RSS | Comments | Tell a Friend | Larger Text | Smaller Text | Bookmark and Share

Local News

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Sobriety stops net no OVI arrests
Oiler's Lube Express - Findlay
By J. STEVEN DILLON

STAFF WRITER

Troopers encountered more than 800 motorists during back-to-back sobriety checkpoints last weekend in Hancock County, but detected only one driver with alcohol on his breath.

And even that driver got off without a citation after testing under the legal intoxication limit.

"He had been drinking but he wasn't impaired so we allowed him to get a ride home," Lt. Jerrod Savidge said.

Savidge, supervisor of the Findlay post of the Ohio Highway Patrol, on Wednesday said no alcohol-related citations were issued during the two sobriety checkpoints on Saturday.

About 425 motorists passed through the first one, on U.S. 224 west of Findlay near Treadway Chrysler Dodge Jeep, from 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. Saturday.

Troopers, who checked only westbound vehicles, did cite four motorists for driving under suspension, according to the patrol.

The second checkpoint was operated between 8 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. on Ohio 12 west of Fostoria in Washington Township. Officers checked 395 motorists traveling both east and west on Ohio 12, but wrote a single ticket to a driver with a suspended license.

Savidge said the absence of alcohol citations was not discouraging and not surprising.

He said some of the motorists stopped indicated they had heard about the checkpoints from others or through the media. One driver said she had been alerted by friend via cell phone.

"People knew we were going to be out, which isn't a bad thing," he said. "Our guys had a lot of good, positive contacts with motorists.

"It is really about awareness," Savidge said. Operating a checkpoint "shows we're being proactive and doing our best to discourage drinking and driving."

The federally-funded checkpoints were considered "low manpower" checkpoints, which require fewer officers to operate.

It was the second time in as many years the patrol ran multiple checkpoints in the county on the same day.

Last September three were held, on Ohio 12, U.S. 224, and on Bright Road north of Ohio 12.

Savidge said it is likely another checkpoint will be operated in the post's area later this year. The Findlay post covers Hancock and Hardin counties.

Dillon: 419-427-8423,

Send an e-mail to Steve Dillon
Comment on This Story
NOTE: Comment moderation has been enabled. If you see a comment that violates our Electronic User Agreement, please e-mail webmaster@thecourier.com. Thank you. If you are having problems viewing this Web page, please contact our Internet Department to help us diagnose and correct the problem. We may contact you for more information. Thanks in advance.
Your e-mail address will not be displayed on this website or shared with anyone. It is used by our online editor for contacting purposes.
Comments are moderated by The Courier according to its Electronic User Agreement within one business day. Comments that slander others or include language that violates the agreement will be rejected. All comments that impart opinion and information are welcome.

38 Comments (4 pages)

Latest comments listed first.
tim wrote:
Steve
“ No-I don't have a problem following a conversation and I don't think I took anything out of context, I just repeated what you said in your own words. You apologized (very big of you) by agreeing they are not illegal in one post and then you stated in your next post that they constituted a traffic stop without probable cause and violated your 4th amendment rights-i.e. illegal. You seem to think that I'm trying to say that you don't have the right to your opinion, but as I've stated twice now-we both do. I'm just stating facts and you're stating feelings. If you FEEL that they violate your rights-fine, you have that right. I'm just saying it's a FACT that they are not illegal, and that's fine too. The bottom line to me is, if it saves just one life-and I'm sure they have-it's worth the 10 minutes of my time. If you're not doing anything wrong,and it can save someone's life-doesn't that make it worth it. Let me change that-if you're not doing anything wrong and it's your wife or your child's life that was saved-doesn't that make it worth it? It's been fun Steve, thanks for the lively debate. Best of luck to you on the roads....hope you never come across a drunk driver that took a detour around a checkpoint. ”
Wednesday, July 08, 2009 2:21:21 PM
Steve wrote:
You're the one getting confused Tim
“ Obviously you have problems following a conversation and are reduced to quoting fragments of sentences using them out of the context of the entirety of the original post. It's clear you missed the point somewhere along the way that I, and many others, including three of the US Supreme Court Justices who decided the case, legislators of other states, local jurisdictions, and even law enforcement personnel, believe checkpoints violate citizens' 4th Amendment rights, and further are not an economical solution to address impaired driving. Seriously, 800 stops and not a single DUI/OVI citation? This practice, with the intention of removing impaired drivers from the road is a failure. Did you know DUI/OVI convictions from checkpoint stops is a very small fraction of 1%? With that success rate, how are checkpoints not "fishing expeditions" for whatever the officer wants to find? Being stopped and required to prove innocence of everything before continuing on your way is un-American.

