Washington Votes Forum

I have heard stories that people have left the scene of an accident, allegedly gone home, allegedly had a beer and returned to the scene (with a driver) where police have not charged them with a hit-and-run because they showed back up and, further, were prevented from administering a sobriety test because of the admission or having alcohol (when they are no longer driving.)  I would suggest further amending this law to state that after such an accident, no one involved shall be allowed to consume any substance that would invalidate a DUI test.  Consumption of such a substance would be assumed to have been taken prior to the accident and that any test for driving under the influence would be legally assumed to be valid.

I would hope that if someone hit me and actually stopped but popped his trunk, took out and consumed a beer, while awaiting the arrival of law enforcement could not avoid a conviction for impaired driving.

There does not appear to be any language permitting a party to the incident to proceed to the nearest safe location (police/sherriff's station, fire station, hospital, etc) to provide the required contact in a safe and controlled environment.  There have been reported incidents of bump-and-rob, as well as, bump-and-rape which would be enabled by this legislation as it stands currently.  I am somewhat concerned about the requirement to provide residential address information to all parties involved in the accident.  We likely won't be able to get away from that though.

The comment around post-accident consumption of alcohol are probably not germane to this particular bill.  Such language should be part of the more general RCW statutes around DUI and motor vehicle accidents.  I'm not sure if the presumption of consumption prior to the accident would work well in court, but it conceptually makes sense.

-Brian D Heaton