DUI Checkpoint Nets 3 Motorists, 7 Vehicles

The checkpoint was staffed between 8 p.m. Friday and 3 a.m. Saturday on Winchester Road, at Nicolas Road, officials said.

Three suspected drunken drivers were arrested at a checkpoint staffed by sheriff's deputies from the Temecula station.

The checkpoint was staffed between 8 p.m. Friday and 3 a.m. Saturday on Winchester Road, at Nicolas Road, officials said.

Deputies screend 1,973 vehicles, out of 3,485 vehicles that passed through, with 82 vehicles sent to a secondary stage to be checked, Riverside County sheriff's Sgt. John Magnan wrote in a news release.

Four motorists with alleged license violations were ticketed and ordered to appear in court, and seven vehicles were impounded, Magnan said.

Deputies administered 12 field sobriety tests, the sergeant said.

The operation was funded through the state Office of Traffic Safety.

Brenda July 09, 2012 at 08:47 AM
Ok God KB, that was 3 drunks taken off the road that did not kill someone on that weekend also. That is the main issue.
5150 July 09, 2012 at 02:05 PM
Checkpoints are good. They should have one at both ends of Old Town Temecula on a saturday night.
LBV Collins July 09, 2012 at 02:32 PM
Hi 5150. Instead of paying officers overtime to interrogate visitors as they leave Old Town, how about paying officers to rove through the crowds on foot? If they see someone publicly intoxicated, they can then deal with THAT person appropriately. I also suspect that their presence will remind imbibers to ensure someone in their group is the designated driver. As I have mentioned before, I am 100% in favor of preventing drunks from driving. However, I think it is wrong for officers to stop and question the innocent without probable cause.
LBV Collins July 09, 2012 at 02:38 PM
Hi TVOR. I'll talk to my representative, but I need to know what to discuss. Can you point me to info about the rules imposed on officers that prevents them from using roving patrols to nab drunk drivers? Thanks!
LBV Collins July 09, 2012 at 02:52 PM
Hi Brenda. I respectfully disagree. The main issue is not that three "suspected DUIs" were taken off the road. For me, the main issue is that nearly 2,000 innocent drivers were needlessly stopped and interrogated by law enforcement. And of those nearly 2,000 who were "briefly" detained, 82 drivers (and their passengers) were sent to a secondary stage for further interrogation. Of those 82, seven had their vehicles impounded, yet only three were arrested on suspicion of DUI! That's a whole lotta people who were not DUI, yet whose evening was needlessly and negatively impacted by police supposedly searching for a teensy, tiny smattering of drunk drivers.
5150 July 09, 2012 at 03:06 PM
if you a had a family memeber killed by a drunk driver as i have, you might think different.
Jeri Sidebotham July 09, 2012 at 03:35 PM
What amazes me is all these senior citizens that are the first in line talking about having a few beers and getting behind wheel of vehicle and they should be ashamed of themselves, but they forget that the vicodin, pain killers, and all the other medications that they are on while having no concerns of the damage they do, weaving into and out of traffic, going so slow as to cause accidents behind them, making illegal turns in front of other drivers. So I dont want to hear from them, yes its not cool to get behind the wheel while impaired...period!
Brenda July 09, 2012 at 07:51 PM
I agree 5150 and also at wine country. LBV where do you all get the idea that officer's are paid overtime? Some are ahh I can't think of the name of the gentlemen not paid yet, its not volunteer's, (dang) and then officers on a regular shift. I was not interrogated at all when I went thru. Literally took me about 3 min from start to finish including the short line, looked at my license, and insurance, registration, said thanks, he was "going to wave me thru thou, and not stop me", LOL. NOT everyone even gets asked to show their ID or is stopped. I don't care if its 3 people or 14. I don't care if half are for vehicle registration and insurance violations because I HAVE TO PAY MINE!! I would love to have a walking patrol at Old Town, and in the Mall by the restaurants. Rather see them in a car but we dont want the officers wasting gas, hey thats fine by me, they will walk. Trying to keep someone smashed into their car like a pretzel, trying to keep them alive is difficult on cops, firemen, medics, hospital personnel, they would like to end drunk drivers by all means. Its put in the paper the time and place of a check point, just dont drive if you dont want to "waste" 3 minutes of your precious time being waved thru a checkpoint. LBV do you feel the same about Border patrol officers, stops etc. also? hmm? Definately stopping us, and questioning us, "the innocent" without probable cause right? dogs sniffing all over us? Tongue a wagging? LOL
Sammie July 10, 2012 at 05:57 AM
Everyone is all up in arms about this, and how wrong it is. Guess what???? They publish the checkpoint dates, times, and locations in the newspaper prior to the event. And it hardly ever happens. No one's trapping you, deal with the few minutes of traffic (OH THE HUMANITY), or take an alternate route.
Tristen July 10, 2012 at 02:55 PM