You on the other hand, will stand behind this bad practice until you're blue in the face, and have to file an itenerary with the government before you travel, because it's the LAW. Not that it's effective or a good idea, but it's the LAW!
 ”
Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:37:10 AM
tim wrote:
Steve
“ Now you're talking out of both sides of your mouth, in your last post you stated 'Sobriety checkpoints are not illegal as I misstated' Now-you're back to saying 'A check point is indeed a "traffic stop" without probable cause' So- just what do you believe? You seem confused. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that I'm right about the law-but you don't want to admit it and you don't like it. That's fine, you don't have to like it, it just is. So-it's not semantics, it's what you said, I'm just clarifying. I don't think I'm smarter and I never said any decision was unanimous, but the bottom line is that the Supreme law of this land is that checkpoints are legal and that's not drivel. That's a fact and that's all I said. Don't waste your time feeling sorry for me-I'm just fine, thanks. As far as the cop comment-I wasn't ridiculing you,and I don't know how it can be unflattering. I simply think it's funny that when people get into these conversations they talk about how law enforcement officers are taking away their rights and stripping them of their Constitutional protections and then say oh yeah-by the way some of my best friends are cops. Not unflattering-just funny! I'm not saying you don't have the right to feel the way you feel, as I stated we both have the right to our opinions, but at least be consistent. ”
Tuesday, July 07, 2009 3:42:12 PM
Steve wrote:
Semantics?
“ A check point is indeed a "traffic stop" without probable cause, it's my belief my 4th Amendment rights would be violated should I ever find myself subject to such a stop. I'm not changing the subject at all. Your drivel is a matter of semantics.

Whether or not you contend that you "know exactly what you're talking about" is irrelevant. Because you chose the victorious side in this case, it seems you think you are smarter than the dissenters to the opinion. Your opinion of the subject at hand is not as unanimous as you would like to lead the impressionable to believe, hence my references to other jurisdictions who have ruled the same searches illegal.

I feel sorry for people such as yourself who still argue you are free as your Constitutional protections are stripped before your very eyes.

BTW - You ridiculed me for stating I have friends who are also cops. If I may rebut your unflattering comment, I didn't use the statement to lend credence to my claims. I would further expound to say I too have the highest respect for these men and women who are sworn to uphold the law.
 ”
Monday, July 06, 2009 10:40:56 PM
Patrick wrote:
Someone is in denial
“ Marilyn,
Your comments are of great concern. I work on a daily basis with alcoholics and addicts who all try that same lame excuse you gave. "One or two cant hurt. I'm more aware when I've had a few." Perhaps sir, your drinking has escalated to a point where you even belive these statements to justify your actions. There is help out there. Please seek it before it's too late for you or your future victims. ”
Monday, July 06, 2009 12:54:05 PM
tim wrote:
Sorry Steve
“ Marilyn-a few drinks have killed plenty of people-No- I've never had a few drinks and driven anywhere. That would be stupid, wouldn't it? I can't do anything but shake my head at your comments.
Steve- Unanimous or not, in Ohio- it's the law. I was addressing, as were you, checkpoints-not traffic stops on the whole-and I content sir-that I know exactly what I'm talking about. You're trying to save face by changing the subject, but that's ok alot of people do that when they're wrong...'Quite a few close friends that wear the badge?' Doesn't everybody when they get into discussions about topics like this? And about the PC Nut-job activist, wrong again. I wish you could be right just once, but I'm sorry, you're not. I don't think it makes me a pc nut job activist because I know the law, abide by it, and defend the people out there every day protecting me and my freedom. That's what is great about freedom and this country-one person can be right and the other completely wrong-and it's ok. We both have the right to our opinions-because this is America. ”
Monday, July 06, 2009 11:59:03 AM
Steve wrote:
I stand corrected.
“ Sobriety checkpoints are not illegal as I misstated. I as well know they have been ruled acceptable by the US Supreme Court. However Tim, you left out the fact the Court did not rule unanimously on the issue, and in fact several states, not including Ohio, ruled them illegal according to their states' constitutions. That many lawmakers believe as I do, traffic stops without probable cause are, and should remain illegal is evident. I contend that segment "knows better than you".

I have never had a DUI or anything more serious than minor speeding tickets in 25 plus years of driving either. I don't have anything to hide, and have quite a few close friends who wear the badge, so you don't even need to go there.

Did I get "PC, nut job, activists" from TV? That's a good one. Who really cares when you're easy to spot, and ID from across the street (or on this blog).


