Election 2008
Advertisement
Steamboat Springs — Routt County Sheriff Gary Wall will fight the Colorado Department of Revenue’s yearlong revocation of his driver’s license and is asking that his license be reinstated while the appeal process plays out.
Wall and his lawyer, Steamboat Springs attorney Ron Smith, have asked for a judicial review of the Department of Revenue’s decision. In his petition for review, Smith accuses the Colorado State Patrol and hearing officer Art Julian of inappropriate behavior. The petition claims Trooper Melissa Fowler had no reason to pull Wall over near the well-lit intersection of Walton Creek Road and U.S. Highway 40 on Oct. 27, 2007, for a failure to dim his headlights.
“It would have been impossible for the trooper to distinguish high beams from low beams or those of the powerful overhead street lights,” the petition states.
The State Patrol revoked Wall’s license that night because Wall refused to submit to tests of his blood alcohol level. Wall was charged with failure to dim his headlights, driving under the influence of alcohol and possession of a weapon while under the influence of alcohol.
Wall appealed the loss of his driver’s license to the Department of Revenue and was issued a temporary license, but Julian upheld the revocation in December 2007. Julian rejected Wall’s claims that troopers did not have probable cause to request a test.
Julian based part of his decision on State Patrol reports that Wall was unsteady on his feet when he exited his county-owned vehicle. But Smith claims any observations made after Wall exited his vehicle should not be considered because the decision to arrest Wall already had been made.
A written statement from Fowler supports Smith’s claim. She wrote that Trooper Brett Hilling — who was called to the scene and took over the investigation — told her before asking Wall to step out of his vehicle that “we would arrest Wall based on indicators of intoxication we observed.”
Smith’s petition claims that Wall had, at most, only one glass of wine at the Steamboat Springs Chamber Resort Association celebration he attended that night before driving home. Written testimony submitted by 16 individuals on behalf of Wall supports that position. In his petition, Smith calls Julian’s preference of the troopers’ testimony “pervasive and disturbing.”
Smith also claims Julian acted inappropriately in rejecting a request for the subpoena of Sheriff’s Office Dep. Lance Eldridge, who was called to the traffic stop scene and later drove Wall and his girlfriend and passenger, Jenny Wilson, home. Smith’s petition states that Eldridge’s testimony was crucial to the defense’s claim that the strong odor of alcohol troopers observed was emanating from Wilson, not Wall. Eldridge reportedly spoke to Wilson while Wall was in Trooper Hilling’s vehicle and smelled a strong odor of alcohol coming from the car in Wall’s absence.
Wall’s appeal of the Department of Revenue’s revocation of his driver’s license is a civil matter and has no bearing on Wall’s criminal trial, which resumes at 10:30 a.m. today. Judge Cecil Wayne Williams is expected to decide whether the trial will remain in Routt County. Special prosecutor Karen Romeo has requested a venue change, citing media coverage that has been “massive, pervasive and prejudicial to both sides, but more so to the defendant.” Wall is opposing the venue change. In his response to Romeo’s motion, Smith claims venue changes can only be requested by the defense because they are for the benefit of the defendant alone. Romeo has since submitted a supplement to her motion: 120 pages of stories and reader-submitted comments on Steamboatpilot.com related to the charges against Wall.
A phone message left at Romeo’s office Tuesday was not returned. Wall and Smith have refused to discuss the case.
Community comments
Note: The Steamboat Pilot & Today doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy.
spukomy (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 2:02 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Classic.
blackthroatedwind (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 5:17 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I fought the law but the law won… Oh wait, I am the law… Now what??? Yet another excellent example to our kids of how to evade the law. The OJ school of justice. Gary, you are an embarassment!
Ms_E_Bronte (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 5:49 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Yep — blame the girlfriend! Second had alcohol? Interesting defense.
weallnutz (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 6:17 a.m.
› Suggest removal
every little loophole, is anybody surprised, look at the pre election interviews, all his run ins with the law and misgivings and mistakes were'nt his fault, guess we all thought we could save him by electing him. Continues to be an ridiculous.
boatski (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 6:50 a.m.
› Suggest removal
“Wall had, at most, only one glass of wine”
“refused to submit to tests of his blood alcohol level”
I don't understand why a law officer who only had one glass of wine would refuse to submit to a test?
CoJustice (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 7:16 a.m.
› Suggest removal
The rancher interviewed on 9 news stated he did not see Wall drink anything. Sounds like the story changed. What about the fact that Wall was carrying a gun while consuming alcohol? I guess the street lights blinded the fact that Wall could not tell he was carrying a gun, or in a county vehicle consuming alcohol.
steamboatlover (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 7:28 a.m.
› Suggest removal
This is getting ridiculous. If Wall is willing to pass the buck to his girlfriend, and she is dumb enough to let her own name be smeared for his defense, then what does that say about our Sheriff and one of our local business owners? What a joke. If this were anyone else there would be no grounds for appeal, nor would this be considered. You made your bed Wall - lie in it. And then do the right thing and step down as Sheriff so the other communities don't get to yuck it up at our expense.
mtroach
February 13, 2008 at 7:51 a.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff because it violated our terms of use.)
kusellout (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 7:55 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I agree, great comment at the Carnival. But, where's the recall?
Queenie (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 8:12 a.m.
› Suggest removal
One HUGE question remains (or maybe I just haven't seen the answer) WHO is paying for Wall's attorney?????
Queenie (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 8:16 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I hope the BCC are looking for their own “loopholes” to deal with Wall.
JazzSlave (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 10:36 a.m.
› Suggest removal
“It would have been impossible for the trooper to distinguish high beams from low beams or those of the powerful overhead street lights”
Wall's defense: Liar liar, pants on fire!
Don't look at me - I didn't vote for him.
Ms_E_Bronte (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 10:38 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Wall is paying for his defense on this one — checked it out — on County matters, we, the taxpayers, foot the bill.
Correction on my previous post: Second hand alcohol — not “had” Sorry
zirkel (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 10:47 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Can he still bike to work?
justathought (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 10:49 a.m.
› Suggest removal
“Written testimony submitted by 16 individuals on behalf of Wall supports that position.” (1 glass of wine), DID all 16 of these people stick by his side exclusively the entire time he was in attendance? IF not, is it possible each person only seen him consume 1 glass which equals 16 glasses. “Eldridge reportedly spoke to Wilson while Wall was in Trooper Hilling’s vehicle and smelled a strong odor of alcohol coming from the car in Wall’s absence.”, NO one said she wasn't drinking too and that doesn't make him any less drunk. Did anyone check her purse, maybe they had a little nip after they left the party. ALL kinds of scenarios but, the FACT is the Routt County Sheriff refused any kind of alcohol test which would have proven his innocence (if in fact he was) and someone is now paying big bucks to an attorney to loophole him out of the consequences of his actions. He sure is showing a lot of respect for the office the majority of you “voters for change” elected him to. It's time for him to slither back under the rock from whence he came.
shadow (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 10:53 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Clinton never inhaled, maybe Wall didn't swallow.
letomayo (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 11:31 a.m.
