicated equations to determine if they're okay to drive (usually incorrectly)...I say just don't do it!

Oh, Desi, that's awful! These should not be posted pre-trial.

*fact

I think DUI/DWI laws are bad period! One drink for "the average" women could legally render her intoxicated i.e. if you go out for dinner and have a drink and then get into a car you could be arrested. And I'm willing to bet for most people ( maybe not in this room) they wouldn't consider themselves drunk and most people don't even truly recognize that just that one drink is a crime. Therefore I think it should just be totally illegal to drink and drive especially because we are then leaving it in the judgement of Peace Officers to pick and choose who they charge.

I had a friend who was barely below the legal limit CA .078 but the Peace Officer took her in, I had another friend who was admitly drunk get pulled over and not even breathalyzed or field tested get sent home with parting words of " you go straight home" That to me says that the law and the people that are enforcing it are flawed.

BA, I agree that the laws are bad. They're based on what would impair the average person, but like you said, some people are impaired way before .08. In the same vein, some people can have twice what any other person could drink and still drive perfectly. Everybody tolerates alcohol differently. I'm really not sure what the best way to fix it would be. Your suggestion might work, but there definitely needs to be an examination of the current system. The limit is arbitrary.

I'm of the opinion that drinking and driving should not be a crime in and of itself. If you do something reckless, illegal, or otherwise dangerous while intoxicated, you could use the drunkenness as an aggravating factor.

I agree that it's the timing of the pictures that is really questionable. If she hadn't been convicted of DWI/DUI yet, then there is no reason it should have been posted.

Personally, I believe that the "Wall of Shame" is a justifiable punishment for the crime. It's good as a deterrent. Furthermore, driving under the influence of anything isn't just something that affects a select group, it puts the entire public in danger. It's highly irresponsible, and pretty much preventable. [if you don't have the sense to plan for a night of drinking, you *should* be punished! plan a limit, get a buddy, a taxi, designate a sober driver... if you can't do any of those then DON'T GO OUT DRINKING!]

However, it shouldn't be a *permanent* thing. Maybe just putting mugshots up for a couple of days or a week might be better.

Going to jail for having one drink, having to go to court, getting your license suspended, bumming rides and taking a DUI course with a room full of strangers is shaming however there is a high percentage of people who re offend ( so have undiagnosed substance abuse issues) so "shame" isn't always a deterrent.

I have no problem with the wall so long as they wait until after the sentencing. And it shouldn't be permanent either.

I agree with what everyone is saying. Sure the photos are public property, but posting them on a "wall of shame," before the suspects have had their day in court is a ridiculous infringement on due process. Why even bother having a trial?

As someone with a DUI on my record, it was quite a summer while I was gone, I think that it's hilarous defientaly not a deterrent but it's funny as hell and would have thought so even if they posted my mug shot

"As someone with a DUI on my record, it was quite a summer while I was gone, I think that it's hilarous defientaly not a deterrent but it's funny as hell and would have thought so even if they posted my mug shot"

Statements like this make me happy that I am pursuing a career as a prosecutor and not a defense attorney. But still.must.respect Constitutional rights. Yep. Argh.

Excuse but does that avatar pair the phrase "Nobama" with the picture of a monkey in a suite? Anybody else bother by the blatant racism?

Oh I was so appalled by the statement I didn't even notice the avatar. And McCainiacs keep wondering why Obama supporters worry about the race issue...

Anyone see the mug shots The Smoking Gun posts on Fridays? Now THOSE are funny!

wow liciababe....you really have some balls with that avatar.
Do you not have any type of respect for anyone?

whaaaat! not cool, liciababe.

LOL at YOUR avatar, mommaof2!

karste ummm yes I am I can't believe that licibabe has the nerve. And before they try and defend themselves and say that scientist say all humans evolved from apes etc we all know that the "monkey" has been used in derogatory ways against African Americans specifically! Not cool I hope someone reported them!

It's advertising for a courthouse or jail that should not have it. So of course it should be taken down.

If they want to post the photos online after conviction, I'd fully support that. After all, convictions are public records. And if the threat of being publicly exposed as the idiot they are prevents even one person from getting behind the wheel intoxicated, than it's well worth it. Drunk driving is terribly dangerous not only to the person driving, but to other innocent people on the roads.

The problem with the current set-up, however, is that they're posting photos of accused drunk drivers. Sure, maybe 95% of them are guilty, but for the 5% that aren't, it's completely unfair and possible defamation over a crime they did not commit.