So, if you have been drinking you can opt to go another way to avoid the checkpoint. There is always an 'Out" before having to go through the checkpoint. Where this one was Friday night, Roripaugh went through and avoided the checkpoint entirely. I took it and went right through. If Temecula drivers are ignorant not to know another way, that's their problem. Dealing with Temecula drivers who constantly say they only know one way to get somewhere .... they deserve what they get then. If you choose to go through then take your lumps like the rest of us. Unless you have personally witnessed a fatal traffic collision due to DUI, keep your mouths shut .... Freekin Winers.
Brenda July 10, 2012 at 08:36 PM
Wow Tristen and I get bombed on for being outspoken! Great points, and like I said, if you read in the paper the days before, just dont come to Temecula, drive through, or party if you intend on DRINKING AND DRIVING. Hope you just dont kill someone that night in another City and as you say Tristen, they can take their lumps.
Brenda July 10, 2012 at 08:47 PM
Exactly Sammie, like its some big conspiracy theory, story. Its a check point, drive up, probably get waved through unless you are drunk, or have license, registration issues. Ta DA!
JAH July 11, 2012 at 02:12 AM
To those of you against DUI checkpoints, you obviously have never lost a loved one to a drunk driver. You drink, you drive, you pay.......no innocent person should pay for your mistake or lack of better judgement.
Brenda July 11, 2012 at 04:01 AM
Whew, thank you guys on the same page as me on check points and drunk drivers. Was feeling kind of alone and the only one in the world willing to accept any small of getting even one drunk driver off the road. :/ I have lost a few and have 2 friends alive but in wheelchairs from drunk drivers........I will accept anything to stop them.
Timber July 11, 2012 at 04:14 AM
If you're going to assert that 'every' time anyone is driving drunk they kill. Then step up to the plate for you big home-run swing and grace us with your empirical evidence to support that claim. Otherwise, that assertion is nothing more than an elementary attempt at making an impotent argument with a grade school mentality. I implore that with such serious issues involved there is something more you could bring to the table besides baseless emotional tripe.
Timber July 11, 2012 at 04:29 AM
Brenda, They are 'accused or suspected' and in this country we reserve branding your fellow countrymen AFTER they have received their due process. It is a disservice for you or anyone to convict someone before. If you have something against the Bill of Right and/or the Constitution please contact your legislators to see if they can help you with that type of cause.
Brenda July 12, 2012 at 11:37 PM
Anyone a contractor who can build Timber a large platform somewhere out in cow country where he can stand all day and spew drama filled speeches about these huge conspiracy theories? I just am not that paranoid about life to follow his whole concept.
Brenda July 12, 2012 at 11:48 PM
Timber, Get your facts straight. I did not say they are convicted, I called them drunks. Obviously when they got picked up they were drunks, and its the decision of the jury to decide just how drunk, not mine. They are still drunks. Anyone build you that big grandstand yet out in cow country for you to stand and preach all day?
TVOR July 13, 2012 at 04:15 AM
LBV, the answer lies in case law. Rules are imposed based on what judges have ruled in cases where people got DUI's and then whined because they got caught.
TVOR July 13, 2012 at 04:18 AM
All DUI checkpoints are also license and registration compliance checkpoints. Those whose cars are towed without being charged for DUI have them towed because either their license was suspended or revoked, or their registration was more than 6 months overdue.
TVOR July 13, 2012 at 04:23 AM
I wish someone would post up a video of them going through a checkpoint and show the jackbooted thug cops harrassing then when they are minding their own business driving down the road. I have never been through a checkpoint where the cops were anything but professional and pleasant.
Timber July 13, 2012 at 06:06 AM
Let's spell this out. You assert these individuals are “drunks” based upon being arrested by police for probable DUI blogged here on Patch. Some questions: Did any of these “drunks” go to court for this event? (Answer: NO) Were any of these “drunks” judged in a court of law? (Answer: NO) Were any of these “drunks” sentenced? (Answer: NO) This label, “drunks”, denotes a specific meaning, which is of guilt. How you arrived at this conclusion from just reading an article here on Patch is astounding. Not one interview of witness' or investigation of the evidence held by local law enforcement or review of the officers written statements or even a phone call to the prosecuting attorneys office. With this skill you have I suggest you begin advocating for the elimination of the Judicial branch. After all, it's much easier if we just stream-line the process for conviction right there in the field with the officer conducting the arrest and acting as judge and jury, with your help of course. Fact is your bias is showing. Try on some objective glasses once, you might come to appreciate this thing about Rights. Bias and impartiality is in the eye of the beholder.
Arthur July 13, 2012 at 08:53 AM