› Suggest removal
stmbtluv, “let her own name be smeared for his defense, then what does that say about our Sheriff and one of our local business owners?” Good business owners don't get drunk is thaqt what you mean are you kidding? If his girlfriend was the one drinking how would that smear her name if she was drinking and was not driving. I smelled lots of booze on alot of folks who are at different events and lots them are business owners and realators and school people and cops off duty and construction business owners. Her name is smeared when you and others attack her because she likes the sherriff. You think she's stupid but they say love is blind does your spouse love you all the time and when they do are they stupid?
I don't care for the saying bad things on soomeone who is really not involved. You don't like the sherriff and have said so but leave the girlfiend out. would you like it if someone close to you was attacked by someone just cause they like or love you. They don't deserve it and niether does she.
CoJustice (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 11:55 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Low beam, high beam, Jim Beam……… .the whole think stinks like b-o-l-o-g-n-a.
CoJustice (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 12:14 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Seriously, if Wall did not want to cooperate and work together with CSP on a breath test, he should have insisted on labs that check for traces of blood in your alcohol stream.
shadow (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 1:32 p.m.
› Suggest removal
COJustice, Agreed. In the eyes of the law he is innocent until proven guilty. However, right or wrong, in the eyes of the community a high profile public figure can be expected to be held to the highest standards. If he had nothing to worry about, a breath test would have exonorated him and eliminated doubt and restored the respect of the community. Instead he opted to refuse to submit and now is desperately seeking an end run around the consequences.
Ms_E_Bronte (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 2:24 p.m.
› Suggest removal
CoJustice — maybe he did have something to worry about and just didn't have his wits about him. After this article, he's just grasping at straws and perhaps has broken the camel's back.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 3:17 p.m.
› Suggest removal
We are all forgetting to thank Mr Wall for setting such a good example to our youth.
Also, is Dep. Eldridge availible to give me a ride this Friday, I have an urge to go have ONE glass of wine with 16 people and I sure would hate to cause such a fuss when I refuse the breath test…… I just know that Trooper Fowler is laying in wait for someone else under those powerful lights…….
paddlefisher (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 3:28 p.m.
› Suggest removal
food for thought..i'm not on anyones side here but i have been driving with my high beams for several months(low beam burnt out)and never been stopped by Steamboat P D or Highway Patrol or Sheriffs office..and yes I replaced my headlight
bandmama (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 4:26 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Nice point, but the issue is more about Walls behavior after the stop. He was elected to an office for the sole purpose of upholding the laws set forth by our county, state, ect. Can anyone actually believe that if Joe Blow were stopped under similar circumstance, Joe would be allowed to leave the scene with one of his employees? No.
(BTW, now I know who that terrible person is who has been blinding everyone for months…shame on you! lol)
424now (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 4:33 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Sheriff Wall, Get some help.
Honor dictates you look to yourself for your actions.
How long are you going to attempt to avoid the consequences of your actions.
weallnutz (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 6:21 p.m.
› Suggest removal
seriously…why is there not a recall and what are the steps to start one, I'll do it, where do I go?
weallnutz (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 6:24 p.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff because it violated our terms of use.)
424now (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 7:03 p.m.
› Suggest removal
nutz
Get a couple of like minded folks together. Make a night of it. head down to City hall and say it out loud when they give you the opportunity to speak.
That is you start one.
diva (anonymous)
February 13, 2008 at 7:12 p.m.
› Suggest removal
get over Gary already and get onto something else. West Routt Fire Chief Bryan Rickman, summoned for inapproriate sexual conduct and harrassement, been relieved of his administrative duties, EEOC has taken case, civil lawsuit pending, possibly more charges coming.
justathought (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 8:14 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Sorry diva, we move on when we choose, not because you want us to leave your boy alone. Personally, I'll “get onto something else” when Routt County has a decent sober sheriff.
Queenie (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 8:29 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Was Rickman relieved of his duties? I see that he is at work everyday. Haven't heard much about this one.
Queenie (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 8:30 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I wonder if Wall reads these comments? I'll serve on the jury. :)
diva (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 8:39 a.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff because it violated our terms of use.)
id04sp (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 10:56 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Despite the fact that everybody shouted it down when I proposed the scenario before, there is a logical explanation for all of it.
Chloral hydrate is a sedative, and is relatively easy to get. Anna Nichole Smith apparently died from an overdose of it. The hospital probably carries it for a pediatric sedative. The usual sedative dose for an adult is .025 grams, and .05 grams for a “hypnotic” dose. 1/2 (.5 grams) gram is roughly 1/2 cubic centimeter of water, so it doesn't take much; just a drop or two. If given in orange juice, coffee, or some other liquid with a slight acid or bitter “tang” to it, it goes unnoticed. The effects take about 20 minutes to kick in. It can cause drowsiness, stumbling, speech and coordination problems, and affects judgment. It's effects are often confused with alcohol intoxication. If someone at the dinner slipped Mr. Wall a dose of chloral hydrate in a cup of black coffee with dessert, or on the way out the door, his actions and physical symptoms ten to twenty minutes later are a perfect match for chloral hydrate doping.
Unlike alcohol, chloral hydrate is not the direct cause of the sedative effect. It must be metabolized in the body into a derivative substance before the effects are felt, which is why it takes a few minutes to show its effects.
So, say what you want about it. Maybe he was just drunk. On the other hand, ain't it convenient that the CSP was lying in wait for him? How do we know he was not followed, and someone with a cellphone didn't tip off the CSP officers invovled in the stop.
This drunk driving scenario is a dream come true for Wall's detractors. Way too good to be true, I think. Astonishingly lucky, don't you think?
Who was serving that night? What was served to Wall in the last few minutes he was at the dinner? Did he take a cup of coffee “to go” with him, and sip on it while the car warmed up?
And before anybody says, “He should have recognized that he had been doped and asked for a blood test,” well, that's the whole point about chloral hydrate. It affects judgment and causes confusion. It's a date rape drug.
