Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Is a third term in Gov. Pritzker’s future? Or maybe a Cabinet position?
Next Post: Energy Storage Now!
Posted in:
* WCIA…
Two people are in the hospital after a crash involving a retired police Sergeant near Lake Springfield Thursday night.
The Illinois State Police said a Toyota Tundra was traveling north on East Lake Shore Drive near Laconwood Drive around 9:20 p.m. The truck turned left in front of a Kawasaki motorcycle traveling south, failing to yield the right-of-way to the motorcycle. […]
The driver of a Toyota Tundra, 50-year-old former Springfield Police officer Michael Egan, was ticketed for the crash. […]
The police department is undergoing an internal investigation to ensure all policies and procedures were followed. […]
A spokesperson with the Sangamon County Sheriff’s Office said their office was not involved in the response to the crash.
* WCIS…
Chelsey Farley and Trevor Hopkins both suffered serious injuries, and their loved ones said they believe the proper measures were not taken hours following the crash. Farley’s sister, Caitlyn Weiss demands answers.
“Our family is just outraged,” Weiss said. “We want accountability and justice from the Springfield department for this type of egregious act, and for all the families who have had this type of trouble and heartache all year.” […]
Both family members said the sergeant was visibly disoriented at the scene.
“It’s been all over social media since 9PM,” Weiss said. “This officer is clearly drunk, clearly stumbling in the videos that everyone can reference and see all over.”
Weiss was shocked by the message she received from the State Police.
“The state police told me that I shouldn’t believe things on social media and that I need to put trust in them,” Weiss said. “They wouldn’t give me an answer, the answer that we all need, of why there was no field sobriety test given to the Springfield police off duty officer.”
Witnesses said Springfield Police arrived on the scene and gave Egan gum and hours to sober up. They also said that responding officers did not give Egan a field sobriety test.
However, according to Attorney Mark Johnson, drivers can legally refuse to take a breathalyzer test. […]
While State Police have taken over the crash investigation, the Springfield Police Department said an internal investigation is underway to make sure proper procedures were taken by the Springfield police officers.
* Videos taken after the crash and posted online by Chelsey Farley’s sister are here.
* SJ-R…
Michael Egan, 50, who had just retired from the police department, was ticketed for failure to yield the right of way, according to a release from the Illinois State Police.
Deputy Chief Sara Pickford of Springfield Police said the on-duty lieutenant at the time, Lt. Grant Barksdale, contacted state police to conduct the traffic crash and a DUI investigation. Pickford said three ISP troopers arrived at the scene at 10:08 p.m. […]
“Both and active and retired law enforcement officers must be held to the same standards to maintain public trust and uphold the integrity of the Springfield Police Department,” SPD Chief Ken Scarlette said.
A protest is scheduled for tonight.
posted by Isabel Miller
Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 10:31 am
Previous Post: Is a third term in Gov. Pritzker’s future? Or maybe a Cabinet position?
Next Post: Energy Storage Now!
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Since when can you legally refuse a breathalyzer and not be arrested?
Comment by Trap Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 10:49 am
“why there was no field sobriety test given to the Springfield police off duty officer.”
Nobody knows how to get out of a DUI, better than the people who are responsible for enforcing it.
Now, such a refusal to submit to testing by the driver should automatically lead to a summery suspension, but it’s amazing how often the required court filing timelines are accidentally missed when these incidents involve police officers.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 10:49 am
Left turns in front of motorcyclists are more common when the motorcycle is speeding.
I’m not excusing the driver.
And once upon a time, I was the speeding motorcyclist.
Comment by We've never had one before Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 10:57 am
== Since when can you legally refuse a breathalyzer and not be arrested? ==
I genuinely hope someone can speak to this.
Comment by Incandenza Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 10:57 am
=== Since when can you legally refuse a breathalyzer and not be arrested? ===
It’s long been the case in Illinois that you could refuse the breathalyzer. If you refuse, you are subject to an automatic suspension of your license - but are depriving the state of evidence of your intoxication.
Comment by Bud's Bar Stool Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 10:59 am
=If you refuse,=
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but if you refuse the ISP can seek a warrant and have a blood test administered. I do not know the entire process required in terms of evidence etc.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:06 am
https://www.ilsos.gov/publications/pdf_publications/dsd_a118.pdf
Illinois Secretary of State dui handbook
Comment by Almost retired Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:18 am
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but if you refuse the ISP can seek a warrant and have a blood test administered. I do not know the entire process required in terms of evidence etc.
Mixed,bag. .kinda true but good luck finding a nurse/ hospital yo draw,the blood. Most,are,regusing since some,have been sued for battery…and lost…
Comment by Jilted Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:26 am
When the best way to hurt or kill someone without consequences (driving a vehicle) meets the best way to get away with most common crimes (being a cop)…
Comment by Homebody Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:26 am
==according to Attorney Mark Johnson, drivers can legally refuse to take a breathalyzer test==
True, as far as it goes, but refusal results in suspension of driver’s license and is admissible in criminal and civil proceedings as evidence of guilt. That is why it is important to find out whether he refused the test or of the cops covered for him by not requesting a test.
Comment by SAP Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:27 am
@never before, the motorcyclist may have seemed like it was coming fast because the cager was impaired to the point of delayed reflexes and decision-maker. Implying in the least little bit that this is the motorcyclists fault, is inane.
Saying it may not have been the driver and then saying I don’t excuse the (obviously impaired) driver, is a meaningless statement.
Comment by Lurker Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:27 am
If no field sobriety test was performed the offices involved in this response didn’t ask for a breathalyzer.
