[Jeff Higgins]

Yikes, Steve - ten year suspension??!! Holy shee-it. That seems pretty damn hard to justify for an accumulation of what they term (at least up here) as "non-criminal infractions". I'm not sure what the particulars of Oregon law might be, but in Washington, that classification essentially means there is no burden of proof whatsoever placed upon the accusing officer. If he says ya done it, ya done it... end of story. We are absolutely unable to contest on evidence of any kind; the only way to win is on some procedural or book keeping technicality. A ten year suspension is far too much to risk at that level of infraction, with such a low (non-existent) requirement for evidence of any kind. Yikes...

Anyway, it turns out a co-worker's wife is an assistant D.A. in Snohomish County. His assignment for the day was to go home and ask her. I'll report back when he tells me, assuming he remembers.

As an aside, he mentioned that she has told him darn near 20% of all drivers we see on the road in Washington these days have suspended licenses. That sounds high to me. If it's really anywhere close to that, that alone should tell us all something about how over the top, out of control enforcement has become. I have a very hard time believing that one out of five drivers poses enough of a threat to the rest of us to actually yank their license. No way.