I wasn't there, and I didn't see anything that went on, but I've worked as a server and I guarantee you that I could do it to anybody who ordered a cup of coffee without anyone else knowing anything about it. I'm not saying it happened. I'm only saying it would have been easy to do, and it would explain a lot, and it's a perfect fit with what everyone has said about the events that occurred that night.
dundalk (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 10:59 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Good grief Id. This is Earth, welcome to reality.
justathought (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 11:40 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Well, wouldn't one of the 16 friends that surrounded him all evening attesting to his 1 glass of wine have noticed something if he went from straight to doped on coffee? Is it possible his 16 friends were so busy counting his drinks they failed to notice any symptoms or does this drug only start it's affect after you get behind the wheel? Will his next defense be to accuse his girlfriend of date rape so he can weasel out of the charges? His state of confusion and lack of good judgment started long before this, nice try though.
fmrstudentlxa (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 11:53 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Regardless of conspiracy theories the fact stands that his license was revoked. It would be a gross corruption of Justice if his license is reinstated.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at noon
› Suggest removal
ID, do you know who killed Kennedy also?
Benny (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 12:54 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Poor Mr. Wall. He should have had his blood drawn, then he could have had it tested for Chloral Hydrate and then all this “conspiracy talk” could be cleared up! When is he ever gonna be able to end the corruption?? Oh me, oh my…..
Hadleyburg_Press (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 1:19 p.m.
› Suggest removal
is04sp,
How does a highly educated person like you dispense with Occam's Razor so easily, (“when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities”)? Cognitive dissonace maybe, “(the filtering of information that conflicts with what one already believes, in an effort to ignore that information and reinforce one's beliefs)”? Have your past dealings with real corruption given you insights or a paranoid bent? I don't agree with your hypothesis, but I leave open the possibility that it may be correct on the order of 2% probability.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 1:48 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Hadley…wow I respect your superior intelligence!
Perhaps you could explain to me and ID, exactly what makes Wall so important that we are to believe that he was drugged and the conspiracy goes as far as to include the Colorado State Patrol, laying in wait to bust him? Are we also to believe that the Deputy who did give Walls a ride on the evening in question completely missed the signs of a possible drugging? I kind of thought they were trained to notice unusual behavior, certainly he would have noticed or reported any strange behavior from his superior, UNLESS, he also believed that Walls was drunk and was afraid to report him…. oh my the plot thickens!
Why cant everyone just agree that there was a lack of good judgement and now it is time to pay the piper and take responsibility for those actions? Oh wait, that would mean that Good Old Gary would have to admit he was a bit on the tipsy side….darn back to square one…..cant wait ot read the next article……..
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 1:53 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Also, ID….just where is it that you work? You seem to have put a lot of thought into slipping a druggie-poo into someones cup of Java.
BoatMaster (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 2:02 p.m.
› Suggest removal
16 people said they saw him have 1 glass of wine. That could mean he had 16 glasses of wine if he saw each person at different times. Ha Ha.
But really folks, since they are using this discussion board in the courtroom the pilot will get a subpeana and have to supply them with a list of all of us posters and how to contact us.
This is gonna get messy.
424now (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 2:09 p.m.
› Suggest removal
There is Education and there is common sence.
ID, I disagree.
HBP, 2% is a generous estimation.
Bandmama, well said.
How does what Hall gets away with look to all the twenty somethings out there new to alcohol?
Its the law. You drink, you drive, you go to jail. You loose your licence. You pay fines. and whatever else it takes to keep people from operating a vehicle while under the influence of anything.
Period.
Matthew Stoddard
February 14, 2008 at 2:15 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Okay, if they use this forum, I'll help: I want part of the salary, though (is the bartender 1 of those 16ppl?).
Questions for the Prosecution to Use:
1) How many people go to a function and count how many drinks another person they aren't driving with has?
2) Did you actually count the number of drinks, or did you only see him with a single drink in hand at any time you saw him?
3) Did you see him have a drink almost empty at one point and then later see him with a drink only half empty?
4) Has Gary Wall ever stopped someone for using their brights in a lit area, at any time while acting as an Officer of the Law?
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 2:17 p.m.
› Suggest removal
You are correct Boatmaster, but in all honesty, since the majority of information that MAY be admissable in court was reported by the paper, the rest is our opinions. I would be more than happy to take the stand and express the many opinions I have on this issue, as I am sure many other citizens who are disgusted by the behavior of our sherriff.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 2:37 p.m.
› Suggest removal
424, thanks for keeping it real, as a parent, this is what bothers me the most, the fine example shown to the youth of the community.
Although, the drinking allegations have yet to be proven, just by refusing a breath test, he has helped to promote bad realations between officers of the law and a driver who may have imbided to much. He has thus succeded in making it even harder for us to explain to our youth that even though they do have a right to refuse, it is usually best to cooperate with the officers if they are stopped. Thanks Gary!
below_me (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 3:12 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Gin Blossoms. They are called Gin Blossoms. I'm beginning to think Ms. Trooper Fowler is the only cop around here with a pair of balls.
id04sp (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 3:22 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Hadley,
What is the basis for your assignment of a 2% probability to Wall having been doped? What's the difference between this scenario and a date rape drugging? Chloral hydrate is a known date rape drug.
Benny,
As I already explained, the effects of chloral hydrate interfere with a person's ability to function intellectually. It is a plausible reason WHY he may not have thought to go get a blood test. Would you ask a date rape victim why she didn't insist on a condom?
Justathought,
As I explained, chloral hydrate takes 10 to 20 minutes to begin to have an effect. Something consumed just before leaving the dinner would not have had an effect that his friends would have noticed. His companion was admittely drunk, so how could she be expected to notice anything a few minutes later? Wall himself might have noticed starting to become drowsy, but it was late, right? Since he would have been unaware of the doping, why would he be alert for any such thing before it was already too late and the drug had taken full effect?
Bandmama,
Wall made his living for a number of years as a private investigator, and his specialty was discrediting the testimony of law enforcment officers. The CSP was involved on numerous occasions from what's been said on this forum in the past. To say the CSP might have been “gunning” for Wall that night is not much of a strech of the imagination. And as for where I work, I've been out of the food service business for more than 12 years, so have no fear. And I'll ask you also: If this case was about someone who was a victim of date rape, would it be so hard to believe?
I'm not saying Wall was drugged. I'm only saying that a chloral hydrate doping in the last few minutes before leaving the dinner could explain everything that has been described regarding the events of that night.
Everybody seems to really want this man to be guilty. Frankly, other than the displaced RCSO employees, I don't see why anyone would have a reason to complain. His policies have resulted in improved service to the community (winches on patrol vehicles; patrol vehicles spending the night in North Routt; cutting funding to questionable programs). I haven't seen anyone complaining about calls not being answered, an increase in crime out in the county, etc.
