City Official Nabbed On Motor Vehicle Charges

Is this really news???

How come his car was not towed?

Guess he forgets more than the stealth raises.

Why was he allowed to drive an unregistered car away once pulled over?

Threefifths...

I TOTALLY agree. Why in the heck was his car not towed? I thought that when an unregistered vehicle is out on the street, the cops tow it away and the driver is left to call a cab. What the heck is up with that?

Unregistered motor vehicles are towed at the officer's discretion. More important than registration is insurance. As long as a MV is insured it doesn't need to be towed.

How is this newsworthy, but a fireman arrested in the codys incident for illegal transfer of a firearm (a felony) is nowhere in print. Rings a familiar tone like the president of the firebirds arrested for dui also warranted no copy. Does your paper have a biased agenda?

[Note: In case you missed the Cody's story, we broke it: http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/firefighters_diner_gun_incident_probed/)

Discretion? They tow insured, expired cars all the time, few days expired, fully insured, towed.

I can't speak for what other officers do. According to state statutes, there is a 30 day grace period after a reg is expired where its an infraction for Failure to Renew. After 30 days, it becomes Operating an Unregistered MV. There are also instances where the registration or license have been suspended, which is more serious than simply not renewing your registration. In those cases, the plates or license can be seized.

Again, you may not like it, but except in cases involving domestic violence, police have (and should have) broad discretion in what line of enforcement to take.

as far as the gun incident at codys; you didn't update that the fireman turned himself in on gun charges last week. Seems like an important development that wasn't followed up on. Public safety officers are held to a standard others are not. I figured his arrest would warrant his own article with updates.

To "fireman arrested".....The rug at the "Independent" office must have a bump in it the size of West Rock from everything that gets swept under it.

VC man

I can’t speak for what other officers do. According to state statutes, there is a 30 day grace period after a reg is expired where its an infraction for Failure to Renew. After 30 days, it becomes Operating an Unregistered MV. There are also instances where the registration or license have been suspended, which is more serious than simply not renewing your registration. In those cases, the plates or license can be seized.

Again, you may not like it, but except in cases involving domestic violence, police have (and should have) broad discretion in what line of enforcement to take.

Here is the whol law.

What are the penalties for driving a car in Connecticut (CT) that is unregistered?

The General Statutes of Connecticut (GSC) list the penalties for driving an unregistered car in CT as fines.

Section 14-12 of the GSC notes that a person commits an infraction if valid registration is not on a vehicle and it is driven on a public road. Failure to renew within 30 days receives a fine but operator’s license shall not be affected. The exact wording of this section of CT law, titled Motor Vehicle Registration is as follows:

(a) No motor vehicle shall be operated or towed on any highway, except as otherwise expressly provided, unless it is registered with the commissioner, provided any motor vehicle may be towed for repairs or necessary work if it bears the markers of a licensed and registered dealer, manufacturer or repairer and provided any motor vehicle which is validly registered in another state may, for a period of sixty days following establishment by the owner of residence in this state, be operated on any highway without first being registered with the commissioner.

(1) a person commits an infraction if he registers a motor vehicle he does not own or if he operates, or allows the operation of, an unregistered motor vehicle on a public highway or (2) a resident of this state who operates a motor vehicle he owns with marker plates issued by another state shall be fined not less than one hundred fifty dollars nor more than three hundred dollars. If the owner of a motor vehicle previously registered on an annual or biennial basis, the registration of which expired not more than thirty days previously, operates or allows the operation of such a motor vehicle, he shall be fined the amount designated for the infraction of failure to renew a registration, but his right to retain his operator's license shall not be affected. No operator other than the owner shall be subject to penalty for the operation of such a previously registered motor vehicle.

So it appears the fine ranges from $150 to $300 for a vehicle being operated without proper registration.

CGS 14-215 lists another fine that you may also face for operation of a vehicle if the registration is refused, suspended or revoked. Here it states under subsection (a) that no person shall operate or cause to be operated any motor vehicle, the registration of which has been refused, suspended or revoked, or any motor vehicle, the right to operate which has been suspended or revoked.

Subsection (b) goes on to say that any person who violates any provision of subsection (a) shall, for a first offense, be fined not less than one hundred fifty dollars or more than two hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than ninety days, or be both fined and imprisoned, and, for any subsequent offense, shall be fined not less than two hundred dollars or more than six hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than one year, or be both fined and imprisoned.



Check this out.

a) No motor vehicle shall be operated or towed on any highway, except as otherwise expressly provided, unless it is registered with the commissioner,

So even if you have nsurance,This motor vehicle should not be on the road at all.
Second when did he go to court.Last I bet when he showed has city ID that is when the Discretion came in or maybe a phone call.Look at what happen with Rev. Kimbo and Look at this case.

