Thread: Police struggle to find drivers 'that don't exist'

Police struggle to find drivers 'that don't exist'
Hit-and-run highlights rising issues of false car registration
By Carol Vaughn
Staff Writer
April 12, 2008

PARKSLEY -- Darryl Hopkins was asleep in a recliner in the living room of his Fisher Road home early this week when he was startled awake by a crash.

At first he thought the handgun he sleeps with had fallen to the floor. Then he realized the gun was still in his lap, and he was covered with glass shards from a broken windowpane in the nearby front door.

A framed picture of Jesus had been knocked from the wall next to the doorjamb and now laid behind a bookcase.

"It woke me up big time. I couldn't get myself together. I didn't know what happened," said the 65 year-old Air Force veteran and retired electrician, still shaken a day later.

Hopkins called 911. A couple of minutes later, he looked outside and saw the source of the impact -- a white 1995 Hyundai with Mississippi license plates was lying on its side near the front door, its headlights still shining toward the road.

Hopkins' front porch was demolished and the driver was already gone, leaving behind a wallet containing a Mississip-pi driver's license issued to Fidel Chavez Escalante.

The driver had not been found as of late this week, according to First Sgt. JP Koushel of the Virginia State Police, putting a spotlight on hit-and-run cases involving falsified vehicle registrations that seem to be increasing.

"We can't solve these (cases) because in Mississippi, this car is registered to a person who doesn't exist," Koushel said.

His department has complained to that state, as well as Tennessee and the FBI, but he said the problem now includes Virginia.

"All they want is proof of address," he said of changes in policy at the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles since 2005. Applicants for car registration and title do not have to prove their identity, he said.

"These cars are untraceable; they all come back to a fictitious person," Koushel said. "If you don't have to prove who you are, what's the use of registering and titling a car? If migrant workers can do it, criminals can do it."

A search of General District court records this week turned up three cases involving a person with the name on the license found in the car with a Parksley address -- one for speeding, one for not having a Virginia driver's license and one for no license. The man was found guilty in all three cases and paid fines ranging from $75 to $100.

In this most recent incident, the car apparently rounded a sharp curve just west of Hopkins' house and ran off the road into his yard, missing a utility pole by inches and leaving deep tire tracks in the lawn. It then flipped over and destroyed Hopkins' front porch before coming to rest against a picket fence.

Fisher Road
Cars leaving the road and crashing into things is apparently not an uncommon occurrence on Fisher Road, a short stretch near Parksley that connects two busy thoroughfares -- Parksley and Greenbush roads, both of which lead into town.

Tuesday's crash wasn't even the first time Hopkins' front yard has been invaded by an errant vehicle -- last year, a westbound car flipped and took out his lamppost, he said. A week or so later, he found a half-gallon jug of vodka nearby while cleaning up his yard.

"It's a zoo back here," said Hopkins, who grew up in the farmhouse next door to the bungalow where he now lives after retiring to the Shore in 1995. "This is a major corridor for drugs, alcohol and illegal immigrants."

There were 10 motor vehicle accidents reported on the 1 1/2-mile-long Fisher Road between 2000 and 2007, according to highway department statistics -- and a half-dozen more at the intersection where Fisher veers off from Parksley Road, which connects Parksley with Route 13.

Hopkins said neighbors across the street also recently had a car run into their yard, barely missing their house.

One car that hit a utility pole on the road had Mississippi license plates on the front and Tennessee on the rear, he said.

A half-century ago Fisher Road was rural with few houses, Hopkins said, but now it is a "major bypass for Parksley," as well as the location of a migrant labor camp that came in the 1970s and a new mobile home park. Besides the problem with car accidents, Hopkins said he sometimes hears gunfire in the night, and two years ago a building at the labor camp was set afire.

"It's going to be a big disaster back here," said Hopkins.

The accident has left Hopkins with a host of problems, including the trouble of rebuilding his porch and repairing other damage to his house.

