Case Examples

Cover Page

Technical Report

Technical Summary

The remainder of this chapter provides seven case examples, which summarize the driving history and observation reports for selected subjects. The observation reports have been condensed, and any information that might be used to identify the subject or other persons has been destroyed.

In reading these examples, it is important to remember that subjects were observed only twice during their suspension period and only twice after reinstatement, if applicable. Each set of observations included a four-hour period on a weekday morning, when subjects were likely to be traveling to work, and a four-hour period on a Friday or Saturday evening, when subjects were likely to be pursuing personal, recreational, or social activities. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that observed driving by a subject represents the subject's typical driving pattern. To provide a comparison to the during-suspension travel patterns, a second set of two four-hour observations after reinstatement occurred on the same days of the week and times of the day as the during-suspension set of observations. This permitted the comparison of during-suspension and post-suspension driving patterns.

The five Milwaukee examples are typical of most subjects at that site. Most of these subjects have poor driving histories, characterized by numerous violations and prior suspensions. All show an apparent disregard for their suspension. Thus, these subjects run a red light; go to the liquor store; go about their daily business (washing their car, renting a video); drive their children to school; and drive to work. Only one of these subjects reinstated their license. As was typical of the Bergen County subjects, the two Bergen County cases had "clean" driving records. Further, their observation reports illustrate the most common pattern of subjects at that site: using alternative transportation during the suspended period and resuming driving after reinstatement.