February 28, 2012 11:37 PM UTC

Laura Bradford, Victim?

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

As the Colorado Statesman’s Peter Marcus reports:

In an exclusive interview with The Colorado Statesman this week, a shaken Bradford poured her frustrations over a string of controversies and personal turmoil over the last month that has left her fighting for her career and family…

Just when Bradford was resuming some semblance of normalcy, she was hit again Wednesday with another disappointing surprise. The Denver Police Department released a report to the public estimating that her blood alcohol level was 0.2 percent – more than twice the legal limit to be drinking and driving.

…Given the apology from the Denver Police Department and the exoneration by the ethics panel, Bradford thought her troubles with this chapter of the saga were over. But when she learned that police were estimating her blood alcohol level, she was astonished by what she calls “unprofessionalism.” She wonders how it is fair for police to publicly guess her blood alcohol without having her take a Breathalyzer, saliva or blood test.

“That’s why I kept asking them to bring me in, so that I would be exonerated,” she said.

“Are they going to have a crystal ball in the car to decide who’s an axe murderer, or to determine who is a drug dealer and who is not?” asked Bradford. “I’m just so frustrated by the lack of professionalism that should be extended to any citizen, public or not. Due process. Where has that gone? Does it exist and for whom?”

“Every citizen has the right to the presumption of innocence,” she vehemently concluded while on the phone with The Statesman as she drove back to tend to her ailing husband in Mesa County.

Folks, we’ll be honest: it’s a difficult situation that Rep. Laura Bradford finds herself in after not being properly investigated for driving under the influence on the night of January 25th. We noted last week that the “estimate” of Bradford’s blood alcohol content by police, while likely a reasonable estimate based on their experience, is not in any way legally admissible. Bradford says, and one of the two DPD officers involved in her traffic stop backs her up, that she didn’t ask for special treatment. But she got special treatment, and that special treatment is the ultimate reason Bradford wasn’t fully tested (followed by possible charges and a trip to Denver detox).

Sure Bradford is entitled to a “presumption of innocence,” just like the public presumes everyone is equal before the law. Unfortunately, you can’t have one without the other.

The fact is, Rep. Bradford might not even have a driver’s license to conduct her “windshield time” thinking sessions on the road back to Collbran every week, but for the fact that she received “special treatment” from the Denver Police that night. There’s really nobody in the general public who is going to feel much sympathy for her being treated “unprofessionally,” since if she hadn’t been, we wouldn’t be having this conversation at all. We’d be talking about her mug shot.

Bottom line: we can’t tell Rep. Bradford how to solve this conundrum, but we would suggest that playing the victim after everything that’s been said and done here is not her best choice.