Honest Question about Jordan Williams

[so cal hawkfan]

I understand that part. My point is SOLELY about what a jury would decide based on that evidence. Also, he didn't drive the vehicle, so your wording doesn't apply here. The charge is based on him "controlling" the vehicle. I would think a jury could see that he never intended to drive it and "controlling" the vehicle is vague as hell when all he may have done was turn it on so the climate was comfortable enough to sleep it off in.

Would you convict someone of a DUI if the defense clearly proved he NEVER had intent to move that car whatsoever and all he ever did was turn the AC on to sleep until he was fit to drive?

As far as help goes, I have never said he didn't need it. If he wasn't drinking he wouldn't be in this situation even if he never was going to actually drive while drinking. I guess I may actually be different than most, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to punish someone so harshly for trying to do the right thing when drinking...

I have arrested hundreds of people for DUI in my 28 year Law Enforcement career. Plenty were passed out in vehicles with the engines running. The DA files those cases and most take plea deals or don’t and then get convicted. Jordan made the decision to drink to the point inebriation. He then made the decision to bring an open container into his vehicle and start the engine (we don’t know if he drove there or if he drank elsewhere and walked to where his car was parked. Let’s be real though, it was likely the former). I’ve seen quite enough people killed by drunk drivers to worry about whether a kid with an obvious problem with alcohol INTENDED to drive drunk. Even in ultra liberal LA County he’d get convicted. In Iowa? C’mon now.

 

[GLC1969]

I have said this previously i dont believe wrestling will help his problem. I wish the best for anyone who is struggling in life. Wrestling can help with a lot of things but it becomes a distraction to the bigger problem. IMO

 

[VonEhwegen]

Jordan needs to make a lot of decisions in his life and where he fits in at Iowa. He needs decide if he's ever going to put 100% effort into wrestling. He needs to decide between the party college life or the dedicated wrestling life. He needs to figure out his academics, hopefully he's eligible to even wrestle. The photo he shared when he announced he was coming back to Iowa, just shows how immature he truly is. Looks like he's just here at Iowa for the party life & Money. With wrestling coming in a distant second place. Where academics and setting himself up for what's beyond wrestling falls, who knows.

 

[manatree]

Just thought I would throw out the names Grothus & Teske to get this thread back on track.

 

[HugoHugo]

I understand that part. My point is SOLELY about what a jury would decide based on that evidence. Also, he didn't drive the vehicle, so your wording doesn't apply here. The charge is based on him "controlling" the vehicle. I would think a jury could see that he never intended to drive it and "controlling" the vehicle is vague as hell when all he may have done was turn it on so the climate was comfortable enough to sleep it off in.

Would you convict someone of a DUI if the defense clearly proved he NEVER had intent to move that car whatsoever and all he ever did was turn the AC on to sleep until he was fit to drive?

As far as help goes, I have never said he didn't need it. If he wasn't drinking he wouldn't be in this situation even if he never was going to actually drive while drinking. I guess I may actually be different than most, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to punish someone so harshly for trying to do the right thing when drinking...

The whole point of OWI laws is prevention.

Waiting until the drunk guy actually puts it in gear and runs over someone seems like a pretty inefficient strategy.

 

[MSU158]

I have arrested hundreds of people for DUI in my 28 year Law Enforcement career. Plenty were passed out in vehicles with the engines running. The DA files those cases and most take plea deals or don’t and then get convicted. Jordan made the decision to drink to the point inebriation. He then made the decision to bring an open container into his vehicle and start the engine (we don’t know if he drove there or if he drank elsewhere and walked to where his car was parked. Let’s be real though, it was likely the former). I’ve seen quite enough people killed by drunk drivers to worry about whether a kid with an obvious problem with alcohol INTENDED to drive drunk. Even in ultra liberal LA County he’d get convicted. In Iowa? C’mon now.

I would say 3 hours of the car running WITHOUT him driving it would be enough to say he wasn’t intending to drive drunk. However, I get that your job gives you a specific perspective and that is why you definitely wouldn’t even be on a jury anyway.

Still, you have my utmost respect for doing that job. A very difficult and often thankless job. Thank you for your service, even if we may disagree on parts of this topic.

 

[MSU158]

The whole point of OWI laws is prevention.

Waiting until the drunk guy actually puts it in gear and runs over someone seems like a pretty inefficient strategy.

At what point do you become a police state though? I am all for tough laws if you ACTUALLY commit the crime.

