from what I understand its not carl garz jr first run in with the law I heard he had a disorderly from drinking and cant remember the other .he should be fired.How will he does his job to his full potential with out his drivers license? Doesnt your license get suspended after a dui for 30 days? So how can he do hid job. the city fired Mike Brazil for not having a drivers license under a different circumstance and never found any alcohol in him,the mistake he made was not accepting a blood test.This city should have fired a lot of its employees for violation,stealing,drug abuse,dui,stealing drugs out of some ones purse even more of a reason to fire.Its time to drop the hammer on some of these less than desireable people.PS; i have met carl sr and think he is a stand up guy caught in the middle of his kids poor decision making but he is still his father non the less.

Well if this is true I spoke before I had all of the facts ... I get so very bored reading DD anymore .... I guess I do not regret my decision.

Joe Pilchesky Posts: 5905 Date: Nov 10 8:07 AM, 2009

Printer Friendly The puppy is back on its leash after an hour of chasing cars up and down a political highway already loaded with roadkill of the virgin and veteran kind.  Unable to reverse an error jettisoned by a young tongue that spoke four years ahead of its graduation date from the Scranton College of Political Wisdom, a politically promiscuous Mr. Rogan unilaterally scheduled himself to appear with the mayor and various cabinet staff to discuss budgetary process. He couldn't back out of it without embarrassing himself and making the mayor look good, one way or another.   Mr. Rogan kept that appointment with potential disaster in a timely manner, but he was flanked on one side by Janet Evans and by Frank Joyce on the other. The newly elected majority listened to the mayor pitch the need for a new Library Authority that he wants to create so he can transfer the deeds to the libraries to the new authority and they can then give them away to LJC or Da U. See South Side Complex. The current library board is loaded with cronies, by the way.  Doherty wants this new authority to get busy laying the groundwork for a new library that will raise taxes, which library the county wants nothing to do with for that reason. With Mrs. Evans functioning as the spokesperson for the new majority, the mayor was respectfully and courteously thanked for his invitation, but he was provided with no indication as to whether or not the new majority approved or disapproved of the creation of a new Library Authority.

"My point is, we shouldnt crucify someone before they are even charged, as we do not know the entire story, and people do make mistakes, hopefully this is a wake up call for him."


Errr.....Whynot??  You understand if you try to spread that good commmon sense across the hall you will be "assimilated"  right? 

Resistance is futile!

the hammer wrote:

---

for one thing the channel 16 said he was arrested along with (wilk )now I am not a cop or lawyer but I believe the legal limit in Pa is .08 and if you refuse a blood alcohol test or breathalizer it is automatic suspension and a person tested .08 does loose there license and get ard.It would make sense because people would drink and drive more often knowing even if the blew over the legal limit,get ard and still have there license I always heard it was automatic 30 days.I also dont think the hearing if he has one (cough cough) wouldnt come up for a while.I believe in people getting second and even third chances.But when your father is who he is and pretty sure got him his job ,not pretty sure positive he got him it and should watch there step at all time because people look at you through a microscope. Lets face it this city of corruption has to end.And if he is charged with a dui he sould loose his job due to job productivity,or will the city offer him a driver to do his inspections.It  just comes down to ethics.Funny I said ethics and city politics in the same paragraph .Like I said his dad a great guy ,maybe jr needs to  find a new hobby.Because lets face it the city cops and city leaders are at odds and if some one can drop a dime on the good ol boys the will.I know a few people who got arrested ,was over the legal limit and for some reason the paper work got lost after it left the cities hands.one for the little guys I guess