The cause of Anna Nicole Smith's death, from a chloral hydrate overdose, was made public in March of 2007. It can't be that hard to get, and there's plenty of information on its effects. How hard would it be to make someone look intoxicated by slipping them a dose of chloral hydrate, and then calling the cops to be on the lookout for a drunk driver?
A former gramnet officer set up a judge's girlfriend for a cocaine trafficking bust after the judge threatened to hold the officer in contempt. It happened here in Routt and Moffat counties in conjunction with a murder trial. Conspiracy nutso or not, it does happen, and it has happened right here before.
Hadleyburg_Press (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 3:50 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Bandmama,
Read through again and see that I was attempting to REFUTe id04sp's drugging theory.
Id04sp,
I came up with 2% probabilty based upon the incidences of drugging related stories verses DUIs that I have read about. Granted these are not hard figures. The rate is probably lower if you were to do the statistical math even including known date rape figures versus DUIs.
Again, I will grant you that your theory is possible, but does it really make the most sense? I will try to keep an open mind to see what evidence is presented in court that might be exculpatory.
CoJustice (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 4 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Ido4: If Wall was given chloral hydrate, he still made the decision to get behind the wheel of a car, and drive under the influence, with a gun.
It would be interesting in reviewing his campaign finance report listed with the Secretary of State, employees and girlfriends and compare the list to of 16 witnesses. Maybe the DA has already printed the report. Should be entertaining.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 4:30 p.m.
› Suggest removal
id….. I believe you just helped to support my comments by stating that Wall has had experience discrediting Law Enforcement Officers, who better to beat this rap? As for your cold comparison between this particular issue and a date rape, I dont feel it needs a response, it speaks for itself.
Please review Hadleys comments, the 2% was explained very clearly.
As far as getting a blood test, I may have misunderstood but I was asumming the blood test was for the booze, again I state that Dep Eldridge (whom I hope was sober unlike the girlfriend) may have noticed any unusual behavior and reported it.
I do need to clarify one more tiny detail, it is NOT that I want him to be guilty, his behavior and actions since the incident are not those of an innocent person, but someone who may realize he messed up and is trying to get out a a bit of a sticky embarrassing situation.
Once again let me point out that my main beef is the very poor example this man has given to the public. As sherriff, he should be the FIRST to set up and have a breath test if he knew at the time he was not intoxicated. Instead he made the choice to refuse, he made the poor decision to have an employee (whom is paid with our tax dollars) to taxi his alledged drunken self and his girlfried whom he has publically stated was intoxicated home on tax payers time. It was inappropriate and I believe this is the issue to be addressed, not conspiracy theories, not date rape and most certainly, not Anna Nicoles tragic demise.
BTW, thanks for the info on the food service. I wont be so frightened the next time I order coffee.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 4:45 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Hadley-
I got it, sorry that I didn't make that clear!
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 5:04 p.m.
› Suggest removal
CoJustice an excellent suggetion!
Hadleyburg_Press (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 5:26 p.m.
› Suggest removal
424now,
I do presume that id04sp is highly educated and intelligent. One does not get to be a Naval Aviator by being ignorant. I also know people like id04sp presumably who are Mensa / geniuses. They would come across as lunatic fringe to the majority of us because their reality or concept of reality differs from most of ours. Conspiracies require an imagination. Many conspiracies are/were real. There are things that occured during the cold war that the masses could not even contemplate let alone believe. I'ld be willing to bet that id04sp was privy to some of these. Things that will never be made public (declassified) and that will historically evaporate. And no, I am not talking about Roswell. So this is id04sp's paradigm and I am trully greatful for it. For without the type of intellectual imagination that id04sp puts forth we would all assume that our vantage point is the only true reality.
So, now that I have established that I have an open mind, I have a few questions for this conspiracy theorist:
a) Would the drug have shown up in a breath test or blood test?
b) If so, then wouldn't the drugging attempt have come to light bringing down the conspirators?
c) If not, then what could the CSP have charged Wall with if nothing showed up on the test?
So, “riddle me this grasshopper”, doesn't this complex approach to frame somebody then seem to have a very low likelyhood of success and a high probabilty of being exposed?
With your cold war experience couldn't you think of a much better approach in terms of reversing the above probabilities?
So in all fairness to Wall, I will wait and see if there is any real evidence that might exonerate him in court. If you were his attorney, would you be comfortable running with the drugging postulate? Not me.
I would think that they stand a better chance of showing that Wall should never have been pulled over and therefore anything that occured after that is mute.
Benny (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 5:36 p.m.
› Suggest removal
ID: I don't agee that it is a good thing to put winches on patrol cars. I actually think that that is absurd. Also, there were deputies living in North Routt prior to Wall being Sheriff. Warner also allowed take home cars, just didn't allow employees to use them for personal use and especially didn't allow them to drive them out of state for personal use. It's not like Wall was elected as sheriff, then stationed deputies' residences in different parts of the county. Deputies live where they live, then they get the job….usually. You keep bringing up this doping thing and I'm just wondering if you have evidence of that. It's just weird to me that someone would be so persistent about something, unless they had inside information. I believe that the man was drinking and driving and the reason that I believe that is because of his character, previous behavior, current behavior, and because of the facts that have been presented to the community about the case. nothing that I have learned about Gary or about this case makes me even consider that he was doped. One fact that remains is that he refused any tests. Any reasonable person would have taken those tests if they were not under the influence. Also, from what I have learned from people who have been under the influence of the date rape drug, you aren't just a little tipsy; you're pretty much unconscious and oblivious. That's the point, so you can't fight off your attacker.
beerassmomma (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 5:41 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Dudes, i hear it was abuse of citric acid like drink mix unflavored like kool aid crap when inhaled it's totally undetectable (duh our kids drink it) the powder causes intoxification from enlarged sinus cavities due to the burn. It's short but can hit u later in extreme cold. He didn't think it was gonna end up this way. i used to blow the crap but started getting relapses about hr after
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 5:52 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Hadley, while I do appreciate your point of view, this isn't the cold war, and again I would like an explanation as to the point of setting Wall up, if one (or as a conspiracy usually takes more than one) were wanting to discredit and get Wall out of office, why start AFTER the election? Just curious.
As far as the date rape drug being detected, yes, it can be through blood if done in a timely manner. Which again raises the question of propriety that he left the scene.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 6:28 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Benny, you should be commended for pointing out that there were actually were deputies living within the county before Wall.
In our haste to conspire against him we all forgot that there would be none without him………..
id04sp (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 7:12 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Okay, you people all must be dumb as stumps.
If Wall had been drugged with something like chloral hydrate, he would not have been able to make a rational decision at the roadside. That's what it does to people — disorientation, confusion, etc.
