Politics & Government

Brian Becker Among Those Pushing for Change in Drunk Driving Laws

Part of the inspiration for House Bill 6132 comes from the October 2010 death of a Windsor Locks teenager, struck by a local, off-duty police officer who had allegedly been driving drunk.

As a long time EMT, Don Miner has seen a lot come through the ambulance.

Miner has volunteered as an emergency medical technician for nearly 22 years with the Suffield ambulance. He’s helped transport and care for any number of patients with any number of ailments, from vehicle accidents to home accidents to intentional harm.

Quite possibly the most frustrating call for Miner to respond to is when someone has been drinking and driving and is knowledgeable enough of current state laws to “game the system.”

Find out what's happening in West Hartfordwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

For this reason he fully supports House Bill 6132, which could close a "loop hole" in current drunken driving laws.

On Monday, Miner testified before the state Transportation Committee in support of the bill, which is sponsored by State Rep. Elaine O'Brien, D-Suffield, state Rep. Tom Reynolds, D-Ledyard, whose district is in the area of the state’s two casinos, and state Rep. Brian Becker, D-West Hartford.

Find out what's happening in West Hartfordwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

On Tuesday, Miner, who is also on the Suffield Police Commission, shared the examples he gave to the committee to explain why the bill is important.

Miner said he's seen several scenarios when he responds to such an incident, but used these two to show the difference between what should happen and what sometimes does happen, in his opinion.

The first involves a person who has been drinking and driving and takes down a telephone pole. That person might get out of his or her car, stagger a bit, possibly slur his or her words and smell of alcohol. Then police give the person a field sobriety test at the scene.

If the person fails, then he or she is arrested and charged with an appropriate violation, taken to the police station and possibly issued a Breathalyzer test.

Yet, Miner’s also seen it happen this way: person is drinking and driving, person knocks down pole, person gets out of car stumbling and slurring, but this time it ends differently. This time the person is aware enough to say that his or her knee is injured and needs medical attention.

“They can’t give him the test because if he fails it’s not because he’s intoxicated, but because his knee hurts,” Miner said Tuesday. So the person is brought by ambulance to the hospital where medical staff examines the patient’s knee, but determines there is no medical reason to draw blood.

Miner said in some cases, the driver has just averted a drunk driving charge.

“There is no evidence that he was drinking. Police weren’t able to give him a field sobriety test, he wasn’t arrested so he didn’t have a Breathalyzer and no blood was taken to be tested later. The scary thing is next time it might not be a pole that gets taken out, it could be a family,” Miner said.

House Bill 6132 (An Act Concerning Evidence of Drunken Driving) reads: That section 14-227a of the general statutes be amended to provide a procedure for a police officer to obtain a blood or urine sample from an operator of a motor vehicle who has been injured in an accident when such police officer has probable cause to believe that such operator was under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

The statement of purpose: To reduce driving under the influence.

O’Brien said the intention of the bill is to allow police to still issue some sort of sobriety test even if a person is transported to the hospital for a minor injury.

“Right now the law allows the tests when there is a serious injury or death. This would give them a mechanism to get evidence when there is a minor injury. No arrest is needed. It would not be mandatory for every minor accident, just when there is probable cause,” she said.

O'Brien said the inspiration for the bill partly came from an accident that occurred in Windsor Locks in Oct. 2010 when Michael Koistinen, 24, an off-duty police officer who had allegedly been driving drunk, struck and killed a teenager, according to court documents.

Koistinen was not issued a sobriety test and fellow officers, he was a member of the Windsor Locks Police Department, did not ask him to submit to a blood test, according to court documents. Koistinen has been charged with negligent homicide and manslaughter, among others. His father, Sgt. Robert Koistinen, responded to the accident and has been also been charged in the case. The senior Koistinen is on paid leave, while the younger has been fired.

Miner said a few people at Monday's hearing said that the bill violates their Constitutional rights. Miner said this isn’t the case because police still have to establish probable cause and ask a judge to grant a search warrant to obtain the results of the blood test.

“I don’t think this is new ground. I don’t know if it will fly, though. I hope it does,” Miner said.

The transportation committee will spend the coming days considering the bill, along with many others, before deciding whether to pass it out of committee and onto the next step in becoming a law.

What do you think of the bill? Will it help curtail people from driving drunk?


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here