Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Weather
Two Men Sentenced On Separate Drunken Driving ChargesThe blood alcohol content for both men was twice the legal limit.Related Content
Two Anchorage men, both convicted of separate drunken driving charges, have found out how much time they will be spending behind bars.
According to the district attorney's office, Lawrence Brewer, 41, was sentenced to 11 years in prison, with four years suspended, for killing a 55-year-old cab driver last January. Donald Knue, 34, was sentenced to five years in prison, with two and a half years suspended, after a drunken driving crash last October that sent two men to the hospital. The blood alcohol content for both men was twice the legal limit. |
This content requires the latest Adobe Flash Player and a browser with JavaScript enabled.
Click here for a free download of the latest Adobe Flash Player.
|
You have indicated this comment should be removed.
The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .
Bob D said on Saturday, Jul 16 at 10:09 PM
Only 11 yrs for taking someone's life ? Where's the justice in THAT ? Actually 7 since 4 were suspended.
70822204Endub said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 12:15 AM
Not nearly enough time for either of these men. Hangin them in front of DMV sounds like better justice. That would teach people exactly what drunk driveing gets you!
70823699Wes said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 12:55 AM
I see by the sentences handed down by these judges that alcohol assault and murder is continuing to be treated as a joke. 14,000 people will die at the hands of drunk drivers in America this year. The state of Alaska will take in $35 million in alcohol taxes and spend about $1 billion dollars cleaning up the mess. All because people think alcohol is a plaything--safe and socially acceptable. Got news for you: the purpose for drinking alcohol isn't to be responsible--it is to get drunk. We can take measures short f prohibition to stop this slaughter--first we must recognize that we have a major problem.
70824327akbandit said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 8:00 AM
Wes- I disagree that the purpose for drinking is to get drunk (I have a beer or 2 with dinner almost every night because I love the taste of good beer, but it sure doesn't get me drunk), and I also feel it can be safe and should be socially acceptable when done responsibly. That said, I feel it is a major slap in the face to the victims of drunk drivers when these laughable senteces are given. If you drive drunk, you set yourself up to kill people, and to me that is on a level with premeditated murder. The problem I see is that we have judges and prosecutors and cops who all have been convicted of drunk driving and weaseled out of jail time, so it's hard for them to be tough on drunk drivers when they are guilty as sin themselves.
70833349Andrew Navarro said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 9:04 AM
Thank god I stoped that could have been me that killed or hurt someone...
70835637Granny Franny said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 11:10 AM
Drunk drivers should have tougher sentences and the systen shouldn't victimize the vicitms a second time with their unjust treatment of the situation.Even if they don't kill the person they hit with their vehicle they change other peoples lives for ever.they steal the finances and the security of the victim and their famlies.Some of the victims live tru the nightmare and find thierselves unable to live thier lives without pain and without the physical and phycological scares that the drunk has so selfishly stolen from them.We need to change how our society lets these drunks out to do it again and again.
70839692CC said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 11:40 AM
"..premeditated murder..", "Hanging them in front of the DMV...". These men were NOT senseless serial killers. They are addicted to a substance and they lacked the ability to choose whether they drank or not. The attitudes I see posted below about addiction are exactly why society is failing as a whole to successfully deal with this problem. You cannot PUNISH the addict out of a person. If you could, there would be no such thing as 2nd and 3rd DUI's. Maybe instead of locking addicts behind bars, costing the taxpayer $300 a day per person, we could try something that works: treatment and education. Otherwise, we can continue the downward spiral of labeling addiction as a moral dilemma and people will continue to die. As for these two men, perhaps after successful treatment they could become counselors helping other addicts by sharing their stories of how they feel after killing and maiming people. That would be powerful indeed. Or we can just lock them up and pay for them to stare out t
70840576bill s said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 11:46 AM
Do y'all want to pay for it? we could give them 20-30 years and that would how 'em we are serious. As for a drink or 2 well we could hold bars to that standard also. I'm sure CHARR would stand behind that. Picture Chilkoots with a half a dozen cars in the lot a midnight on Saturday of the folks that got off work at 11 enjoying thier 2 beers. Methinks they are there to get drunk?