COJO, if wall was drugged with chloral hydrate, he would not feel anything for about 20 minutes. He'd have already been driving down the road, carrying his gun, when the drug kicked in. AND, once it began to act, he would not have been able to think rationally about what to do at that point. That's how the drug WORKS!
That's what I'm trying to tell you all if you'd READ IT and understand.
He may have just been drunk. Okay, case over.
However, chloral hydrate doping shortly before his departure from the dinner would not have caused any observable difference in his behavior for at least 20 minutes. Then, he would have acted exactly as he was described to act by the witnesses at the roadside. he would have appeared to be drunk.
Hadley,
Yes, you are indeed right about your speculations.
ANd, the drug would have shown up in a blood test if one had been administered. However, if Wall was drugged with chloral hydrate and did not give consent, no blood was taken.
I'm purely speculating here, but the reason is that Wall would have to be the dumbest ########er in the world to drive drunk away from that dinner. With so much to lose, if he really only had one glass of wine because of the risk to his position, a drugging is the only logical alternative to him simply being the stupidest man in the county.
Hadleyburg_Press (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 7:28 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Okay, so the drugging would have made him refuse the test because he was disoriented. That's a tough sell Capt. Regardless, I can not think of anything worse than being falsely accused and convicted of a crime that one is innocent of. Therefore I will keep an open mind even though my better instincts keep pulling me back to the obvious. Lastly, do you think this theory is going to be the approach the defense takes? If so, wouldn't Wall recognize the effects ex post facto of being drugged and be pleading his case publically as such from the outset?
Benny (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 7:28 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Maybe he is the “dumbest ########er” in the world. Him being stupid is a lot more logical than him being drugged, but I'm just speculating here.
CoJustice (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 7:34 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Check out this link: It has all the Campaign Finance Reports, click on “Report”. It will be interesting to see if any witness or jury member is on these lists.
http://www.sos.state.co.us/cpf/CombinedR…
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 7:35 p.m.
› Suggest removal
ummmmmmmmmm like gee man..up till know I thought i done had some intillegance…………have you been subpoenaed yet for the denfence?
Quite honestly, you seem to be determined to show that he was drugged. do you have information to back that up?
If you do I would suggest to you to contact the the defence in this issue, as he obviously needs additional public support.
check the posts man…..
And by the way dude.. if the meds impaired his judement,the fact he carried a lethal weapon does NOT help help his cause. I would suggest that you stop defending this man on this.
As to him considering his job and social standing, as sherriff, he should have made a point of having a sober driver availible to drive him and the girly-friend home…
it didn't seem to be an issue when Lance was summed to drive him home.
or geee, maybe I am just really dumb…..but yet again your last comment supports my point. He was irresponsible. Done.
,
Hadleyburg_Press (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 7:39 p.m.
› Suggest removal
You know what Id, forget about my questions. I honestly don't give a sh*t about this case. Let it run its course through the courts. I'd rather play a game of chess or read a book than waste another minute on this bs. Too damn old not to be fatalistic if you know what I mean. If he's innocent I hope he gets his freedom and his good name back. If guilty, then I hope he is punished in a way that prevents him from harming any of us in the future.
Benny (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 7:44 p.m.
› Suggest removal
WOW Cojustice, his contributors consist of lawyers and criminals. Interesting.
Benny (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 7:45 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Most of them, I should say.
Hadleyburg_Press (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 7:50 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Isn't that redundant?
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 8:25 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Hadley, again my point, you and the public SHOULD care!
Gary showed poor judgement which implicates clouded clarity of thought, for one reason or another….yet to be determined……………………………. BUT! this is a man whose, EVERY public bit of knowledge of his life style should reflect nothing but the best of choices, he has managed to make a complete farse of the CHP, local law enforcement, and what we are supposed to be teaching our kids! I have an upcoming young driver, who by the way, is a very intella-lek-tu-ALL young person. I have had to step in when he and friends make jokes about driving drunk and “just calling a fellow co-worker”……………ok…So have I. But please see my point.
As a parent, this situation makes it very hard to “drive home” the serious implications as to any question to sobriety, which aside from the light issue, the girlfriend issue, the conspiriacy issue, the oh gee he made a bad decision issue…leaves us with the question, This not a person that I would like to see holding such an office.
Forget Anna Nicole, this IS Routt County, our home, our kids,
is this what we would approve of, had it been our wife, husband, son, daughter, girlfried, boyfried, you get the idea…..
Hadleyburg_Press (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 8:54 p.m.
› Suggest removal
bandmama,
I get it, but it is now time for an imparshall jury to decide. Don't you agree?
justathought (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 9:03 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Is the Jenny Wilson in this article (the one emanating strong alcohol odors), Wall's girlfriend and passenger in a county owned vehicle, the same Jennifer Wilson that received over $5,800.00 in reimbursements from Walls political campaign funds? Cozy
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 9:26 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Hadley- as a possible member of that jury, yes we should wait for the impartial jury, unlike the public forum in which I thought I thought I was engaging in, I should wait for “real” evidence” unlike that which was public record. Ah gee, he didn't dim his lights, a simple error, that may or may not indicate the level of inlightenment or lack of judgement for any reason of any driver to manuever on our roadways……………………………………I kind of thought that that was the responsibility if CHP or the Sherriffs dept or the local police to determine if one were to be possibly threatening the safety of Joe Blow and his family, who maybe, to the apparent surprise of some, sharing the same roadways.
Trooper Fowler should be commended for undertaking the responsibilty of daring to pulling over the sherriff for not showing said safety concerns……like duh man…..
is there really no one else who sees the simple thought in this? if not I give up.
justathought, thank you.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 9:51 p.m.
› Suggest removal
ummm, if I get pulled over by the sherriff's dept after expressing my opinion here….can I claim Bright Lights????
Just wondering,
CoJustice (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 10:08 p.m.
› Suggest removal
justathought:
Are you talking about this Jennifer Wilson? As reported by the Secretary of State.
Found 7 matching record(s). Viewing page 1 of 1. # Payee Name City, State Amount Date Purpose Report Date Corrected?
