I am, as usual, confused. My Dallas Morning News today contains a story which states that "U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady failed a sobriety test and refused to have his blood tested before his drunken-driving arrest." He is quoted as taking full responsibility for his actions, and he commends the officers for doing their job. Oops ... "through an aide, he declined to discuss the incident or say how much he'd been drinking." I don't think he has fallen on his sword just yet.

South Dakota requires an operator of vehicle suspected of DWI to submit to breath test at request of law enforcement officer. If the test indicates that operator consumed alcohol, then officer may require operator to submit to chemical test.

Don't know if breath test is like our road side PBT or what.

Here is yet another version by the media of the arrest (perhaps a lesson in skepticism on reporting):

Rep. Brady says he takes 'responsibility' in arrest

Congressman says he doesn't know how DWI case will turn out

By SAMANTHA LEVINE and CINDY HORSWELL
Houston Chronicle

U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, who was arrested on charges of drunken driving in South Dakota over the weekend, said Tuesday that he took "full responsibility for my actions."

"No one is above the law. ... I'm glad law enforcement is doing their job," the Republican from The Woodlands said in a brief statement.

Later in the day, during a visit to the East Texas community of Kountze to talk about hurricane recovery, Brady said he would not elaborate. "That is my statement," he said.

Asked if he planned to plead guilty, he replied: "I don't know how it's going to turn out."

When pressed for more information about his arrest, Brady, 50, said: "Don't get behind the wheel � that's the answer."

Brady was pulled over by a South Dakota state trooper just before midnight Friday after receiving an alumni achievement award from his alma mater, the University of South Dakota. The award was presented at a dinner where wine was served, and Brady later attended a reception with a cash bar.

The five-term congressman was driving a Subaru Legacy sedan with several passengers on the two-lane State Highway 50 near Vermillion when he was stopped.

According to the police report, State Trooper Brent Mohrmann stopped Brady because of a problem with his taillights. After observing Brady, he asked him to step out of the car to take a battery of sobriety tests.

Mohrmann, who graduated from the South Dakota Highway Patrol Academy in January 2005, administered a breath test, the results of which cannot be shared under state law, state officials said. Brady refused a blood-alcohol test, which is his right as a first-time offender under South Dakota law.

Mohrmann also checked Brady for alcohol-related involuntary jerking of the eyes and asked him to recite the alphabet, count, and do a one-leg stand and a nine-step walk and turn, according to South Dakota State Highway Patrol Superintendent Col. Dan Mosteller.

Handcuffed and booked

Brady was then handcuffed and taken to the nearby Clay County Jail, where he was booked on a Class 1 misdemeanor charge of driving while intoxicated, according to Clay County Sheriff Andy Howe.
Police took Brady's fingerprints and photographed him.

His bond was set at $400, an amount stipulated by the charge. He paid the bond with cash in the presence of his attorney in South Dakota, Lee McCahren.

Brady's wife, Kathy, told KPRC-TV in Houston that she was in the car when he was pulled over about 100 feet from their hotel and that her husband learned a lesson to never drink and drive.

About 10 hours after being arrested, Brady rode in an open car in the homecoming day parade at the university, which is located in Vermillion, the seat of Clay County. The convertible bore a banner saying,"U.S. Congressman Kevin Brady, Alumni Achievement Award winner," said Paul Kruger of the alumni association.

News spreads

When news of the arrest began to spread, officials in Clay County, which has a population of 13,000, were nearly overwhelmed by phone calls from reporters, States Attorney Tami Bern said. By 6:30 p.m. Tuesday, the story had been posted on more than 100 Web sites, including ones operated by the Houston Chronicle, CNN, USA Today, the Washington Post and the Guardian of London.

Records show that Brady has had no convictions during the past three years for driving while intoxicated in Texas, according to the Texas Department of Public Safety. A deeper check takes 24 hours and had not been completed by press time.

Brady's record in South Dakota dating back to 1976 shows a ticket for driving with expired license plates, according to the Clay County Clerk of Courts.

Brady's court date was set for Nov. 8, though out-of-state defendants usually have an attorney appear for them at the initial hearing, Howe said.

At that point, Brady could either plead guilty, which for a first-time offender would likely bring a fine and no jail time, or he could opt for a trial.

If found guilty, Brady could face a maximum $1,000 fine or a year in jail, Howe said.

Brady returned to The Woodlands on Sunday and kept to his schedule, which included talking about hurricane recovery in Jasper, Newton, Deweyville, and Buna on Monday, and Orange, Vidor, Kountze and Woodville on Tuesday.

The arrest surprised Montgomery County Republican Chairman Wally Wilkerson Jr.

Brady "is not a drinker to my knowledge at all," he said. "I don't think he makes a habit of drinking and driving. It was a mistake. I think this is an isolated situation. It could have happened to any of us."

Where do you find there is a "Right" to refuse? I am not aware of any "right" that comes with a penalty for exercising it? The transportation does not call it a "right". What does the fact that we are "people too" have to do with the expectation that those whose job it is to enforce the law have a greater obligation to follow the law? While we are are being "honest" I will say for the record that "this" prosecutor would absolutely stepup to the tube and blow as "this" prosecutor would have nothing to fear from the results.

Not trying to rock the boat.

Just got a tad irked at the many posts judging those who refused as villains.

"Right" was in italics. I thought that would denote my sarcasm. Alas, it did not.

Nonetheless, please note my compliments to all that post here. It is an enjoyable discussion.

Have a good day.