Warrant issued for soldier deployed in Iraq

he should nto have been allowed to deploy. I bet he didnt even tell his commander. He has to show responsibility.

You really stuck your foot in your mouth this time!! You are a PIG! Have you no sympathy, her son was killed by a drunk driver. While he was dying his brother was allowed to come and be at his bedside. Maybe just this once you should apologize for post trying to be funny and not thinking about people’s feelings or pain!!

Basta wrote:

<quoted text>
Was your son a doctor?

Thank you for opening my eyes. Too often I sit and judge people by their posts when I don't know them while I hide behind my posts just like the rest of them. Thank you for your honesty!

Deepest sympathy in your loss. My thoughts and prayers for you and your family. Continue your fight and your posts.

Christian Heller wrote:

<quoted text>
How dare you call me a loser?
Unless you lost a child to a drunk driver, you have no room to use your keyboard in an insult to me.
http://www.myspace.com/please_no_dui_nm
Look at the guy in the wheelchair in the link above. That was my child.

Its not like this guy ran away from home, his boss if you want to call them that <US Goverment> sent this man to fight overseas so this
Ms Kari Brandenburg can sleep better at night !!~ Hope this witch can sleep better now !!
Only in America (Justice)

Go DA! The State has six months to prosecute him or it automatically gets dismissed BY LAW. The warrant stops the 6 month rule and he can deal with it when he gets back. I bet everyone wouldn't be saying squat if he had driven drunk, killed someone, then got deployed. Oh, that's right the DA is suppose to make an exception for this guy...what other exceptions should there be? Bottom line, if this guy were living up to the standards that the military demands, he wouldn't be picking up criminal charges.

I never said he should get preferencial treatment because he is a soldier.
I said "why isn'y our esteemed DA going after the perpetual DWI lawbreakers the ones with multiple multiple offenses?"
And why such a big whooptydoo about this soldier?
She needs headlines!!!
Everybody needs to be held accountable, but she seems to always
need drama. Reminds me of my 16 year old.

This is shameful and I can understand why it would garner Ms. Brandenburg such negative press. While I can appreciate that individuals need to be accountable for their actions and choices, it never ceases to amaze me how this state lets cases of 20 or more DWI cases get pled down to "fewer" DWI's and yet they're moving to string this guy up and its all over the news.

he should write back and say... "I'll be there when the president ends this war, like he promised."

What about the Judge? who was it? the Judge was not required to issue the warrant. If the judge had any courage, he/she would not have issued the warrant. time limits are tolled if the reason for the warrant is the defendants fault.

John Martinez wrote:

<quoted text>
You must be a better lawyer than the DA, because everyone else knows that if they don't prosecute within 6 months means he gets away with it. But you seem to think it is within the law to dismiss and file it in a year, over 6 months AFTER the statute of limitations have run out. So, which Law School did you go to that you learned the trick of ignoring Statutes of Limitations?

NMSA 30-1-8 C. 2 years statue of limitations. Look it up BEFORE YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH! knowledge is power and you sir, are weak!

Drippy wrote:

<quoted text>Your not aggravating things by wishing that he would be prosecuted already for this 2nd dui? Stop lying. You don't care what it would cost to bring this soldier home. Your pathetic Christian. Are you looking for sympathy? Just let this man serve his tour, then be held accountable for what he's done. Crybaby.

Thank you for your post. It was interesting. I would like you to imagine this (since I don't know if your are a parent).
One evening in the future, your child goes to work. A few minutes after your child leaves, you get a call that the child was in a wreck. You head to the hospital to see your child. You child lies there, not responding to you. Your child is in a coma. Then your child is airlifted to another hospital. You send your mate (husband or wife, depending on your gender) on to get started with the trip to the other hospital. Meanwhile you rush home to contact the Red Cross because your youngest child is in a War. You know the elder may not make it. You give the vital information to the Red Cross, praying the child in war makes it home before the sibling dies. Then yo go on to meet with your mate at the other hospital.
You arrive and find out, there are a lot of injuries. 95% of them internal. Here a partial listing.
Collapsed lung.
13 broken Ribs.
Bruised Heart.
Both Kidneys bruised.
Bruised Liver.
Herniated Diaphragm (intestines are around the heart now).
Two shattered Vertebrae.
Torn Spinal Cord.
The final injury meaning your child WILL NEVER walk again.
Your child from War comes come after spending two days en-route home.
You see one child leaning over the other in the hospital bed. Still not even close to an answer. Will my child survive?
Well, medical surgical science saves your injured child from death. 3 weeks later your younger child returns to duty at the scene of the War. You're affraid this child may not come back.
The crippled child returns home after 138 days in a hospital. Less than a month later your child nearly died again. From complications of the wreck, again (same wreck). The scenarios will continue for nearly three years, while you care for your now crippled child. Taking turns with your mate caring. 2 AM, you help turn your child on its side, because it can't. You change it's diaper,'cause it can't go to the pooper.
Make a dreadful story short. You have raised this child to be a productive working member of society. A drunk driver put your child in a wheelchair, then in a grave (due to the illnesses caused by the injury). You child was nearly 25 when the wreck happened. Your child died when it was not quite 27.
You will fight for the rights of victims.
And guess what?
You will CRY.
I hope this never happens to you, it is very miserable. Closing the lid on your child's casket.