1. jennifer wilson steamboat
springs,
co $4,149.36 11/03/2006 reimburse for post cards & mailing 12/09/2006
Benny (anonymous)
February 14, 2008 at 10:51 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Who's corrupt? What conspiracy? Hmmmm.
beerassmomma (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 7:39 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Hey I was kidding. I don't know anybody nor have I ever snorted kool-aid. For those of you who read this and ran home to give it a try, other than letting us know the color of your snot. Get out of here!!! Drinking and driving is about as stupid, careless, immature and selfish as a kid snorting Kool -aid and then when he gets caught and/or sick saying “Gee, I didn't know it was gonna turn out like that” with purple infection hanging off his face. You can all make excuses and try to sound as if you have a brain in your head but there is no excuse for anybody law enforcement or otherwise to do this. Let alone get away with because of some lame excuse or somebody making up something and pulling strings. Everybody out there whether they are a aware of it or not has had their lives impacted by a drunk driver. Plain and simple no mercy; take his licence and his job. Or at least unpaid leave until he has done his time (and not paid administrative you dumb as liberals I'm not paying for his stupidity) before he takes someone else's life and ruins it. If you don't agree fine go blow some kool aid because that is about where you are in the evolution line.
beerassmomma (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 8:06 a.m.
› Suggest removal
One more comment: If he was drunk, drugged and in anyway in a manner that impeded his judgment. Was he actually in this shape with nobody to step up and order test and/or hold him in custody until he could (or someone in his defense) make a clear and safe judgment to clear his name? I think if he had been “taken advantage of ” some evidence to that would have surfaced already. Besides anybody who is in law enforcement knows or should you never eat out in public without knowing who is preparing, serving or handling your food. I've dined with law enforcement officials and this is fairly standard especially if you've been working on anything high profile. If Wall (or the co-worker who “saved ” his ass) felt that a drugging or anything else was possible and didn't protect himself, do we want him looking after us????
mtroach
February 15, 2008 at 8:28 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I think that if he had not been drinking, he would have done the field sobriety test, or gone in for a blood test to get rid of these charges at the time of the stop. If he had done this he would have justifible cause to assert the CSP pulled him over for no reason. Case Dissmissed. None of this happened, and it makes you wonder why anyone without something to hide, and everything to loose would act the way he did.
brownskull (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 8:58 a.m.
› Suggest removal
“Wall had, at most, only one glass of wine” The glass held one 1/2 gallon of wine. They left that part out.
justathought (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 9:21 a.m.
› Suggest removal
CoJustice, yes, she was the registered agent for his candidate committee. Besides the 4,149 you stated, on different dates she was reimbursed (rounded off) 144 for food at the swearing in party, 961 for badges, and 558 that just says reimbursement. Legitimate and factual expenses, who knows, but if these Jenny's are one in the same, it still LOOKS like a sweet deal. Sounds like she would make a real unbiased witness too.
bloggyblog (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 9:47 a.m.
› Suggest removal
what a mess! can we send this 'tool' back to vail. this soap opera is an embarrassment to Steamboat(probably an expensive embarrassment). Wiggins is the man for the job. Wall seems better qualified ski area security
beerassmomma (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 10:50 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Do you want him patrolling anywhere??? Obviously he has something to hide or at best is uncooperative and dishonest.
emmalee (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 11:11 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I've been reading all this with great concern. We are not to judge less we be judged ourselves. However, we do have our families' safety to think about. I just want justice served. I feel so torn between our justice systems mishap and where to go from here.Can we trust our local government to issue a trial to Wall that is both fair to him and just in finding out the truth if he is in the wrong???? I don't have any children yet but what a poor example we are as wretched humans. I can understand the plight of those whose children look up to and observe our elected officials. Can't we all just get along???
bandmama (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 11:20 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Hmmmmmmmmm…perhaps we should widen the investigation to include an audit of expences since taking office, oh my! Again the plot thickens…..(yeah it is a freaking soap opera!)
Brownskull, thanks for letting us know about that one “glass” of wine, it does clarify some points.
mtroach, Bravo!!!!!!
Here is something to think of, IF he were drinking, and IF CHP had not delayed him and he had driven on his merry way and maybe killed or maimed someone. What would that have looked like? hmmmmmmmmmm…..when you factor in the intoxicated girlfriend……
Bloggy, yes it is an embarrassment.
emmalee (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 11:32 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Who cares what it would have looked like; what would it have felt like to the family who suffered the loss. And just to take sides slightly (on a humorous note) what would have been a likely excuse then??? Wall, “oh…um..gee I think I hit my head to hard in the collision” Well sir that doesn't explain the accident. Wall ” well um they were out to get me. “Sir the accident and your slurred speach. Wall,”my syrupy beach, well it caused me to slide….” Sir, “you are under arrest”. Wall, “are you out to get me toooooo?” God knows what he did.
id04sp (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 11:35 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Okay, geez,
Hadley you are right. I, however, have what one might call a “pending matter” that could involve the RCSO at some point. It's a minor civil matter.
I dealt with John Warner's folks for several years in various capacities from crime victim to poster of bail to informer, and they were the most incompetent and do-nothing bunch of dead-@$$ed polyps on the taxpayer's dollar I've ever known.
Since Mr. Wall was elected, things have changed in Routt County for the better when it comes to the RCSO dealing with matters that the RCSO formerly blew off as “not our problem.” Things as minor as snowmobiles and kids on dirt bikes on subdivision roads owned by the county are now being dealt with by the RCSO according to the law, and that's a whole big positive change in the way of life for people who have been adversely affected by the noise, dust, etc. Very small stuff. Insignificant. Unless you're the one dealing with the annoyance.
Bandmama,
Teaching your kids that the cops always do right is, uh, really stupid. I've dealt with CSP officers who I would trust with my life, and I've dealt with some who could care less about endangering the public by doing things as stupid as speeding through town with no lights and no sirens to get to a wreck on the way to Rabbit Ears Pass.
I have no proof or evidence that Sheriff Wall was drugged at the dinner. I only know that his actions that night were nothing short of bizarre, and there must be a reason for it.
His statement that he did not consume anything that would have affected his ability to drive (do your own search for the quotes in the Pilot) leaves me with the impression that he consumed something … right … something. That's what makes me suspicious.
Obvously, Mr. Wall has had a lot of experience with the criminal justice system and DUI prosecutions in this state, and if he did, or does, suspect that something he consumed was tampered with that night, we won't hear about it until his attorney presents evidence in court.
The people who dislike him are anxious to see him busted for DUI on a criminal charge. That's okay. I dislike several people around town who are involved in the justice system, and I'd hire an airplane to tow a banner over town in celebration if one of THEM got busted for drugs or alcohol.
As for the other people at the scene, stop for a moment and put yourself in their place. The medical literature plainly states that people affected by chloral hydrate and alcohol are almost impossible to tell apart without a blood test. That's why it would have been such a great way to frame Mr. Wall into this exact situation.
(continued)
emmalee (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 11:59 a.m.
› Suggest removal
I agree but why would anybody go to so much trouble??? if he was really the victim here. Would there still be trace amounts of something in his blood even after he “sobered up” and realized what happened. Why didn't he ask for lab work then if he had nothing to hide???
bandmama (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 12:03 p.m.