The public is owed an explanation. I suppose the question is whether Brendan Kelly understands that the public is owed a prompt explanation as to why our State Police Officers would intentionally bungle an investigation into a crime in order to protect a retired cop from the consequences of their crime.
Comment by Candy Dogood Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:29 am
How did the ex-officer get home? Did they let him drive?
Comment by Lurker Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:30 am
“However, according to Attorney Mark Johnson, drivers can legally refuse to take a breathalyzer test.”
Right. And then you are guaranteed to lose your license for a year, regardless of whether you were drunk.
I don’t know who it serves other than corrupt cops to mislead the public into thinking they’d have any success with this approach. Yes you can deny the breathalyzer, no it’s not going to help you turn back the legal machinery that was already set in motion when they pulled you over and you didn’t have a badge.
Comment by Larry Bowa Jr. Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:39 am
You can refuse field sobriety tests–the walk-and-turn, finger to nose, etc.–with no consequences and you also can refuse a roadside breath test with no consequences. Once at the station, you have to take a breath test. If you refuse, you are supposed to get your license suspended, but that’s not how it necessarily goes. Sangamon prosecutors, at least at one time, often will drop the license suspension in exchange for a guilty plea to DUI, with supervision, if it’s a first offense, the bad driving wasn’t egregious, there was no accident and the defendant wasn’t stumbling drunk.
This doesn’t appear to be one of those cases.
Given there was an injury accident and he refused field tests, the first priority should have been getting him to the station for a proper breath test. He likely would have refused that, too–cops more than anyone know that you’re better off not taking the test and suffering the consequences than taking a BAC test.
Comment by Don't Drive Drunk Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 11:44 am
I know of (former) active-duty state cops that couldn’t get out of a breathalyzer after being involved in vehicle accidents.
What the mother scratch is going down in that county?
Comment by Flyin'Elvis'-Utah Chapter Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 12:21 pm
==I know of (former) active-duty state cops that couldn’t get out of a breathalyzer after being involved in vehicle accidents.==
ISP can order sworn officers to take a chemical test under their administrative rules. The results couldn’t be used as evidence in a criminal prosecution but would be used for discipline for violating rules of conduct.
Because this driver was involved in a crash resulting in serious injury or great bodily harm, he is subject to having blood drawn without his consent. Like another poster said, not all medical professionals will assist a police officer in this forceful taking of a patients blood. Of course you can see why… hippocratic oath, lawyers… stuff that shouldn’t apply as long as the townfolk are ready with their pitch forks.
Comment by Occasionally Moderated Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 1:09 pm
===order sworn officers===
The officer is retired.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 1:10 pm
Getting a DUI in Sangamon County is one of the most messed up legal processes imaginable. My daughter (3 years old at the time) and I were hit head on on Interstate 72 by a drunk driver going the wrong way at 10:00 a.m. on a Sunday. That drunk driver refused the breathalyzer, was taken to jail and posted bond and was released before my daughter and I were released from the ER. Thank the Lord we suffered no major injuries, but we almost went over a barricade and if we had we would have ended up on 55 northbound. She was going the wrong way on the interstate and for some reason the ISP didn’t try to get a warrant to do a blood draw or make her go to the hospital. The summary suspension for refusing the breathalyzer was dismissed and ultimately the driving the wrong way on a one-way roadway was dismissed. She NEVER lost her license when they could have made the driving the wrong way on the interstate charges stick and she should have had her license suspended for that at a minimum. An accident reconstruction was never done. I get it was her first offense, but it was 10:00 a.m. on a Sunday and she was noticeably drunk and you could smell alcohol in the car per the officer that arrested her. She wasn’t just still drunk from the night before, she was drinking probably until the point she got in her car. I know several people that had a first time offense DUI and didn’t result in a wreck that resulted in at least a year long driver’s license suspension.
If a DUI isn’t handled correctly at the scene then it’s almost impossible to build a case in the courts. The officers that arrive on scene and ultimately issue those tickets are the first line of defense for the victims and should do what is necessary to ensure the driver doesn’t walk away consequence free.
The driver that hit my daughter and me didn’t have to deal with being separated from her screaming child to be taken to the ER, she didn’t have to hold and see her normally talkative, laughing toddler cuddle up to you in the ER non-responsive for hours due to shock, attend scores of doctor visits, months of physical therapy, returning to work when I should have stayed at home longer, have to take a different route home to this day because the accident happened on my most traveled route, your child asking every time, for months, if the black car in traffic was going to hit us and she probably wasn’t terrified to drive for years.
That driver was so drunk she probably doesn’t remember any of it, she got to go home to her two young children whose car seats were in the vehicle she was driving and take them places without them worrying about what was going to happen. I hope she maybe feels some remorse, but I doubt it. How else would an adult, with two young children that can’t even pay for her own attorney or be defended by the public defender due to her decision, she did know enough to refuse the breath analyzer and ask mom and dad to get her an attorney that could make it seem like this never happened.
In accidents that result in injuries to any party involved and substance or alcohol intoxication is a possible concern and refusal of a sobriety test or breathalyzer no ifs, and, or buts about it - submission to a blood draw should be required and mandatory license suspension until court appearance or legal blood draw results should be required. I understand the whole innocent until proven guilty and that blood draw is the answer to your innocence. If that doesn’t make you think twice about driving intoxicated then you have no business driving.
Comment by Drunk Driving Victim Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 1:11 pm
@Lurker:
I’m only saying that I’ve been the biker in such an accident, and I’ve seen it repeated over and over again, where the biker is speeding.
Comment by We've never had one before Monday, Sep 9, 24 @ 1:12 pm