The Value of Victim Impact Panels

By John Thatcher

Debora Auman was in a tragic period of her life. Her parents had recently died, she was the victim of a rape and she had just broken up with her domestic partner. As a result, she had started drinking more heavily and on June 7, 2012, was driving drunk when she struck and killed a pedestrian, Alvin Wilson, as he was walking to work. The accident was a tragedy with Wilson’s body discovered 74 feet away from the impact, who died from injuries on the highway.

An attorney on the case estimated that Auman’s blood alcohol content at the time of the collision was .11, as her alcohol content more than two hours later was .08, the legal limit in Virginia.

Auman was sentenced to one year of home electronic monitoring and her drivers license was revoked. She was credited for the 21/2 months she had spent in jail waiting for the sentencing, and is allowed to work, a very lenient sentence given that the victim had been killed. In defending his position, the judge said multiple factors influenced his sentence including Auman’s work record, lack of criminal history and her multiple sclerosis which would cost taxpayers $60,000 per year to pay for her medication.

Auman showed total remorse for her actions, saying that what she did tortures her everyday, and she apologized to the family of the victim before her sentencing. The victim’s family was touched by Auman’s tale of her own tragedy, and the story surely influenced the judge’s sentencing.

So if the story was so powerful, why was participation in a victim impact panel not included in Auman’s sentence? Auman would have been able to have a powerful impact on other DUI offenders who perhaps didn’t understand the seriousness of their offense because there had been no victim in their case.

Victim Impact Panels were created by Mothers Against Drunk Driving as an educational tool for convicted alcohol offenders to consider the pain and suffering drunk driving can cause to others. In this case, Auman’s story would also show the suffering and heartache a DUI can cause to the offender themselves. The goal of the panel is to also help break down a denial of a problem with alcoholism, create a lasting impression that offenders will remember before getting in the car again and hopefully to change behavior and save lives.

Not all offenders who participate in these panels are affected, but for some it is an emotional wakeup call that they never forget.

For victims, these panels also provide the chance to tell their story and get involved in the justice system. Many victims and victim’s families are also looking for a way to prevent other tragedies from happening, and these panels allow them to have a positive impact on offender’s through their message.

Linda Ekpe’s son, Daniel Ekpe, was killed by a drunk driver in New York. At a panel she said that it had been eight years since her son had been killed, and she still feels pain but hopes one day to share her story without shedding tears.

Just like defensive driving isn’t a cure-all for reckless drivers, neither are victim impact panels, but they can have a powerful effect for those offenders who are ready to listen and can hopefully help them to get started on the right track.

John Thatcher is a freelance writer for defensivedriving.com

When has the NFL ever passed on commenting when their players get into trouble? The league since under the stewardship of Commissioner Roger Goodell has acted swiftly and always ready to pass judgment on its players that get arrested. Evidently, the NFL has a different standard for the management of their teams.

Recently, two executives for the Denver Broncos, Matt Russell and Tom Heckert were arrested for DUI. In Heckert’s  case, the Broncos tried to keep his June 11th arrest under wraps until the Associated Press blew the cover. NFL spokesman, Greg Aiello is leaving comment in both cases up to the Broncos. The same Broncos that allegedly attempted to sweep the incidents under the rug.

When it comes to marijuana, the NFL has a firm and consistent protocol to deal with players that get caught or test positive for that drug. They are subject to fines or suspensions. In September of 2010, Braylon Edwards was charged with DUI and was permitted to play football the following Sunday. When I contacted an NFL official to see what their policy was for Players caught with a DUI offense, I was told that they don’t have a connection with the State and Federal laws against DUI. The NFL decides their own punishment policies.

DUI is the most prevalent crime NFL players become involved in, yet there is reluctance for Goodell to crack down on this problem, which since taking the mantra of the tough, new sheriff in town when he took the job in 2007, appears out of character. What’s needed to thwart the DUI plague in the NFL is to cut a convicted player from the team on the grounds that the NFL players are held in high esteem by teenagers in the U.S. and cannot appear to accept the crime of drunk driving, one of the main causes of youthful deaths in America.

Doris Aiken, RID President

In most states, if you happen to kill someone while driving drunk with a BAC over .18, the standard lowest punishment is 1 to 3 years in a state prison. But in Jackson County, Kansas, that’s not what happened in the case of Robert J.K. Domsch, 27, a KU law student who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter after killing Marco G. Vendetti, 25 of Kansas, MO. in a crash where Mr. Domsch’s BAC registared three times the legal limit. Mr. Domsch was sentenced to just 120 days and 5 years probation

The prosecutors in Jackson County stated that the fact that Domsch had no priors played a role in the lenient sentence handed down. Obviously, Domsch as a recent graduate of Kansas University with a degree in business and law had standing in the community. But when a life is taken and the BAC of the offender is so high, those facts should be given consideration as well.

Domsch’s BAC was .242 and that test was administrated four hours after the crash. So his BAC at the time of the crash could have registered as high as .322. The unwritten law that rank has its privilege is glaring in this case. Evidently, the victim didn’t have the same prestige or level of support that Mr. Domsch did in the community.

What this case illustrates is the need for uniform federal laws on how and what DWI offenders are charged with. Just because Mr. Domsch happened to drive on the wrong side of the highway while extremely intoxicated in a state that has no guidelines for consideration in those factors, shouldn’t allow him to get off so easily. In New York State, a driver with  a BAC higher than .08 is automatically charged with a felony DWI even if there were no injuries.

In a society where we all have to share the same roads, we as a society should all share in a justice system that treats these serious circumstances equally. Cases like Mr. Domsch should be the poster child for federalizing DWI penalties and changing the hodge-podge patchwork of state laws which produce these uneven, unfair and unjust outcomes.

Doris Aiken, RID President

Note: Thanks to Bill Dikant for bringing this case to RID’s attention.

RID Citizen Action Network

Empowering and Connecting with Victims

What inspired Doris Aiken to start RID (Remove Intoxicated Drivers) the first grass roots, Anti-DWI organization in America? It was the news of two dead sibling teenagers killed by a drunk driver in her home town of Schenectady, NY.

The victims, Timothy and Karen Morris were the same ages (19 and 17) as her own children. She couldn’t fathom the loss which their mother, Bonnie Morris was dealt. Aiken was angry when she called the district attorney on behalf of Ms. Morris. But she really hit the roof when the district attorney told Aiken to “mind her own business. That phone call was the genesis of RID.

When Doris Aiken held her first RID meeting at the SchenectadyUnitarianChurch, the response of victims was overwhelming. Aiken recognized the power victims’ had with their stories of loss without receiving justice. Aiken, who has never been a victim of drunk driving herself, has led RID with the idea of empowering the victim. She was responsible for helping get the first victim impact statements in New YorkState to be read at sentencing of the defendant. Her most active chapter leaders were victims of drunk driving. Aiken has been quick to put the focus on their stories as the catalyst driving legislation and changing the attitudes toward drunk driving.

RID-CAN is the latest plan of attack to empower the victims of drunk driving by providing victims with the contact information needed to pursue justice. Each county has a Judge, District Attorney, Court Clerk, Police Chief and in some states a stop-dwi coordinator. Through RID-CAN, victims can be informed as to who they should call and what role these different officials have in relation to their case.