Police: Woman drove drunk with baby in car
MIDDLETON — Police say a Sauk City woman who was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving had her 2-month-old son in the vehicle.
Middleton police say the woman was arrested early Saturday morning for what would be her third-offense of driving while intoxicated.
Police pulled over the 28-year-old for allegedly driving 75 mph in a 55-mph zone. A preliminary breath test said her blood-alcohol level was 0.18 percent, more than twice the legal limit.
Her son was secured in a safety seat. Because the driver had a child passenger, the alleged offense would become a felony.
The baby was taken into protective custody. He slept in a police lieutenant’s office until his grandmother arrived.
Jul 20, 2009 at 5:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
As long as the League of Alcohol Distribution has the politicians on their payroll, there will be no progress to eliminate drunk driving in WI..
Duh !!! It's another "Stupid Human Trick"...As long as there are public drinking establishments with parking lots, there will be drunk driving.
Public smoking is almost gone, (smoking tobacco), but you can still smoke all the petroleum you want in public.
Perhaps public drinking needs to go away as well.
Jul 19, 2009 at 9:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
In Wisconsin drunk driving is a joke. It takes something extraordinary to make it a felony, with some real punishment. Nearly all of the surronding states file any 2nd offense as a felony, and if you have a 3rd offense in the 10 year period surrounding the 2nd conviction- you will go to jail. That is legislation that most of us would support. If you look at the statistics where drunk driving laws have been the toughest, there has been a decline. Time to get real Wisconsin!
Jul 19, 2009 at 6:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Why does'nt the state take your vehicle after you have one dui, like the DNR takes your hunting or fishing equipment for violations.
Jul 19, 2009 at 5:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
AndrewJackson: Your right of course, but look how long it took before carmakers finally agreed to add seatbelts!
Jul 19, 2009 at 11:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Whoops, I said brave, intelligent and politician in the same sentence. I apologize to the faithful!
Jul 19, 2009 at 10:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
I have to laugh at the people that think we can legislate this problem away. Could somebody give an example of legislation EVER doing it. Breath test ignition locks should have been installed on the first car built and every one since. Where is the brave intelligent politician that is willing to introduce this?
Jul 19, 2009 at 9:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
It should've been a felony whether she had a child in the car or not!
Jul 19, 2009 at 9:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
"...third-offense of driving while intoxicated." Third time! The measures put in place do not deter this behaviour. How many times have we read someone has died at the hand of a drunk driver only to find that this will be the drivers multiple offense? The technology is available to prevent the vehicle from operating if you are intoxicated. Isn't it time to mandate it? Granted there are ways around the system, maybe we can at least screen a majority of these selfish intoxicated people from operating 3500 lb bullets. Even one off the road would make our families safer.
Jul 19, 2009 at 9:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
coyote - that is correct. Persons like the one profiled in the article, will violate laws regardless of if they are strict or lax.
Jul 19, 2009 at 8:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Plain and simple; you can't legislate morality.
Jul 19, 2009 at 8:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
3rd offense - 5th, 7th - it's obvious that the same people keep driving while intoxicated. Wish I had a solution to that problem and all would be safer.
Jul 19, 2009 at 6:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Many people don't realize if a person is an alcoholic, which records indicate she might be, that level of alcohol could be just what she needed to be "normal". She wouldn't be intoxicated, but rather maintaining an alcohol level which just keeps she from detoxing. She might have been perfectly capable of driving that car. Not that what she did is right, but I'm just sayin'.
Jul 19, 2009 at 4:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Sarah-what's not to get? She continues because our legislators don't see a problem here, & because our state as a whole thinks it's something to joke about.
Jul 19, 2009 at 2:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
thank god she didnt crash...and the innocent 2 month old baby is safe and not harmed...and hes in the safety of his grandmother...hopefully this will put things in order for this girl...but who knows...i just hope she doesnt have to learn the hard way...
Jul 18, 2009 at 11:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
No matter how many times we read the same stories over and over about drunken drivers, people continue to drive drunk. I just don't get it!
Jul 18, 2009 at 11:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
and alcohol is legal because????
you are allowed to consume it, but only a little legally, and you are not allowed to drive, but who walks anymore these days? And if you do you get a ticket for being drunk in public. No matter what kind of laws there are, alcohol is still legal and idiots like this alleged 'mother' are putting other people in harms way . Thank goodness the 2 month old is alright.
Jul 18, 2009 at 11:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Let the comments begin!!!!!
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.