70840792mbrewster75 said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 12:27 PM
I cannot believe that people are saying these two people had no choice to drink. That is ridiculous, they didn't have the common sense to take a cab or call a friend. I have been around alot of drunk driving fatalities and to say those people had no choice is a joke. We focus on those men what about the victims in their crimes did we forget about them. Quit giving these law breakers an excuse just shut up and do your time you did the crime now deal with it
70841976akbandit said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 12:30 PM
Bill and CC- Those that drink to get drunk and take a cab or get a ride are not the problem. My point was simply that the purpose of drinking is not always to get drunk. As far as addiction and treatment, great idea but I know of at least 2 dwi situations in which the driver hurt or killed someone, and that driver was NOT an alcoholic. So then what? What sort of program handles the guy who rarely drank but got drunk at a wedding and drove? Also not sure how a person who drives drunk and kills someone is equated with a 'senseless serial killer', though they could easily fit that description after a few incidents. But planning to kill someone, and planning to get drunk and knowing you're going to drive and could easily kill someone, are pretty close to each other. Treatment is a feel-good solution that sometimes works. But it does nothing for the victims, and it does nothing to prevent the person from driving drunk again (look up a guy named Justin Eaton on court view).
70842057Bill a said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 1:21 PM
AK Bandit Ok i'll give you a wedding drunk. The 1st dui is as it now is 30 with 27 suspended fine. But i don't feel sorry for him in fact just the opposit he isnt an addict & should have known better. therefore i suggst that on a 2nd DUI, you do your suspended time and then start your time for the 2nd and so on when you get to Fdui suspended time get longer and if you have to do it before starting new time, you are going to do some good time. I seen 7 X dui's getting 4 years with a couple of years suspended. if you had to do all your suspended time from the older charge 1st and the start the new sentence for the DUI one might think twice & if not well we kept them off the streets a little longer. However, do we want to pay "TO LOCK EM UP AND THROW AWAY THE KEY". it's easy to be draconian until the bill arrives - see Calif & 3 strikes.
70843617akbandit said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 9:22 PM
Not understanding your point Bill. You say make the sentence longer, then say "do we want to pay the bill?". What do YOU suggest we do? I'm not the one saying go easy. My wedding example was simply to suggest that not all dui's are alcoholics, thus treatment isn't the perfect answer. I agree it MAY work great in some cases, but how do we know which ones? I'm certainly not feeling sympathy for any drunk driver for any reason. Jail costs money, but an inmate seldom drives drunk. Revoked license doesn't work. The ignition lock thing doesn't stop the person from driving a different vehicle. Ankle monitor, paid for by the guilty person, seems the best route. Do jail time, then a monitor that measures blood alcohol for 5 years. That's first offense, if nobody was hurt or killed. Again, what do YOU suggest? If you had a loved one die from a drunk driver, what punishment would you hand out? I'd give that person one last drink, and it wouldn't be grain alcohol....
70857161cooljulie said on Sunday, Jul 17 at 9:39 PM
I don't have any great answer to the problem, but here's an example of the failure of the system. A drunk in a truck hit my friend's car in a parking lot. He got arrested on site. My friend was not hurt. We decided to hire a detective to see what happened from there on out, since the cops would not give us any info! Here's what we learned: The guy blew a .23, almost 3 times the legal limit. He had had a dui less than 3 years prior (we couldn't get his bac level for that one). He did less than 30 days in jail. He was back driving (same truck) in less than 3 months. We had him tailed for 3 random days. He drove to construction jobsites, and went to the liquor store on his lunch break and/or after work. He was observed pouring booze into a cup in his truck and drinking from the cup before leaving the liquor store parking lot. Obviously whatever punishment/treatment he got DIDN'T WORK. That was a year ago. For kicks, we had him tailed one day last week. Same routine. Makes me sick.
70857409mer said on Saturday, Jul 23 at 11:33 PM
Marijuana is illegal. Alcohol should be illegal. a drug is a drug. look at how 'freely society allows alcohol to roam thru homes, streets, bars, everywhere and all the deaths, accidents it is causing. Wake up People! restrict alcohol.
71200412Add a comment
Most Popular