I agree that drunk drivers are scapegoated for killing people when most of the injuries and deaths are from just driving period with influences being convenient to blame- after all most of the people during such times are under the influence so cauusation is not to be assumed and frankly ahd you not been drunk you might not of survived the accident instead texting or whatever would of had you do to passthe time behind the wheel. That being said Brenda is correct your nuts and evil and are obviously not attending meetings and only momentarally without intoxication not really committed to geting insight or long term sobriety. Please don't take my comment personally though- I'm just trying to support her, and join her in thanking you for yoru candor as it helps us have insight- your lack of it. Before you agress at me for telling you the truth- and prove I'm right- step back, consider, call a friend or make one to call, and only then report me for saying paying a fine means your guilty/aka evil, and in not realising that 'confused.'
Arthur July 13, 2012 at 09:00 AM
Timber yes- to have driven drunk is to be no better the nthose who have done soand killed.
Arthur July 13, 2012 at 09:08 AM
you can fail the test just by being too tired- and should be convicted if you do. you can fail it for havingtoo much monster even without tequilla in your blood, caffiene kills, makes people narrow there vision, not see the bike approaching fast from the left when t hey run the light- either does. yes your supposed to llook both ways even at an intersection with a green light- and caffiene doesn't help you do that only rest does. 3 charged out of a dozen tested sounds fair to me. the number not using transit is embarrassing and collectively they do far more harm then the drunks do alone, so should not be regarded as innoocent at all!
Arthur July 13, 2012 at 09:14 AM
by driving recklessly drunk or not our ability to travel without being identified is being lost- if you want to be a ble to travel without hastle thten stop thsi from happening- stop kids from being indoctrinated into buying cars they don't need that bring only misery and loss to there families and society ultimately- let us all afford limo's when we actually want to be in one and better ways to get around privately, peacefully, wisely at all other times. The checkpoint is proof cars are a bad deal. Period.
Arthur July 13, 2012 at 09:16 AM
will you accept letting compuuters take over the driving for us as should of happend already years ago?
Arthur July 13, 2012 at 09:22 AM
what's impaired is the human brain and the fact that computes now do a far b etter job but we act like we are in the 3rd world and can't afford them- can't require any car now be driven smartly- not by some clown owner be they old, young, or just too human. THe time to ban driving by people who have just taken a stupid test and can barely drive is long past- driving for transportation is no longer necessary! Yeah a lot of people owe alot of omoney on loans undersecured b y the crap they have been sold, likely used, and would default, if they had to buy a computer retrofit, but that's business, there's risk, the writing has been on thewalll for decades- they've been obsolete for more then a few years, an dwe can bail htem out sure, it's cheap to do so. What we can't afford to is to confuse business with pleasure- enjoy your playstation- xbox,et c... let it drive the tons though when it comes to moving yoru body aroudn town and spare us the carnage- and of cousre feel free to drink as much as you want if we designate ppeople can no longer drive as well as machines so should not be allowed to do so for no good reason and hav eus fill our nursing homes crematoriiums and cemeteries with the waste for as long as we do that- oh people we be killed by comptuers sure, but far fewer, and fewer is better, it is, accept that! Grow up people.
Brenda July 14, 2012 at 06:43 PM
Me too TVOR, always been fast, guys are nice and most of the time I just get waved through, must be my age, LOL. Like this last one, I had everything ready, and he said, "I was just going to wave you through". So that was nice again. Some of you I don't think have even been through one its not even that big of a deal, and alot of us they dont ask. A man or woman who is guilty for something will look nervous, and they are more likely to get pulled over, similiar to border patrol checks.
Brenda July 23, 2012 at 07:30 PM
LBV I get it. I Understand where you are coming from. We are on the same page mine is just a bit more written on. You do not want toes stepped on, rights stepped on or people angry because of a possible wait at the traffic stop, and suggest alternatives which are great ideas also. I think we need ALL of them to stop these drunk drivers however. That is the only place we differ. I am balls to the walls, lets do everything and anything to get them, even if its a few. We have all waited far longer for a mild fender bender on the freeway then we do at a traffic check point thou. Maybe that would be a good poll PATCH. Who would feel needlessly, negatively impacted by police if they were pulled over into a traffic check? I wouldnt be, and I would be cheering them on, and like I said my drive through that night was at the most a minute or two.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something