 ”
Sunday, July 05, 2009 11:31:54 PM
Doug wrote:
This
“ While I would never drink and drive, I do find it menacing to be stopped, held up and searched a check point. Feels Un-American to me! However, it is legal, just like an abortion! So be it! ”
Sunday, July 05, 2009 12:14:01 PM
Todd Lucas wrote:
OVI Checkpoints
“ Well, then I really don't understand what your beef is, Mr. Cruz. Your arguement seems to imply that an OVI checkpoint is somehow an invasion of privacy or something. So, let's examine that.
There is no expectation of privacy at OVI checkpoints because these are conducted on PUBLIC thoroughfares. There's no violation of civil rights for at least two reasons I can think of just off the top of my head.
First, holding a drivers' license is a privilage and not a right. The state can revoke everyone's licenses anytime they want. And since issuing drivers' licenses is a state responsibility and not a federal one, there would be very little that could be done without someone suing the state. This is 9th grade Civics (Thank You, Mr. King). Granted there would be tremendous outcry, but, don't take my word for it. Look it up and see.
Second, they're not telling anyone where they can or cannot go. You're "O"perating a "V"ehicle which gives the police reason to suspect that you might be "I"ntoxicated ("probable cause" is for those that have already been convicted of OVI). If you're not intoxicated then the only thing that has happened is that it has taken you a little longer to get to your destination. Yeah, its inconvenient, but, you haven't been harmed in ANY way. If you ARE intoxicated then sucks to be you for being stupid enough to get behind the wheel in the first place. Go directly to jail. Do not pass "Go". Do not collect $200.
Your definition of a "fishing expedition" is an OVI checkpoint. The fact of the matter is that the only difference between an OVI checkpoint and a "cop on the beat" is that the officers at the checkpoint are simply waiting for the criminals to come to them as opposed to patrolling the city trying to find the criminals. By your definition, Mr. Cruz, a "cop on the beat" is doing just as much "fishing" as the cops at the checkpoint. On a side note, I have to agree with some of the other posters in that announcing where and when an OVI checkpoint is going to be seems counter-productive, but, as someone else correctly stated, the police are required by law to do so.
I understand you don't like this particular law, Mr. Cruz. I personally don't care for the concealed carry law, but, I'm not going to make a big deal out of it because its a fact of life. And before anybody goes ballistic, I'm NOT anti-gun. My Dad, may God rest and keep him, was an avid gun enthusiast and part-time smith and taught my brothers and me the proper way to handle a firearm. Frankly, I find target shooting very enjoyable. I just don't happen to think that carrying a gun under you jacket is necessary. But, the law is the law and so to each his own.
You don't like OVI checkpoints, Mr. Cruz, then do something to ban them. Good luck getting that past MADD, RADD, or any other organization dedicated to getting drunk drivers off the streets.
To Marilyn Manson: You want to have "innocent fun" with alcohol (or any other intoxicant for that matter) then KEEP YOUR REAR-END AT HOME! But, if your "innocent fun" includes driving somewhere after your fun is over then I suggest you issue a press release stating exactly where and when you're going to be having this "fun" so the rest of us can avoid you and the police can find you before you kill someone! You want to talk about pathetic! Calling drunk driving innocent fun is pathetic!
This is my soapbox and I'm standing on it! ”
Sunday, July 05, 2009 2:41:08 AM
Marilyn Manson wrote:
drunk driving
“ Tim - what i'm talking about is the hard working, tax payers just out having a few drinks, that are not a threat to killing someone while driving. i'm sure everyone posting on here has had an occasional drink and got behind the wheel, and was NOT a threat to society. The fact is, most people who get killed while driving, were NOT killed by a drunk driver. In oklahoma a few days ago, a guy driving a trunk killed 7 people, and the guy didnt have a single drink. driving is dangerous not matter what the circumstance. its when people start mixing their booze with drugs, when driving becomes dangerous. The guy who goes out just for a few beers should be left alone. Because he can drive a car just as good, or better because he is more alert after a few beers. And is not a hazard to the streets. ”
Saturday, July 04, 2009 6:08:17 PM
   NEWS VIDEO

Benton Ridge Shooting

This video, released by the Hancock County Prosecutor's Office, shows the shooting of a Lima man who led authorities on a three-county chase ending Aug.24 in Benton Ridge. Be cautioned, the video contains graphic content.
   SPECIAL SECTIONS
Summer Coupons
   WEEKEND
USA Weekend

ANDERSON COOPER: Five years after Hurricane Katrina, the CNN reporter returns to New Orleans as the Gulf Coast faces even newer challenges.


Roses are red...

SOLUTIONS, NOT PROBLEMS: The University of Findlay plays host to competitive sailor who is a quadruple amputee.

ALSO IN WEEKEND: Area events,
prep boys and girls soccer and a trip to Niagra Falls.

   STAY IN TOUCH
The Courier on Facebook
   VIRTUAL VILLAGE
TisaWee Farm

Far Flung Guest Book

Virtual Village
   PHOTO GALLERY
Randy's Seen

IMAGE BLOG: Go behind the scenes with Courier photographer Randy Roberts.


You can purchase photographs from The Courier through our easy-to-use online system. Get prints, mousepads, T-shirts and more!

