A recent study by The Boston Globe Spotlight Team has found that judges in Massachusetts tend to acquit drunk drivers in more than 80 percent of cases, giving those with DUIs a second chance to potentially drive intoxicated again with little fear of repercussion.
This statistic equates to about four out of five alleged drunk drivers getting off free of penalties or even fines. Juries have historically been lenient with DUI cases because their circumstances usually evoke empathy, and while it may seem that judges would deliver harsher punishments, many write off these cases as one-time occurrences and let defendants off scot-free.
Moreover, many law firms today consider themselves boutiques for DUI cases and as such, know their way around the court system. When someone accused of a DUI can afford the retainer for one of these lawyers, they can maneuver their court dates to ensure their assignment to a judge with a history of leniency.
The leniency of the Massachusetts courts and the tricks of boutique lawyers have served to effectively curb the state’s crackdown on drunk driving enacted by Melanie’s Law, which established harsher sanctions for DUIs six years ago.
The problem is that drunk drivers with the available discretionary income are now able to break the law and endanger other citizens without concern for the consequences. The laws and regulations are in place, but judges who choose not to deal with these cases and dismiss them out of sympathy or laziness or anything else negate the principles for which those laws stand. Drunk driving is a serious issue and should not be pushed to the back burner or taken lightly simply because of its prevalence.
Additionally, these lawyers who know how to manipulate DUI cases for their clients are in high demand and therefore represent only those clients who can afford to pay an exorbitant fee for their services. This means that those who are actually punished for instances of drunk driving come from lower socio-economic standing and fill the jails when those who are rich enough to buy their way out of punishment can do so.
Undoubtedly, judges and juries should enforce harsher punishments for those who drink and drive, but in addition to that, perhaps the courts should implement some sort of automatic punishment or fee for the crime to remove human bias altogether. If the punishment were automatic, lawyers would have a harder time talking their way out of a conviction and drunk drivers would be far less inclined to repeat their behavior in the future.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
