Heh - sounds to me like someone got a little too intoxicated, drove into the river, and walked home leaving the vehicle behind so he wouldn't be charged with DWI. Or maybe it's one of those pesky town teen vandals? <rolls eyes>

Since when is drunk driving a joking matter!
We're lucky this idiot didn't kill somebody. Unfortunately for the community, he will never get charged with DWI because they will not be able to tie him to the scene in a timely manner. Another drunk free to drive again. Real funny indeed.

I think that Chuck's speculation on the event is a common response to what we've just read, notice he says,"sounds like" and "maybe". However, J Klein has already tried, convicted, and labelled the guy based on barely circumstantial evidence and a bit of conjecture. Remember, J this is the USA and we are all innocent until proven guilty. Huzzah for the Constitution!!

Of course, how silly of me. I forgot I'm not entitled to form my own opinion given the same scraps of information provided. Thanks Ms.Benson, I forgot. I didn't realize this was admissible in court. Apparently from the gusto of your statement, you might know the unnamed person. I apologize if I offended you.

The joking manner of Mr. Trella's remark is what offended me. I happen to agree with his assessment 100%. Have a good day.

My "joking manor" seems like a trivial thing to get so worked up over. In any case I was NOT joking about the severity of DWI - but rather laughing at what seems like a lame attempt to avoid aprehension. I was emplying sarcasm when it came to my "town teen vandals" comment since that seems highly unlikely.

That said - Kate is correct that no matter how obvious this ploy may seem to many of us - unless they can find evidence proving the owner was behind the wheel - he is legally "not guilty" and we cannot rush to judgement with any certainty.

My best to you both.

I get it , Chuck, I did not think you were joking at all, but was pretty sure you were employing sarcasm and a good eye roll.Having spoken with you in person maybe I have an advantage because I can imagine your tone and cadence. Either way, J, you can form all the opinions that you want and you are certainly entitled to express them, but face it, you straight out called the owner of the jeep a drunk and an idiot, no qualifiers at all. And no I don't know the guy. I'm just saying that giving folks the benefit of a doubt before all the facts are in ain't such a bad idea. You've misplaced your umbrage. :-)