• You must be logged in to see or use the chatbox



This one if for the ever awesome @Keepalowprofile

A Shasta Lake woman was arrested Saturday night after police said she crashed her car while going 80 mph through downtown Redding with her 5-year-old son at the wheel.

Katelyn Miles, 24, was allegedly driving west on Placer Street at about 10:30 p.m. Saturday when she turned right onto Pine Street and collided with a Honda Accord driven by Brian Thomas, 41, of Redding, police said.

Miles was driving with her son on her lap and allowing him to steer the vehicle, Redding police said. The mother also was not wearing a seatbelt, police said.

After the crash, Miles handed her son to a friend who happened to arrive at the incident. Miles then left the scene of the collision, police said.

The mother later returned to the crash site and told officers she had used methamphetamine and heroin an hour before the crash, police said.

Miles was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of drugs, driving while addicted to drugs, hit-and-run driving and child endangerment, police said.

No one was injured in the crash, but the 5-year-old boy was taken to a local hospital for evaluation, police said.
 

Comments

Keepalowprofile

Water is for people that don't have coffee.
Bold Member!
The mother is a moron.
. Miles was driving with her son on her lap and allowing him to steer the vehicle, Redding police said. The mother also was not wearing a seatbelt, police said.
She is so fucking lucky he son wasn't smashed between her and the steering wheel.
. During the crash both vehicles went off the road, striking a utility box, cutting power to the traffic signals at the intersection.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Ramona the brave

Active Member
That is an interesting charge. Does California automatically void the driving privileges of addicts?
Apparently! And since it's usually *known* addicts killing people while high, I don't hate the idea lol.

From the internets:
Vehicle Code 23152(c) VC reads: "(c) It is unlawful for a person who is addicted to the use of any drug to drive a vehicle. This subdivision shall not apply to a person who is participating in a narcotic treatment program approved pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 11875) of Chapter 1 of Part 3 of Division 10.5 of the Health and Safety Code."
Most first, second and third instances of driving while addicted to a drug are California misdemeanors. But fourth and subsequent offenses can be charged as felony DUI.

In practice, California's "driving while addicted to drugs" law is rarely enforced. However, it is still a part of California DUI law and can lead to serious consequences for individuals who are convicted under VC 23152(c)--particularly those who have other DUI priors on their record.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Old Man Metal

Trusted Member
Staff member
Apparently! And since it's usually *known* addicts killing people while high, I don't hate the idea lol.

From the internets:

Most first, second and third instances of driving while addicted to a drug are California misdemeanors. But fourth and subsequent offenses can be charged as felony DUI.

In practice, California's "driving while addicted to drugs" law is rarely enforced. However, it is still a part of California DUI law and can lead to serious consequences for individuals who are convicted under VC 23152(c)--particularly those who have other DUI priors on their record.
Wow. As hard-ass as the South can be on drugs, I've never heard of such a thing.

And as often as the same people nod out and get in wrecks over and over again around here, I don't know that I'd hate the idea either.

ETA: Having said "as hard-ass as the South can be on drugs," I will say NC is unquestionably the most progressive state in the South. I honestly think that's a sweet spot.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Ramona the brave

Active Member
You read my mind.. I read it at least four times and thought wtf.. how do they determine you’re an addict?
Based on what I read, it's a law that is usually enforced when someone causes an accident or is driving unsafely due to the physical/psychological symptoms of drug addiction. For example: diminished alertness or erratic behavior due to physical withdrawal, racing to get your fix, etc. So that you can still face additional changes even if you're not technically high.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Sux, but...
When I was little( before the flood of Noah, high button shoes, and the flock of seagulls band)
My mom.would get a little tipsy and let my brothers...3&6 years older than me...
Drive our station wagon around the court in the summer time.
I wasnt allowed to be in the car, but everyone on our court could hear them laughing and whooping it up.
She would let them sit on her lap, and she would work the pedal, while they steared.
I was so jealous!
They were having fun.
I dont think my mom was wrong, and .
..hate to say it, but I dont think this broad was either.
She didn't mean for a crash to happen.
She was trying to...play...? With him.
I'm sorry, I dont hate her.
 

Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!


Don't like ads? Then help out the site and GO BOLD!

Top