What if I was drinking at a party at my home, left a present in the car and went outside to get it out of the car and turned the car on to write something on the card before bringing it in? Do I deserve a DUI? Now, I would like to believe a cop wouldn’t even go there, but, if we are going by the letter of the law….

 

[so cal hawkfan]

At what point do you become a police state though? I am all for tough laws if you ACTUALLY commit the crime.

What if I was drinking at a party at my home, left a present in the car and went outside to get it out of the car and turned the car on to write something on the card before bringing it in? Do I deserve a DUI? Now, I would like to believe a cop wouldn’t even go there, but, if we are going by the letter of the law….

This is as piss poor of a retort as you’ve had. Talk about your and .

 

[newguy123]

I would say 3 hours of the car running WITHOUT him driving it would be enough to say he wasn’t intending to drive drunk. However, I get that your job gives you a specific perspective and that is why you definitely wouldn’t even be on a jury anyway.

Still, you have my utmost respect for doing that job. A very difficult and often thankless job. Thank you for your service, even if we may disagree on parts of this topic.

I know this isn't my forum, but I'm watching U23s and feeling social. So I'll say it's pretty funny to see you enjoy this debate so much that you'll claim he turned on his car in order to not drive. I mean sure you can picture a scenario where he turned on the car solely to listen to the radio or get some A/C, but the more likely scenario is he was planning to drive. I'll give it a 70/30 split, 70% chance he was going to use the car to travel and 30% chance he just wanted tunes and climate control while he sipped his drink and napped.

Forum banter aside, JW needs serious help and/or serious consequences. I'm not the guy to say what's right for him specifically, but it's not like his situation is unique. Tons of folks have crazy intense alcoholism and most never break out of it without making the choice every day, all day long, to not touch a drop of alcohol. That's extremely difficult to do.

 

[MSU158]

This is as piss poor of a retort as you’ve had. Talk about your and .

It was intended to be extreme to make a point. If you are ONLY going by the “letter of the law” that is just as much breaking the law by “controlling” the car as someone that only turned it on and fell asleep.

How you drank or even where you drank shouldn’t play a factor in “controlling” the car if you never planned on driving it. Now, don’t get me wrong, I don’t know all the facts in Jordan’s case and he may very well deserve to be found guilty. I am simply pointing out the ridiculousness of the law if you never have ANY intention of moving that vehicle in the slightest while under the influence…

 

[Nashville_Hawk]

By far the most likely outcome but the defendant has the right to a jury trial if they so choose, wether we consider it wasting a jury or now.

True that…a very small percentage does choose to do so. Best COA is to take the plea deal and not roll the dice. College kids are just that so I’m not a basher…I just want to see our program and JW to flourish.

 

[so cal hawkfan]

It was intended to be extreme to make a point. If you are ONLY going by the “letter of the law” that is just as much breaking the law by “controlling” the car as someone that only turned it on and fell asleep.

How you drank or even where you drank shouldn’t play a factor in “controlling” the car if you never planned on driving it. Now, don’t get me wrong, I don’t know all the facts in Jordan’s case and he may very well deserve to be found guilty. I am simply pointing out the ridiculousness of the law if you never have ANY intention of moving that vehicle in the slightest while under the influence…

You are hung up on INTENT. There is no legal requirement for intent in OWI. That is the legal standard set forth in the majority of US states (Iowa being one of them). The officer clearly had probable cause to arrest. Jordan was the sole occupant inside a running vehicle. He was intoxicated and in possession of an open container of alcohol. (The open container by itself is illegal) You are arguing for a change in the law, wherein intent becomes a required element in order to convict for OWI. MADD would have a serious issue with that.

I imagine a conviction would come with mandatory alcohol intervention classes. I’ve got quite a few friends in AA. It likely saved some of their lives.

 

[el dub]

Not sure if that is sincere or facetious. But, yes, there have been several Presidents in office since....

I was being facetious due to guessing that your experience with the topic was professional rather than personal. But I seriously do feel sympathy for folks who have to deal with alcohol addiction. It’s one of the easiest substance to procure, and one of the most dangerous, imo. Congrats on your personal journey…

 

[el dub]

At what point do you become a police state though? I am all for tough laws if you ACTUALLY commit the crime.

What if I was drinking at a party at my home, left a present in the car and went outside to get it out of the car and turned the car on to write something on the card before bringing it in? Do I deserve a DUI? Now, I would like to believe a cop wouldn’t even go there, but, if we are going by the letter of the law….

How do you get arrested in this scenario? You’re on your property, right? Private property?