   LOCAL NEWS
  LATEST COMMENTS Last 10 comments submitted by our readers...
Dave wrote in article "Shooting video released":
Suspect chose the outcome
“ This loser knew how this little incident was going to end! He knew EXACTLY what was gonna happen when he pretended to level a w... ” Read More...
9/2/2010 12:49:00 PM
disgusted in Findlay wrote in article "Heroin outbreak":
speaking the truth
“ Thank you "just saying" and "Ykfm" I to am getting tired of grandpa Tony trying to paint his grandson as a victim, whenhe was ac... ” Read More...
9/2/2010 12:39:40 PM
just sayin wrote in article "31 charged in Hardin drug probe":
drugs
“ sick of the whiners...kenton has more drugs than findlay ?how would you know that unless your involved in the drug scene?I love... ” Read More...
9/2/2010 12:08:35 PM
tired of this wrote in article "Shooting video":
benton ridge shooting
“ Well leave it to the courier to keep sterring the pot. The video that the courier itself posted clearly shows the suspect jump o... ” Read More...
9/2/2010 12:03:53 PM
just sayin wrote in article "Heroin outbreak":
the courier
“ what good does it do to blog on the couriers web site when the courier only post the blogs they want you to read how about posti... ” Read More...
9/2/2010 12:02:38 PM
retired OH cop in MT wrote in article "Shooting video released":
shooting
“ Nate.....after reading your comments, you wouldn't live long on the street as a police officer. I was involved in two shootings... ” Read More...
9/2/2010 11:30:30 AM
SICK OF THE WHINERS wrote in article "31 charged in Hardin drug probe":
DRUG BUST
“ Kenton has alot more drugs than Findlay!!! To those of you who don't like Hancock county, LEAVE! Everytime law enforcement in... ” Read More...
9/2/2010 11:19:09 AM
The Layman wrote in article "Parole denied in murder case":
Out of control
“ I'm sorry but there are way too many personal attacks allowed on this forum. You invalidate your point when you stray from the f... ” Read More...
9/2/2010 11:08:44 AM
j wrote in article "Many winners named as Hancock Fair opens":
Good but little expensive
“ The fair was interesting, but at $5 for the more popular rides on the expensive side, same with the food, many people commented... ” Read More...
9/2/2010 10:37:10 AM
JM wrote in article "McComb couple is serious about fair competition":
Very nice!
“ What a lovely article. Will have to check out their goods at the fair. ” Read More...
9/2/2010 10:21:42 AM
  U.S. Headlines
  World News
  Ohio News
Fornes Brake Service
News Briefs Firefighters discover 20 marijuana plants in house
After fighting a house fire early Monday at 815 Howard St., firefighters found 20 marijuana plants in the residence.

"They ran across it and called us," said police Sgt. Justin Hendren with the Hancock County METRICH Drug Enforcement Unit.

Police seized all 20 plants, and Hendren said charges are pending.

High-powered growing lights, fans, and a box filled with dried marijuana were also found in the house, according to a police report.

Investigators said an electrical short started the fire before 3 a.m. Monday.

The blaze caused an estimated $12,000 in damage to the residence, owned by Amanda Crawford. No one was injured, according to the Findlay Fire Department.

Carey announces holiday closing
CAREY -- Carey offices, including administrative, income tax and utilities, electric, wastewater treatment plant, and public works, will be closed Monday in observance of Labor Day.

The curbside recycling program will be held Tuesday through Thursday, Sept. 7-9.

Findlay trooper named sergeant
Trooper Jacob L. Fletcher, assigned to the Findlay post of the State Highway Patrol, was promoted to sergeant Wednesday by Patrol Superintendent Col. David Dicken.

With the promotion, Fletcher will stay at the Findlay post and serve as an assistant post commander, according to the patrol.

Fletcher began his patrol career in 2002 after graduating from the 139th Academy class and has been assigned to the Findlay post since.

Owens announces holiday schedule
The Toledo and Findlay campuses of Owens Community College will be closed Saturday through Monday for the Labor Day holiday.

There will be no classes and the college offices will be closed.

Classes will resume and offices will open again on Tuesday.

Holiday changes ad deadlines
The Courier won't be published on Monday, in observance of the Labor Day holiday.

Because of the holiday, some advertising deadlines have been moved up this week:

Black and white display advertising for Tuesday's newspaper must be placed by noon Friday. Display advertising for Wednesday's newspaper must be placed by 2:30 p.m. Friday.

Color display advertising for the Thursday, Sept. 9 newspaper must be placed by Friday.

Classified advertising and City and Country advertising for Saturday's newspaper must be placed by 2 p.m. Friday. Classified ads for Tuesday's newspaper must be placed by 2:30 p.m. Friday.

Courier business and advertising offices will close at 3 p.m. Friday for the holiday.