---

There are tiers, .08-.99, .10- ..... etc... 3 tiers, if a person is at General Impairment, .08-.99 and has no prior DUI, that involves a $300 fine, up to 6 months probabtion, a highway safety class, and treatment if ordered.... there re varying circumstances such as if a person attended treatment, that can drop someone down from tier 2 to tier 1, etc.... ARD is only offered one time every so many years for non-violent offenses, and in the case of a first time dui, if accepted into ARD there will be no license suspension, as you will not have a dui on your record, again even if you received a 12month suspension, there is an occupational waiver for driving as a condition of employment. All of this is a moot point however, as we do not know of the charges, what if he was .06, then all these accusations were for nothing. Saying he should lose his job is ridiculous, as it had noting to do with work, how many times does a person in either a private or public job get fired for a DUI? RARELY, why, because people make mistakes, now if it is repeated then there is a serious concern. Should he be treated the same legally if he was drunk, Absolutely. Are we capable of being the arresting officer, prosecutor, judge, and jury? I don't believe so. Go to DUI court on Thursdays in central court, and you tell me that everyone of those dozens of people should lose their jobs because of a mistake.

 

Nothing personal,but that jr thing hits a bad nerve with me thats all,I cant call it a mistake

I agree with both of you on the seriousness of drunk driving. I am not arguing that. The point I am trying to make is that people are jumping to wild conclusions and calling for a person to be fired before they have even been charged with a crime. Just because soemone is arrested does not mean they will be or are cahrged witha crime, just like beause someone is NOT arrested dosnt mean they will not be charged witha crime at a later date, it happens all the time. Example; a person is "Arrested" because they were involved in a bar fight. They are taken in, processed, etc.After further investigation it is determined that the person was only trying to break up the fight, no charges filed because no crime occurred. A person is arrested for the suspicion of DUI and is asked to submit to a BAC, if that BAC comes back below .08 then DUI charges are not filed. That isnt to say that a recklass driving charge , etc. cannnot be filed at a later date as well. This is why I say that we shouldnt chastise someone without even knowing the details. I am in no way trying to downplay a DUI, but I bet we all know someone who received a dui, where there were no injuries, they may have paid their fines etc, but probably didnt lose their job. Just like there have been 2 Scranton PD officers who were arrested for DUI in the last 6 months or so, neither lost their job. DUI is a crime, no doubt, but it happens to a lot of good people who make a poor choice, it should be a lesson learned. That is why the law is fairly leniant on a first time DUI offender and harsh on repeat offenders.

Agamemnon wrote:

---

Whynow...

Point well taken, and you are absolutely correct in that everyone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.  I do agree also that requiring that someone forfeit a job (or anything else) while under suspicion of drink driving is wrong.

I do, however, have some questions about the ARD Program in PA...

...is it effective?  At what rate do ARD participants re-offend?
...is it applied fairly? 

Regarding the second point, I have no reason to believe that it is not, but I think that any program like this should be periodically reviewed to ensure that it isn't being used selectively.  If a School Board Member gets into ARD after a first offense, then I expect that "Bob the drug store clerk" will get in as well, all things being held equal.

Lastly, I do have a philosophical problem with ARD, in that it does treat the crime of driving drunk less seriously than other crimes.  For example, do we honestly think that some 18 year old kid caught with a small amount of marijuana is really more of a danger to society that some idiot driving four tons of Ford Excursion while blitzed on booze?  Yet in PA, the kid with the pot gets a criminal record and bozo driving the monster truck with vodka in his veins gets a shot at having a record expunged.  To me, it just seems to point to the fact that booze is nothing more than the drug we've somehow chosen to be legal (mostly for economic reasons I suspect), and as a result we hold it's abuse at a far lower standard than we do other substance abuses OR other crimes.  There is no ARD program for people that steal food or medicine out of personal necessity.

By way of disclaimer, I'm not advocating for the legalization of marijuana (I've never tried it), I'm not excusing theft for any reason and I'm not calling for a new prohibition (although I do confess that I don't drink).



-- Edited by Agamemnon on Thursday 19th of November 2009 06:44:34 AM

---

Yes, ARD is applied fairly, if the person is eligible (meaning the crime is non-violent, and this is their first offense). I do not know about the recidivism rate associated with people who have gone through ARD, but they only get one shot at it so if they do come back, they are being fully prosecuted. Also, each one of those crimes you listed up above is ARD eligible. Many first time offenders receive ARD for possession of marijuana or paraphernalia.