‘I could have killed someone’

Pam
Pam Frampton
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

The consequences of driving while impaired are far-reaching

He didn’t hit anyone with his car when he drove drunk. In fact, he didn’t put a scratch on his vehicle. But he left plenty of psychological wreckage in his wake.

The emotional debris field was a mile wide, reaching into all aspects of his life.

He’s 52, well-educated and a respected research scientist. He lives in St. John’s.

He’s also a diabetic and a high-functioning alcoholic who suffers from chronic depression, so he knows full well that alcohol is not an antidote to anxiety and despair.

Yet that’s exactly what he reached for one night in September 2013.

His case was heard in an open court but he does not want to be named here because he is still grappling with remorse.

His voice is tremulous as he tells his story. He sounds haunted and hollow on the other end of the line.

“I’m a diabetic,” he said.

“My sugar had dropped really badly. I was full of angst. And I did the stupidest thing possible — I went out and bought a bottle of vodka.”

That impulsive purchase triggered a series of events that would lead to charges, conviction, heightened depression, hospitalization and, eventually, realization.

He wants to share his story because he doesn’t think everyone understands the rippling repercussions of driving drunk — even when you’re lucky enough to have made it home in your car without ruining someone else’s life along the way.

The day after that vodka-fuelled evening, he woke around 10:30 a.m. feeling a bit fuzzy-headed, but otherwise OK.

He drove to a convenience store for a case of beer.

An employee with the City of St. John’s, standing in the same line at the counter that morning, noticed the man swaying on his feet.

When he got his beer and left, the city worker got into his car, followed the man home, then called the police and gave them the address.

“I was in my room, trying to read something,” the man recalls. “I heard a knock and looked out the window and saw the police.”

He felt a surge of fear.

They told him he had been reported for drunk driving.

He was taken to Mount Pearl for breath tests.

“I blew into that small device and failed spectacularly. I blew 0.26. I was surprised, but I shouldn’t have been. My judgment was also impaired.”

The legal limit is 0.08.

The police were professional and polite, he says. After the test, they gave him a lift home.

        •••

He couldn’t stop thinking about it and was racked with remorse. He thought of high school friends who had died driving drunk; of the anguish of good friends whose daughter was killed by a drunk driver.

I ask him what he would have done if the police had showed up at his house that morning and told him he had struck someone with his car.

There is silence on the other end of the phone.

He says quietly, “You don’t want to hear the answer to that. I’d be dead. I couldn’t have lived with that.”

        •••

He agonized over what had happened. He found the guilt crippling; the depression overpowering, like being sucked down by quicksand.

“I was so distraught after this. I was a mess,” he said.

“I was having suicidal thoughts. I spent seven days in the short-term assessment unit at the Waterford.

“It was the public shame — that people would find out I was an alcoholic. But the truth is, they already knew.

“Mostly it was self-recrimination. I savaged myself — how could you be so f--king stupid?”

He managed to keep it together for a while.

“Maybe four days, and then I started drinking again. A really good friend knew I was having trouble with the drinking and the depression and the diabetes. He came to check on me and looked in through the window and saw me on the floor. He broke in and called 911.

“I woke up looking at the hospital ceiling and realized I couldn’t drink anymore.”

        •••

In court, his lawyer tried to offer the best defence he could, suggesting a technicality might offer hope of acquittal.

The man was terrified he would get jail time, but he was determined to plead guilty.

“I knew I did it,” he said. “I wanted to own it; take responsibility for it. I have no one to blame but myself.”

He was convicted in November 2013 — a first offence. He was fined $1,500, had his licence revoked for one year and was told to avail of addictions programming.

        •••

He wants people to know that if you drive the morning after a night of drinking, you could still be impaired; that a driver’s licence is a privilege, not a right.

He wants judges and the courts to know that things aren’t always cut and dried. That perhaps someone who suffers from depression and alcoholism — two illnesses that feed off each other — and who has committed a first offence should be sentenced to more rehab and lower fines rather than the other way around.

And he wants the public to know that the consequences are far-reaching — the public and professional humiliation; the stigma of being labelled a “drunk driver”;

the inconvenience of not being allowed to drive; the financial ramifications.

All told, that one trip to the store for beer has cost him about $10,000 in fines, legal fees, taxi fares and lease payments on a car that will sit parked in his driveway until November.

And there are other costs, too. Practical ones, like the fact that he could be stopped and turned back anytime at the United States border, where his research often takes him.

There are emotional costs. The trauma of the event and thoughts of what might have been have exacerbated his illness and rendered him more fragile.

“Personally, this has been a nightmare for me,” he said.

“It’s always in the back of my mind. I felt very strongly that other people should know the consequences. If you have a conscience at all, something like this will do a number on you.”

When I commend him for sharing his experience, he brushes off the compliment.

“I don’t see this as being brave,” he said. “I see this as information. Maybe it’ll make you take a taxi and not your car. I also felt like it might help me come to terms with this.”

He stopped drinking on Sept. 16, 2013.

It was a birthday gift to himself, he says. An avid musician, he also bought himself a drum machine.

        •••

He wants the person who reported him to the police to know how thankful he is.

“The fact that that person took the time to exercise his civic duty, I’m grateful for that. … He did absolutely the right thing.

“I could have killed someone.”

 

Pam Frampton is a columnist and

The Telegram’s associate managing editor. Email pframpton@thetelegram.com.

Twitter: pam_frampton

 

 

Organizations: Waterford

Geographic location: Mount Pearl, United States

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • Dee-lightful
    June 23, 2014 - 10:34

    I think that you are missing the whole point of the story. It's not that the "accused" is pissed off that he was caught breaking the law, or regretting opening the door for the police. He is taking full responsibility for his actions which is something you obviously would not do, seeing as you are so well versed in the law of opening doors.

  • Diocletian
    June 21, 2014 - 14:44

    Why on earth did he answer the door for the cops? The cops could only enter if he let them in; or if they had a warrant; or if there was reason to believe an ongoing serious crime was being committed inside the premises (does not apply here)! The cops in this case would have had to leave if the door was not opened to them. The citizen who reported the matter would have had to give evidence if a charge was laid. His opinion as a non expert about drunk driving (and no alcohol reading)in court would not lay a foundation of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Just cause a cop is at your door you don't have to answer it.Let him get a warrant if he can and he may have no reasonable grounds to get one.

    • jane
      June 23, 2014 - 12:10

      You missed the whole point .... he wasn't trying to get off ( the cowardly thing) he was owning his crime ( the courageous thing). Read the article again. It said, "In court, his lawyer tried to offer the best defence he could, suggesting a technicality might offer hope of acquittal. The man was terrified he would get jail time, but he was determined to plead guilty. “I knew I did it,” he said. “I wanted to own it; take responsibility for it. I have no one to blame but myself.” Sadly, too many drunk drivers want to blame someone or something else for their problem. I commend this man for "taking it on the chin".