On the other hand, we have no idea how young Mr Williams arrived at that parking space, nor do we know what he’s going to do when he wakes up. My guess is that he’s not going to take a breath test before putting that car in gear and driving off. And I’m guessing he will wake up, still intoxicated, to some degree.

 

[Rick Honcho]

I’ve been the foreman on a couple of juries. Not a lawyer.

The prosecution gives the jury the law, and the facts. In this case they would say, “If a person is behind the wheel, and the car is running, and they are sleeping, this meets the rule for OWI.” Then they have a police officer testify that the man was indeed behind the wheel, the car was running, and he was sleeping. The defense will try to claim he wasn’t drinking and driving, but the jury will likely find that’s not the law.

All this being said, it will never go to a jury, so it doesn’t matter.

Meh. What are the Iowa jury instructions applicable to this version of OWI? I’m convinced that at least one person in this group can share that answer…

 

[Trapper85]

Actually I used it as a GENERALITY to say that maybe my take on MOST PEOPLE is wrong and they wouldn't care about the intent of someone if they were sleeping it off in a car to NOT RISK harming someone by driving drunk. Basically saying he was drinking so he deserved it no matter what..

To me, if someone had the self awareness to realize they are too drunk to drive and instead slept in the car, parked specifically in a spot designed solely for it to be parked in, while NOT being used to drive, they shouldn't be charged with a crime. The ENTIRE point of a DUI is so that someone isn't operating a vehicle while impaired in a manner that could potentially harm themselves or others.

To be clear, I think social media is such a bad thing overall. People are so quick to judge and condemn people based on a short, edited video or something they read. It is so bad that if someone is charged with a crime and eventually completely exonerated, it is nearly impossible for them to ever recover. Once smeared they can never completely remove the stain.

Generally agree. The real problem is with crappy laws, or unclearly written laws that leave it to courts to interpret. If you weren't driving....you weren't D or O. Ridiculous how overreaching those laws are applied. It'd be like convicting someone for actually robbing a bank even though they fell asleep in front of the bank before anything happened.

 

[98lberEating2Lunches]

How wasn't he a danger to himself? There is a real risk of carbon monoxide poisoning, no?

 

[PennState1985]

Generally agree. The real problem is with crappy laws, or unclearly written laws that leave it to courts to interpret. If you weren't driving....you weren't D or O. Ridiculous how overreaching those laws are applied. It'd be like convicting someone for actually robbing a bank even though they fell asleep in front of the bank before anything happened.

People are arrested all the time for plotting terrorist attacks or assassinations. Should we not be doing that?

 

[PennState1985]

How do you get arrested in this scenario? You’re on your property, right? Private property?

On the other hand, we have no idea how young Mr Williams arrived at that parking space, nor do we know what he’s going to do when he wakes up. My guess is that he’s not going to take a breath test before putting that car in gear and driving off. And I’m guessing he will wake up, still intoxicated, to some degree.

Great post. Intent can change from moment to moment when someone is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, especially when decision-making is compromised.

Case in point is my wife. Three weeks ago she got a DUI after driving her car into a light pole in front of the courthouse. Blew a 0.107. Said she didn't feel drunk because she hadn't had a drink in three hours. Felt perfectly fine. The reason for hitting the light pole? She swerved trying to keep a $4 plant from rolling around in the back seat. Poor decision-making when she felt "okay". Cost us $78,000 and now she wears an alcohol bracelet on her ankle. The point is that people under the influence often don't know they are as compromised as they are, and make crappy decisions. I have no doubt JW would have woken up and driven home if he hadn't been stopped.

 

[TheREALSpooner]

Yet, it was done without all the facts, nor actually KNOWING the person. Mind you, even I have said multiple times that I "THINK" AJ is a douchebag. But, that is different than KNOWING and therefor condemning him.

Be honest, without any more info than what you have seen online, if given the chance would you right now convict AJ of any/all of the possible charges for those things you mentioned? If you would, that proves my point...

What a stupid question. LOL As if expressing opinions are the same thing as sitting on a jury.

When they were digging up bodies of young boys on John Wayne Gacy's property, MSU thought "I think this guy might just be misunderstood."

 

[Trapper85]

People are arrested all the time for plotting terrorist attacks or assassinations. Should we not be doing that?