Hopkins is a veteran who enjoys big-game hunting. He also is an experienced sailor who once survived being struck by lightning while boating on the York River. Still, he has been shaken by his close brush with disaster this week.

"I slept in my truck last night; I wouldn't even sleep in there," he said.


www.delmarvanow.com

These cars are untraceable; they all come back to a fictitious person," Koushel said. "If you don't have to prove who you are, what's the use of registering and titling a car? If migrant workers can do it, criminals can do it."

Let me help you with the facts. Migrant workers who are in this country illegally ARE CRIMINALS. Not only did they enter the country illegally, but it seems a substantial number of them are applying for and getting what appearts to be valid drivers licenses, also another crime!

And I will presume they are illegal because if they were legal migrant workers, you would probably know who they were and would be able to find them.

Let me help you with the facts. Migrant workers who are in this country illegally ARE CRIMINALS. Not only did they enter the country illegally, but it seems a substantial number of them are applying for and getting what appearts to be valid drivers licenses, also another crime!

Hey, NoBueno, since you said you had some legal training I wish you would take a look at a couple of things. The first is the "Respect of enemy Aliens Act of 1798" which is still contained within the US Code.
That Act does say that a "predatory incursion" by a "nation or government" is basis for the President, if he announces it as a hostile act, to authorize the removal of aliens. As I read it, that authorization is, essentially, the statement that such an incursion has occurred. But please take a look at it:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/statutes/alien.htm

The second point is that President Bush on May 15, 2006 did give a speech which acknowledged the magnitude of the illegal immigration crisis and in which he revealed that he would place 6000 National Guard troops on the border. It seems to me that this is, in fact, a Presidential statement acknowledging a "predatory incursion" if not by the government of Mexico then certainly by the nation of the Mexican people.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases ... 515-8.html
"One way to help during this transition is to use the National Guard. So, in coordination with governors, up to 6,000 Guard members will be deployed to our southern border. The Border Patrol will remain in the lead. The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems, analyzing intelligence, installing fences and vehicle barriers, building patrol roads, and providing training. Guard units will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities -- that duty will be done by the Border Patrol. This initial commitment of Guard members would last for a period of one year. After that, the number of Guard forces will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents and new technologies come online. It is important for Americans to know that we have enough Guard forces to win the war on terror, to respond to natural disasters, and to help secure our border."
I believe the 1798 Act was written to accommodate many situations and intended to grant broad powers in such cases because there would be know way of knowing whether a foreign power was invading secretively with no formal declaration. That is why the writers included the word "nation." The Act also seems to give jurisdiction to the Federal Courts to administrate the removal of those aliens.

BTW, I have no formal legal training but our family has produced a large number of ministers, so people often expect me to "get it right." I do rent out an apartment that is now occupied by three law students--and their books just make me blow a fuse--they are so complex!!! I am hoping that we can see some actual lawyers contributing to ALIPAC. There was one several months ago looking for reverse discrimination cases.

Wouldn't matter anyway if he went to court the D.A. would ask him if he had a I.D. or green card he would say no and they would fine him a couple hundred dollars. These drive off's or run off's what ever you want to call it. Cost Us, Our insurance picks up the tab, when we have no proff of identity. Our insurance pays and our insurance premiums go up. It is our claim. It is counted against us.
But if the car is registered it must of had insurance. I would go after the insurance company or who the car is registered to. Who registers these cars to illegals sometimes bosses, girlfriends, friends. They should be held accountable. What do they mean they can't find the driver?
The car owner should be responsible.

Originally Posted by Captainron

Let me help you with the facts. Migrant workers who are in this country illegally ARE CRIMINALS. Not only did they enter the country illegally, but it seems a substantial number of them are applying for and getting what appearts to be valid drivers licenses, also another crime!