› Suggest removal
ID, you are correct in that you should not teach children that cops are always right, from personal experience that resulted in the firing of an officer (another state) when my child was four, I support your comment here.
My point being is that if he had one drink, which he certainly was lucid enought ot state, he should have just taken the breath test and gone on his merry way. He did not do this, poor judgement from a man who should be held accountable for his actions.
I personally dont dislike or like the man, I have never spoken to him. I have no opinion of him other thatn this incident and the backflack it is causing.
My main concern is that when one takes a public office, they knowingly open themselves up to public opinion. That is what this fourm is and I actually am pleased to see the various opinions posted, the general public opinion is that he messed up. The idea that the headlight issue was a set up is just wrong, one, his lights could have been anyones driving towards the trooper.
This was an event that people were known to be drinking, I honestly feel better that there were patrols out and watching for possible drunk drivers. It could have been anyone who attended the event, or anyone who went to a bar that night.
Have I ever been stopped for failure to dim my lihgts? Nope. But think of this, this is behavior that may indicate impairment, just like weaving, driving to fast/to slow, not turning on your lights at all, ect.
Now, if Gary can prove without a doubt in court that he was slipped something, my sincere apologies. But until evidence is given to that, one has to look at the information that is available. This is what we are doing here.
as far as the people at the scene, they seemingly felt something was not right, one of my orginial questions, why was he allowed to leave the scene? Gee, special treatment maybe???????
emmalee (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 12:22 p.m.
› Suggest removal
We should pray for all involved and for our community as it falters. Bandmama: I think you have made some valid points. I don't know why he was allowed to leave the scene if he was incoherent in any way. I do not think this is protocol or even safe for Wall if his judgment was impaired. I just can't see allowing anybody who could not make just and safe decisions to leave the scene of an arrest. It is not good policy for the detainee or anybody else involved.
Benny (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 12:25 p.m.
› Suggest removal
I drove after having a few to drink when I was 17 years old. I drove about 3 or 4 blocks then turned around and went back to my friends house and stayed the night. It scared the crap out of me. Not that I would get pulled over and get into trouble, but actually driving and possibly wrecking my truck. Since then, I have NEVER drove after consuming alcohol. I have never been able to understand people who put their lives at risk and endanger other people's lives. When you look at the big picture, it is just not worth it. This is something that our Sheriff should be teaching us. I was 17 and immature, but even then, I knew that I wasn't bulletproof.
emmalee (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 12:44 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Kudos to Benny. Good ethics and judgment are not something you just lose now and then. You are either honest and forthright or you are not. First of all those who practice Godly morals rarely find themselves in a position to defend themselves to this extent.
Children do not have the capacity even into their teen years to make these good calls ( ie; The Parent Institute March 2008 : the part of our brain that develops last is the frontal lobe this is the portion that governs our decision making processes. It is also the part that helps us to think through the consequences of our actions) but most children as they get older do the right thing with proper guidance and examples. To have an elected official that allowed himself to be in the position he was in; is disgraceful. He should have protected his own interests long before the officer pulled him over. He not only lacked poor morals and judgment but exhibited extreme immaturity. How shameful and sad.
id04sp (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 1:13 p.m.
› Suggest removal
(continued)
Doctors, nurses, EMTs, etc., are all required to complete Continuing Education Units as part of their job. For those who work in emergency rooms or as first responders, the ability to identify drug and alcohol intoxication is regularly covered in CME (continuing medical education) modules. Almost any of these folks would be in a position to know how to exploit chloral hydrate to frame somebody.
For those who say, “Why would anyone go to this much trouble,” you'd be surprised what a great motive revenge can be.
Hey, remember folks, we recently had a physician arrested for aiding an internet pharmacy operation. It's not like our community isn't full of users and traffickers of all kinds. It's practically the national sport, right after skiing, and before mountain biking.
My purpose in all of this has only been to answer some of the pitchfork and torch mentality regarding this incident. Alcohol has obviously been an issue for Mr. Wall in the past (as for many of the rest of us), and there are lots of people around with enough intelligence and perceived motives of revenge for wrongdoings (like a bunch of fired duputies and their families and friends) that someone could have pulled it off fairly easily IF something Mr. Wal consumed in the last few minutes before leaving the dinner was hidden from sight for as little as ten seconds. A capsule with a hole punched in the end, palmed like the quarter Grandpaw pulls out of your ear, could have been squeezed into a cup and then had coffee poured in on top of it, and nobody would ever know.
Either that, or a controversial sheriff with lots of people already gunning for him went to a public event and got drunk, and then drove home. That's what makes no sense, and that's why a reasonable person would be suspicious.
beerassmomma (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 1:22 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Why can't the sheriff be controversial and be guilty???? Hey Emmalee are you single? you appear to be the only sane person on here.
beerassmomma (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 1:43 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Yes single, politely no I don't date other woman. AND I do think that the Sheriff can be guilty and not set up. If this were your average citizen this would not even be an issue we cared about.
mtroach
February 15, 2008 at 1:46 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Commander, are you working for the defense posting this jibberish.
If that had happened, the drugged victim could request a private blood screen to prove the drugging.
If I felt that I had been drugged, I would get tested ASAP even if I had to pay for it out of pocket, especally if I had been pulled over and cited for DUI and hadn't been drinking. My evidence of innocence would have resulted in the dismissal of the charges, and ended all this BS anonymous online spectulation before it got started.
I know the system is innocent till proven, but, I would cover my own back if I felt someone was gunning for it.
emmalee (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 1:55 p.m.
› Suggest removal
mtroach: your sediments are mine (see previous comment). This could have all been avoided. B.A. momma, I don't know who you are and I only date Christian men. You don't appear to be either of the last two. However, I do enjoy your postings, but sorry.
justathought (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 2:18 p.m.
› Suggest removal
beerassmomma asks emmalee a question then answers it 20 minutes later. Meaning to answer as emmalee instead of beerassmomma maybe, sure sounds like it.
Matthew Stoddard
February 15, 2008 at 2:23 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Where did it say that Wall is now claiming he was slipped a Mickey? I haven't heard that from Wall or his lawyer since this began.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 2:28 p.m.
› Suggest removal
mtroach well spoken and I believe that any rational person would have done the same.
bereassmama and emmalee, please keep in mind that this forum is not for personal hook-ups but to openly and objectively discuss this issue.