Pretty simple. A charge if so should not be the same as actually having done it. Same for DUI or anything. Have a clear law related to ACTUAL DUI. If you want to have laws to try and reduce risk, then write a clear damn "standing near/sleeping in/keys in reach under the influence" law with a lesser charge and see if it passes in your legislature. Maybe even consider how ignorant it is, if reducing risk were truly a goal, of allowing endless businesses THAT YOU MUST DRIVE TO serve you alcohol, but I digress. Right now, alot of BS leeway and a racket in many cases, plain and simple.

 

[el dub]

Pretty simple. A charge if so should not be the same as actually having done it. Same for DUI or anything. Have a clear law related to ACTUAL DUI. If you want to have laws to try and reduce risk, then write a clear damn "standing near/sleeping in/keys in reach under the influence" law with a lesser charge and see if it passes in your legislature. Maybe even consider how ignorant it is, if reducing risk were truly a goal, of allowing endless businesses THAT YOU MUST DRIVE TO serve you alcohol, but I digress. Right now, alot of BS leeway and a racket in many cases, plain and simple.

No one has to drive anywhere this day and age. Take an uber out or just back home when drinking too much.

 

[Mattski]

Great post. Intent can change from moment to moment when someone is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, especially when decision-making is compromised.

Case in point is my wife. Three weeks ago she got a DUI after driving her car into a light pole in front of the courthouse. Blew a 0.107. Said she didn't feel drunk because she hadn't had a drink in three hours. Felt perfectly fine. The reason for hitting the light pole? She swerved trying to keep a $4 plant from rolling around in the back seat. Poor decision-making when she felt "okay". Cost us $78,000 and now she wears an alcohol bracelet on her ankle. The point is that people under the influence often don't know they are as compromised as they are, and make crappy decisions. I have no doubt JW would have woken up and driven home if he hadn't been stopped.

Well said. Pic of wife? There are still rules to be followed.

 

[MSU158]

What a stupid question. LOL As if expressing opinions are the same thing as sitting on a jury.

When they were digging up bodies of young boys on John Wayne Gacy's property, MSU thought "I think this guy might just be misunderstood."

Wow, talk about a red herring. As far as the jury part goes, I was simply looking for an honest answer to that question and, if you noticed, he did NOT answer.

My point was simply about a specific part of a law that I think is beyond ridiculous and was created more as a money grab between MADD and Law Enforcement than a true safety measure.

For clarity, I made it clear that IF it was reasonably proven in court, again, REASONABLY PROVEN, that the person that drank NEVER intended to drive, would you still convict them of a OWI/DUI? Do you think they DESERVE one simply because they drank and were in a car that was on at some point while they were intoxicated? They should get a DUI because they MAY decide later to drive? MInd you, drinking is LEGAL.

The simple truth is this would be the exact same thing as someone legally having a gun on them and charging them with any sort of violent gun crime because they MAY shoot someone with it. Now, there are actually certain laws for having the gun on you in certain places, but it would then be a very specific law LESS than any charge would be for ACTUALLY using the gun. If you want there to be a charge specific to being inside a running car while Intoxicated, I would be fine with that. But, it should be a LESSER charge than an actual OWI/DUI. That has really ONLY been my entire point....


How about this example?

Three buddies go out for a night on the town in some type of cargo van. They all drink heavily AFTER parking the van and when the night is over they all go sleep it off in the van, while it is running. Who deserves a DUI if the cops show up? All 3? Just the owner? What if none of them own the vehicle? Again, I would hope law enforcement would see it for what it is and not charge any of them with it, but they could and that is my contention. INTENT matters to me very much in nearly all aspects of life and it ABSOLUTELY should matter when you get charged with the exact same thing as someone that intentionally did something you didn't do...

 

[MSU158]

Pretty simple. A charge if so should not be the same as actually having done it. Same for DUI or anything. Have a clear law related to ACTUAL DUI. If you want to have laws to try and reduce risk, then write a clear damn "standing near/sleeping in/keys in reach under the influence" law with a lesser charge and see if it passes in your legislature. Maybe even consider how ignorant it is, if reducing risk were truly a goal, of allowing endless businesses THAT YOU MUST DRIVE TO serve you alcohol, but I digress. Right now, alot of BS leeway and a racket in many cases, plain and simple.

Thank you. This is a very concise synopsis of the basic part of my argument. Of course, coming from me, even those on here that may have agreed with it at the beginning wouldn't want to!

 

[Trapper85]

No one has to drive anywhere this day and age. Take an uber out or just back home when drinking too much.