Hey, NoBueno, since you said you had some legal training I wish you would take a look at a couple of things. The first is the "Respect of enemy Aliens Act of 1798" which is still contained within the US Code.
That Act does say that a "predatory incursion" by a "nation or government" is basis for the President, if he announces it as a hostile act, to authorize the removal of aliens. As I read it, that authorization is, essentially, the statement that such an incursion has occurred. But please take a look at it:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/statutes/alien.htm

The second point is that President Bush on May 15, 2006 did give a speech which acknowledged the magnitude of the illegal immigration crisis and in which he revealed that he would place 6000 National Guard troops on the border. It seems to me that this is, in fact, a Presidential statement acknowledging a "predatory incursion" if not by the government of Mexico then certainly by the nation of the Mexican people.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases ... 515-8.html
"One way to help during this transition is to use the National Guard. So, in coordination with governors, up to 6,000 Guard members will be deployed to our southern border. The Border Patrol will remain in the lead. The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems, analyzing intelligence, installing fences and vehicle barriers, building patrol roads, and providing training. Guard units will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities -- that duty will be done by the Border Patrol. This initial commitment of Guard members would last for a period of one year. After that, the number of Guard forces will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents and new technologies come online. It is important for Americans to know that we have enough Guard forces to win the war on terror, to respond to natural disasters, and to help secure our border."
I believe the 1798 Act was written to accommodate many situations and intended to grant broad powers in such cases because there would be know way of knowing whether a foreign power was invading secretively with no formal declaration. That is why the writers included the word "nation." The Act also seems to give jurisdiction to the Federal Courts to administrate the removal of those aliens.

BTW, I have no formal legal training but our family has produced a large number of ministers, so people often expect me to "get it right." I do rent out an apartment that is now occupied by three law students--and their books just make me blow a fuse--they are so complex!!! I am hoping that we can see some actual lawyers contributing to ALIPAC. There was one several months ago looking for reverse discrimination cases.

I have taken a brief look at the Enemy Alien Act of 1778 and find this to an interesting, if not much used piece of law that does remain on the books.

There appears to be several elements that would need to be legally satisfied in order for this act to be envoked. We no that no formal delclaration of war has been declared against Mexico so we do not have that to consider. Next, there must have been an invasion or predatory incursion AND the President must have made a public proclamation of the event.

One of the problems I would have with a legal analysis is that I do not know what the LEGAL definitions of the terms "invasion" or "predatory incursion" as they pertain to this act. Certainly the President acknowledges during that 2006 speech that illegal immigration is a problem that must be addressed.

However, the language he uses to describe this issue is well chosen. He does not make a public proclamation of an "event" in which an invasion or predatory incursion has occured because he speaks in general terms such as," For decades, the United States has not been in complete control of its borders." Thus, in his mind, there has not been "one event" that could be considered, but rather decades of failed immigration law which has resulted in a border that has been out of control. Therefore, there has not been a single event which we could point to that would constitute an invasion or predatory incursion, atleast not yet.

To further establish that point, the President, says, " Yet we must remember that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are decent people who work hard, support their families, practice their faith, and lead responsible lives. They are a part of American life, but they are beyond the reach and protection of American law." He clearly does not perceive the actions of his beloved illegals to arise to any level of a threat which would trigger the Alien Enemy Act to come into affect.

In order to combat an active invasion or predatory incursion, the 6,000 National Guard Troops which were called to the border would have had full authorization to conduct military operations to halt the invasion.

Unfortunately, those 6000 NG Troops were activated for "transitional" purposes only and were not allowed to take the lead on any apprehension or border operation, which might lead some to believe the threat faced was less than invasionary or a predatory incursion since such a situation would have given full military authority to defend that border.

The analysis as to whether an invasion or predatory incursion has occured in which the President made a public proclamation of the "event" as it pertains to this act is doubtful. For this to be the case, the President's speech of 2006 would have to be construed as a public proclamation of a certain event which could be construed as an invasion or predatory incursion event. His speech contains rather general and broad terms which never seem to arise to describe a single event, such as specific incursion by Mexico or other act of war.

Sneaky, little devil, our President. He knows exactly what he's doing, and has been given advice on what not to say. Typical of him to protect and represent the illegal aliens at all costs, even American lives.