Id- as you have pointed out Gary has had issues in the past, (public knowledge) dont you see why this may be cause for concern? Are we now saying that in addition to the CHP, the sherriffs own employees or ex emplyees are now involved in the plot against Gary? As you have pointed out this contrversial sherrif DID go to a public event (with a personal history of alcohol “issues”) it is documented that he had at least one drink (by 16 people) whom we all know were not all by his side the entire evening. The fact that with past issues he drank anything but coffee is questionable behavior in itself (at home let him drink whatever, but in public at least put on a good show) AND since when do people who have been drinking always show good judgement? AND I still say that you show a very unhealthy knowledge of drugging people. I dont think I would ever accept a drinkee-poo from you!
Emmalee very well spoken as to the development of the young persons brain.
Benny thank you for the sincere honesty about your experience! Do want to run for sherrif????????
bandmama (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 2:35 p.m.
› Suggest removal
kielbasa- Id I think implied the conpiracy theory
Maybe beerassmama and emmalee are one and the same and a multiple personality?????……
emmalee (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 2:35 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Why was Wall drinking at all in public one drink or otherwise with a firearm in tow???? If he was carrying his duty firearm was he or was he not on duty? If he was why was he having even one drink and if he wasn't. A. see first sentence. OR B. was the gun planted on him as part of “the set-up”. I think not.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 2:48 p.m.
› Suggest removal
I think we have forgetten that little issue, just why did he have his firearm with him?
And someone please refresh my memory, was he drinving a county vehicle at the time of the stop?
Please allow me to say that the real issue here is not the plot against Gary, it is the simple FACT he was pulled over for a minor offence, the trooper felt he may have been impaired then the gun came into play, again with judgement calls like this, is this the man we want in this office?
ID- you are right there is a large amount of use of many things in this community, even more of a reason for the law enforcement personnel to investigate and take measures to get them off the roads!!!!! No matter who they are.
bandmama (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 3:47 p.m.
› Suggest removal
oh my gosh!!! I just happened to think, why did Gary have his brights on in such a well lit area…..huh? …..huh?
Matthew Stoddard
February 15, 2008 at 3:57 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Because 100yds back, it's dark enough to have your brights on for a reason. Plenty of people forget to dim their brights, but it is one of the signs (weaving, forgetting to dim brights, no lights on at all, excessively slow/fast driving) that police look for in drunk drivers. Sometimes, it's nothing; sometimes not. I was told this when I was pulled over in 1991 for not dimming my brights at 13th, heading west.
emmalee (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 3:59 p.m.
› Suggest removal
O.k. one more (I'll try to not say any more) comment to the peanut gallery before I move on. As someone who has a hard time dealing with light changes. I even drive a “tall” vehicle to prevent being blinded by on coming headlights. It does not matter whether the road is well lit or not I can tell (painfully so if in my smaller car, don't drive it at night) if someone has their brights on. Maybe the arresting officer knew that this could impede someone else's driving and pulled Wall over on this pretext but found more than that.
armchairqb (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 4:18 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Maybe he's a diabetic. Lack of insulin causes the breath to have the odor of alcohol. If you want the truth go to England where the courts seek the truth Here it's guilt or innocence.
emmalee (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 4:30 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Don't you think that if this was a plausible answer, information would have been released by now????
bandmama (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 5:26 p.m.
› Suggest removal
armchairqb-FYI, if you are diabetic, you should not even have that one glass of wine, but and excellent point.
emmalee-I have the same problem, and it does make it hard to see with mega bright lights coming right at you!
BTW, anyone have Lance's phone #?
I feel like a cocktail tonight….HA!
Ok, that was a low blow…..
tmac62 (anonymous)
February 15, 2008 at 5:55 p.m.
› Suggest removal
ido4sp informer ?????
id04sp (anonymous)
February 16, 2008 at 11:01 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Roach and Mama,
Okay, again for the 14,000th time, on the night this occurred, if Wall was drugged, he would not have had the mental capacity to make such a rational decision and ask for a blood test. Your own experiences with drugs have not, apparently, included the use of “hypnotics.”
I don't know how long the substance would remain in the blood stream and be detectable, but it's not like THC or other persistent substances that require days or weeks of abstention.
Chloral hydrate is more like a general anaesthetic than heroin or THC or other such substances. It is a pure synthetic substance, not a plant derivative.
The insidious nature of this kind of drug, again, makes it perfect for a doping. By the time you figure out that something was done to you, it's most likely not detectable anymore. Now, if Wall had DIED that night, it would have probably shown on a tox screen.
Again, I'm not saying he was drugged. I'm only saying that a drugging could account for all of the events observed that night, and there are plenty of people around who detest Wall and could obtain chloral hydrate. Whether there was opportunity to dope him at the dinner, I don't know. I do notice, however, that certain folks are not coming back with any kind of other evidence — such as an account of Wall's actions in the last 10 to 20 minutes of the dinner, who the servers were, if he was served, etc. — that would refute this theory.
tmac62,
An informer is a person who furnishes evidence of a crime to the police. In my case, it was money laundering and trafficking. The evidence involved a difference between sales records and the amount of sales taxes paid, i.e., the suspect paid much more in sales tax than the cash register receipts could support. Employees of the business were involved in the use, at least, of cocaine. It's a matter of record. The logical conclusion is that money from some other source was being deposited into the commerical account along with daily sales receipts, and taxes were being paid on funds from some undeclared source other than the cash register amounts. The old RCSO, of course, did nothing about it. I won't tell you more, but let's say that the people who did this had friends who have exhibited “poor judgment.” I said, “judgment.”
This would have been a great case for gramnet to get after, but nobody seemed to care. I figured out why later on when other events occurred. It may be different now, but a while back, “friends” didn't “let friends lose lawsuits in Routt County.”
dundalk (anonymous)
February 16, 2008 at 11:42 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Id:
You crack me up.
Further scenarios to your imaginative suppositions of chloral hydrate:
Maybe one of the 16 friends, oops I mean “witnesses” of Gary Wall owns horses, and has access to Equithesin.
Maybe Ted Kennedy and the MOB have it out for Gary Wall, and had some chloral hydrate left over from their dealings with Marilyn Monroe.
Maybe “Midnight in Montgomery” was playing on the radio and the ghost of Hank Williams seeped through the heating vents and overtook Wall.
Chloral hydrate is usually metabolized within 4 minutes, so your scenario of someone slipping him a drug are highly unlikely.
You are entertaining nonetheless and I have never laughed so hard in my life after reading your posts.
justathought (anonymous)
February 16, 2008 at 12:02 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Conspiracy theory #2, Maybe he and his girlfriend conspired to get high together and took drugs on their own, then instead of being too disorientated to make a rational decision, he did the only thing he could do to hide it, he refused the tests. Better to fight a dui than prove he was on drugs. Like I said, just another theory but I'm sure he appreciates your belief in him at the expense of other officers.