Somewhat true, but quite limited uber, if any, in alot of areas. Plus, even with uber, pretty sure well over 83% of vehicles at bars or places that serve alcohol aren't uber driver pickups. And expecting/assuming a human, even non-alcoholic, is capable of making a fully reasoned decision AFTER consuming is, well, cesspoolian in nature. So laws need to very very explicit and passed by legislatures, not left to other's motives or interpretations.....or fundraisers.

 

[Stick Kitty]

No one has to drive anywhere this day and age. Take an uber out or just back home when drinking too much.

Right!!!

The issue I have is after all these issues and what he stands to lose he is too dumb to help himself. Has no clue of right or wrong or his circumstances.

How about....

Uber to the bar so the car can never be an issue
Uber home
Use a buddy system to leave the bar that night- Where are the kids friends in this situation to look after understand he is an athlete and his history?
He literally probably could have called a coach or HWC or teammate. He has resources. I am sure Bob would pay for his uber. It;s sad if he doesnt have a support system around him. I am sure Terry would have gotten his slippers on if called.

Did he really plan to drive to the bar then sleep in his car all night afterwards in a parking garage? Was this an irish exit?

JW just lacks serious thinking about anything and cant be counted on to think. He cant help himself. Time to cut bait.

 

[Mattski]

For clarity, I made it clear that IF it was reasonably proven in court, again, REASONABLY PROVEN, that the person that drank NEVER intended to drive, would you still convict them of a OWI/DUI? Do you think they DESERVE one simply because they drank and were in a car that was on at some point while they were intoxicated? They should get a DUI because they MAY decide later to drive? MInd you, drinking is LEGAL.

So MSU158 esq., how do you intend to prove a person passed out drunk in a running vehicle never intended to drive it? Good luck there.
If I've learned anything in my 50+ years of dealing with people who blather on and on during a debate, its that they generally do so b/c they know they're wrong... They're just hoping to either wear you down until you concede out of pure exhaustion, or they think they can dazzle you enough with their bs that you'll eventually agree.

 

[PUR158]

You all took the bait on MSU's annual October warmup post. Well played Sir, good to have you back for another year.

 

[VonEhwegen]

Right!!!

The issue I have is after all these issues and what he stands to lose he is too dumb to help himself. Has no clue of right or wrong or his circumstances.

How about....

Uber to the bar so the car can never be an issue
Uber home
Use a buddy system to leave the bar that night- Where are the kids friends in this situation to look after understand he is an athlete and his history?
He literally probably could have called a coach or HWC or teammate. He has resources. I am sure Bob would pay for his uber. It;s sad if he doesnt have a support system around him. I am sure Terry would have gotten his slippers on if called.

Did he really plan to drive to the bar then sleep in his car all night afterwards in a parking garage? Was this an irish exit?

JW just lacks serious thinking about anything and cant be counted on to think. He cant help himself. Time to cut bait.

Alot of the major programs have a specific "uber like program" where athletes call for rides from bars and events etc. Not sure if Iowa has the same set up, from my understand its usually paid for by boosters or such to prevent these situations. Not sure if it's open to all athletes or just football guys and such.

 

[PSU Mike]

At what point do you become a police state though? I am all for tough laws if you ACTUALLY commit the crime.

What if I was drinking at a party at my home, left a present in the car and went outside to get it out of the car and turned the car on to write something on the card before bringing it in? Do I deserve a DUI? Now, I would like to believe a cop wouldn’t even go there, but, if we are going by the letter of the law….

That’s bordering on discarding all criminal law and just using the civil system. No damage, no penalty.

 

[dt21]

wonder how many of you judgemental folks have an owi in their past

 

[PennState1985]

wonder how many of you judgemental folks have an owi in their past

I don’t need to have been arrested to have discernment. Your comment is ridiculous.

 

[PennState1985]

Pretty simple. A charge if so should not be the same as actually having done it. Same for DUI or anything. Have a clear law related to ACTUAL DUI. If you want to have laws to try and reduce risk, then write a clear damn "standing near/sleeping in/keys in reach under the influence" law with a lesser charge and see if it passes in your legislature. Maybe even consider how ignorant it is, if reducing risk were truly a goal, of allowing endless businesses THAT YOU MUST DRIVE TO serve you alcohol, but I digress. Right now, alot of BS leeway and a racket in many cases, plain and simple.

I can agree to this. Also agree that MADD and local jurisdictions are addicted to the money being generated.

 

[PennState1985]

Well said. Pic of wife? There are still rules to be followed.

If I attached a pic, you'd be an accessory to murder. Mine. She's 52 but looks every bit of 38. Southern belle. Just a little crazy though, and not always in a good way.