I understand that two beers is dwi. No matter what the young adults at the ball game should be arested,
If they even look at a beer. Why are we seling liq at every event in the state, this is making beer mackers look good. while we the people keep
showing young kids its ok to drink at all public events. this state
is needing more liq as we speak.
so they will make money putting you in jail,money that this solder does not make, or anybody eles this is what the state wants.he is the only
person with a paycheck.the state wantes his money, and they will wait.

NM I cant stand it wrote:

Thank you for opening my eyes. Too often I sit and judge people by their posts when I don't know them while I hide behind my posts just like the rest of them. Thank you for your honesty!
Deepest sympathy in your loss. My thoughts and prayers for you and your family. Continue your fight and your posts.
<quoted text>

Thank you.

america wrote:

<quoted text>
YOU ARE SO WRONG.Service from one person, since the start of this nation, is service provided from every single servicemen/women. There is not just one, it is a combined group where everyone has a purpose to make a unit. That has what has keep your freedom and nothing else.

Perhaps you need assistance reading. I stated that the service of one person is not the sole source of my freedom. That means (slowly now - sound out the words if you have to) that one's actions do not equal all of my freedom. It may play a part in my freedom; however, it is not the great end all be all source of freedom.

I encourage everyone to actually read a book...or for that matter, read the United States Constitution. Check out a biography about a United States Revoultionary figure from the local library. Read a history book instead relying on History (Channel) to provide you with information.

This topic is about a soldier arrested for DWI. He will answer to his charges just like everyone else.

Centurion: face it, if he's still the same man as when he left which I doubt. He might have forgotten it all through the drugs he'll be provided from those he's fighting for, the diseases he might contract from the paid loves. or he might end up in "friendly fire" never to return at all.

John Martinez wrote:

<quoted text>
Once you give one person a break it creates case law. What happens next? Everyone that serves in the guard uses the case to defend themselves. So, if they did what you suggest, soon you will have bank robbers, rapists, murdererd, etc asking for the same break because they are on duty. Think people. You are all being stupid.

I never suggest he be "given a break". Furthermore, if your premise of how case law was created is correct than you would not have the multiple ambiguities you do today. The fact of the matter is as I stated before...his trial, his time in the county all comes down to taxpayers dollars being spent. Why not let him work off his debt to society. People are given community service, consider his deployment community service, add a stipulation that he forfeit pay in lieu of fines to a MADD or SADD organization. Putting him in jail is ridiculous. Furthermore, there are people out there who get breaks for far greater offenses. Luckily he did not kill anybody. Nonetheless, we have to be realistic not idealistic. Lastly, implying that I personally am stupid and didn't think is a really stupid, unthoughtful remark to make on your part.

John Martinez wrote:

<quoted text>
You must be a better lawyer than the DA, because everyone else knows that if they don't prosecute within 6 months means he gets away with it. But you seem to think it is within the law to dismiss and file it in a year, over 6 months AFTER the statute of limitations have run out. So, which Law School did you go to that you learned the trick of ignoring Statutes of Limitations?

Mr. Martinez,

Clearly, you yourself seem to delve out legal opinions that are completely inaccurate. There are other options. In a criminal proceeding a prosecutor has an option to "dismiss a case without prejudice" which means that the case can be dismissed with the option of re-filing charges later. A warrant was completely unnecessary. Furthermore, military law states that a deployment does not interrupt the statute of limitations on civil matters, therefore I believe the same applies to criminal matters. Read the fine print of your military enlistment contract, assuming you have one of course.

Morris wrote:

Great going Kari... I thought our DA Office was cash strapped!!!!
Does DUTY HONOR COUNTRY mean anything to you LIBERALS?

Morris, I am a liberal. Don't lump us all into the same category.

Serena C wrote:

<quoted text>
I never suggest he be "given a break".

But yet you're suggesting that we "give him a break" simply because he's a soldier.

Serena C wrote:

<quoted text>
People are given community service, consider his deployment community service, add a stipulation that he forfeit pay in lieu of fines to a MADD or SADD organization.

What about the majority of soldiers who have NOT committed any crimes? What do we consider their deployment? Or do we give them a free pass to commit multiple crimes in the future as well?

Dan Lindsey wrote:

<quoted text>
NMSA 30-1-8 C. 2 years statue of limitations. Look it up BEFORE YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH! knowledge is power and you sir, are weak!

First of all, it is called a STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, not a STATUE? Can you please tell me where this STATUE is, because I love looking at sculptures.

Now, according to the section of NMSA you refer to, you are looking at the wrong STATUTE OF LIMITATION. You are looking at the Statute of Limitation for a misdemeanor. Unfortunately for your argument, a DWI is classified as a traffic offense, and is governed by section 66-8-102, which makes the first and second offense a PETTY MISDEMEANOR. According to your own argument the Statute of Limitation for a PETTY misdemeanor is 1 year from the arrest. So, he was arrested, then weeks later he was deployed for 1 year (or more because we all know they can extend their deployment). But giving the benefit of the doubt, when he got back AFTER 1 FULL YEAR, he will be weeks past the STATUTE OF LIMITATION and therefore cannot be prosecuted.

Here's a word of advice. If you want to argue with someone intelligently, here are some pieces of advice:

Don't come here with half the information

Get the word STATUTE right, and remember this…the next time you are challenged with an intellectual argument, run in the other direction, because it is obvious that you are definitely not armed.