Lack of charges under scrutiny in possible DUI after car hits gas station

By William Kaempffer

Kevin Walton, 38, who is married to Karen DuBois-Walton, former chief of staff for Mayor John DeStefano Jr., crashed early Saturday, plowing over two pumps and smashing into the building at 125 Humphrey St.

He initially left the scene, but stopped about a quarter-mile away and called 911 within minutes of the crash, records show. He said he lost control on black ice and left because he was afraid the pumps, which firefighters later determined were long abandoned, would explode.

While an officer said in his report that Walton "appeared intoxicated," authorities "unequivocally" denied that Walton got a free pass.

"No, we don’t give any preferential treatment. We’ve locked up our own in the past," said Assistant Police Chief Herman Badger.

DuBois-Walton oversaw the Police Department as the city’s chief administrative officer and later was the mayor’s chief of staff. DuBois-Walton, who accepted the position as deputy director of the New Haven Housing Authority in November, went to the accident scene Saturday, reports show.

Attempts to reach the couple were unsuccessful Tuesday. A message was left in her office. There is no home telephone listing under either’s name.

In response to an inquiry, police said there wasn’t probable cause to pursue a drunken driving charge.

The investigating officer indicated he couldn’t charge Walton with DUI because there was about a 90-minute delay between the approximate time of the crash and when he first interviewed Walton.

He also said that he hadn’t observed Walton behind the wheel, and the only witness to the crash couldn’t identify him as the driver.

According to the report, however, Walton admitted to the officer that he was the driver. State law also allows for a presumption that the registered owner of a vehicle was the driver in most motor vehicle offenses, said state Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, a former prosecutor and co-chairman of the legislative Judiciary Committee. The 1997 Ford Expedition is registered to Walton.

While the delay in police response could have made a DUI prosecution more difficult, there likely was still probable cause to ask him to take blood-alcohol or field sobriety tests based on the officer’s observations, according to Lawlor and Attorney Jay Ruane, a Bridgeport lawyer who specializes in DUI cases.

State statute allows a two-hour window to administer a first blood-alcohol test and have it automatically admissible in court, Ruane said.

Even without blood-alcohol content, police still can charge DUI based on field sobriety tests and observations of intoxication, although most department prefer the BAC route because it’s less subjective.

In the police report, the officer reported a strong smell of alcohol on Walton’s breath and surmised he was drunk because Walton was unable to recall which direction he was traveling in.

Personnel from American Medical Response also said Walton was drunk but uninjured, the report says.

"He actually admitted to having driven the car, there’s no question he was driving it. The only real question is was he intoxicated while he was driving the vehicle. There certainly was probable cause to believe so. ... It seem like there’s a lot of questions here that have to be answered," said Lawlor, who also is an assistant professor of criminal justice at the University of New Haven.

After the crash, DuBois-Walton told police she would prefer to have her husband drive the vehicle home instead of having it towed.

"I stated to Mrs. Walton that if he gets behind the wheel I would arrest him for DUI," the officer says in the report. "She stated AAA would be en route."

Wow When you work for city hall you gget a lot of discretion. But let it be me or you.

FIREMAN DUI DOCKET #
H15N-MV09-0364162-S

FIREMAN GUN CHARGE DOCKET#
N23N-CR10-0102770-S
ILL TRANSFER PISTOL/REVOLVER

They should have towed him? really?

When they phased back in emissions & I couldn't get an appointment (everyone was backed up) I could not renew my registration. I was pulled over about SIX TIMES but I was never towed, despite the fact that the officers didn't believe me about the emissions.

Each time they just told me to hurry up and get my car registered again.

I'm awfully glad they didn't tow me. I would have had to wait 5 weeks to get my car back, because that's how backed up the emissions testing place was where I had it done.

The penalty for operating an unregistered MV is an infraction (i.e. a ticket) while operating a MV with a suspended reg or a suspended license is a misdemeanor summons (technically an arrest). Operating a MV without insurance is also a summons. Operating a MV without a license is an infraction for the first offense, a summons for subsequent offenses. Operating a MV with a misuse of plates results in a summons.

Then there are combinations of the above, such as the "Fair Haven special": misuse of plates, unregistered, no license, no insurance, which results in 1 summons being filled out with all 4 charges on it and a possible custodial arrest if the person has no valid ID and probably towing the car as well.

Are your eyes rolling in the back of your head yet? Welcome to traffic enforcement.

How is this news? If this story wasn't reported, and then came out through some other means, would it be a "cover up?"

I'm also pretty sure it's uncommon to tow a car with an expired registration if the plates on the car belong on the car and it's properly insured. It's more common (in <ahem> my experience) for an officer to write a ticket, which is often nolled if you show up at traffic court with a copy of your renewed registration. As I heard once from a police officer, the goal is "compliance."