.

South Suburban DUI Arrests, Jan. 13

Driver blows through stoplight • Woman wracks up felony charges • Man was carrying pot, driving under the influence. This week's roundup of drunken driving arrests in the Southland.

EVERGREEN PARK

JAN. 1: A Chicago man walked away with a list of charges after a ride through Evergreen Park in the early morning hours after New Year's Eve. 

On Jan. 1 at 1:05 a.m. Christan Adams, 22, of Chicago, was seen disobeying a traffic light, police said. He then sped off driving through a train crossing against a signal as well, police said. 

Adams and his green Chevy were traveling 85 mph in a 30 mph zone as he took off eastbound on 95th Street, police said. Chicago police became involved in the chase and Adams' car was eventually stopped in the 1800 block of 95th Street. 

A blood draw was performed after he was taken into custody, police said. 

Adams was charged with felony fleeing and alluding, driving under the influence, driving without insurance, speeding and traffic violations. 

HOMEWOOD

DEC, 29: 47-year-old Darren Shoulders was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol and improper lane usage after police caught him swerving into the opposite lane on 183rd Street and Western Ave. Police say Shoulders, of the 12300 block of LaSalle in Chicago had a blood alcohol content of .265 when officers administered the test.

FRANKFORT

JAN. 5: A Lisle woman faces felony charges following a traffic stop in Frankfort.

Stacy K. Niemiec, 52, of the 5500 block of Essex Road in Lisle, was charged with three counts of aggravated driving under the influence and one count of possession of a controlled substance, all felonies, at 1:50 a.m. on the 20500 block of La Grange Road.

She was also cited for driving with a suspended license, driving without insurance, improper lane usage and two misdemeanor counts of driving under the influence.

A Frankfort police officer was on patrol when he saw the car in front of him weaving from lane to lane.

When he stopped the car, Niemiec smelled of alcohol and couldn’t coherently answer questions about her destination, according to police reports. She was unable to provide her license and registration.

Niemiec failed a field sobriety test and was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. A background check revealed that her license was revoked for driving while intoxicated and that she had two previous DUI convictions.

Her court date is Jan. 28.

PALOS HEIGHTS

DEC. 28: Abdulaziz A. Abouelkheir, 27, of the 14700 block of South Arboretum Drive in Homer Glen, was charged with improper lane use, speeding, unlawful possession of marijuana, illegal transportation of alcohol, resisting an officer and driving under the influence of alcohol, according to a police report. Abouelkheir was reportedly stopped at around 12:38 a.m. near 12900 S. Harlem Ave. for speeding and improper lane use. He allegedly failed field sobriety tests. Abouelkheir was booked and given a $3,000 bond.

JAN. 1: Anthony T. Campbell, 48, of the 19100 block of Roy Street in Lansing, IL, was charged with improper lane use and two counts of driving under the influence, according to a report. Police stopped Campbell's car for lane violations, when officers allegedly noticed he had slurred speech and a smell of alcohol on his breath. Campbell was booked after field sobriety tests and a breath test. He was given a $3,000 bond.

 

 

Police report information is provided by local police departments. Charges are not evidence of guilt. They are a record of police actions on a given day, and persons charged with a crime are presumed innocent until proven guilty in court. If you or a family member are charged or cited and the case is subsequently adjudicated, we encourage you to notify the editor. We will verify and report the outcome.

john bruno January 13, 2013 at 05:38 PM
Stacy is definitely going to be going to jail for 2-5 years or more. Some people never learn.
Mensa2 January 13, 2013 at 07:23 PM
John, I agree with you, she is a danger to others, because she definitely do not care about herself.
Roger January 13, 2013 at 09:30 PM
You're seriously defending drunk driving? Wow. Driving is a privilege, not a right. If you want to drink, do it responsibly. Don't drink too much to drive, or find another way home. It's not difficult. I bet if somebody you knew was injured or killed by a drunk driver, you'd feel differently. And no, I personally do not know anyone directly affected by a drunk driver.
Sara January 13, 2013 at 11:28 PM
If authorities were really serious then legislation would be passed that every car made would mandate a breathalizer be installed. Then no one would be able to drive under the influence of alcohol ever again.
Darnell January 14, 2013 at 03:09 PM
Ban Liquor Sales and Liquor!
Roger January 14, 2013 at 03:21 PM
Yeah, that makes sense. Pass on the cost of installing breathalizers into ever car onto law-abiding citizens, not to mention making everyone have to blow into a device to be able to start their car. That's a joke. That's like making everyone wear a chastity belt so no more rapes occur.
Sara January 14, 2013 at 05:22 PM
Roger - it wouldn't be on the tax payer but added to the cost of the car. I'd be all for the device in my car and I don't drink alcohol at all.
Tired of the B.S. January 14, 2013 at 05:45 PM
Sara, what about all the cars that do not have a breathalyzer? Who would pay to install them on my cars and your cars? Why is it that your solution is to penalize everybody for the actions of a few?
DLC DAVE January 14, 2013 at 05:49 PM
Put knock out devices in peoples steering wheels so when you try to start car drunk a device flys out of the streeing wheel and knocks out driver and activates a 911 signal to police . Or maybe ejects driver into street hey someone has to come up with something eh lol
Sara January 14, 2013 at 05:50 PM
I said newer cars. Remember when cars didn't have seat belts installed in them?
Sara January 14, 2013 at 05:58 PM
BS - how is it punishment if you're not breaking the law? Do you count being forced to wear your seat belt punishment? I recall a number of people being upset when that became a law.
DLC DAVE January 14, 2013 at 06:07 PM
if it saved one person then it's all good
Roger January 14, 2013 at 06:29 PM
Sara, OK, so only on new cars. Who pays for them? Obviously the car manufacturers have to spend the money to purchase and install them, guess who gets to pay for them? Anyone buying a new car!! Seatbelts are logical because everyone in a vehicle has the chance of being hurt or killed in a collision. For people who don't drink at all, or who drink responsibly or use designated drivers, there is no purpose or added protection by having an ignition lock breathalizer installed.
Sara January 14, 2013 at 06:47 PM
As I stated, it would go into the cost of the car. Who paid for the seat belts? They use to be additional cost. Air conditioning and automatic transmission are still additional cost. Who paid for air bags? Again, the cost of the car. I would be happy to pay a little extra if it was an extra measure to save my life against someone else's stupidity.
Sara January 14, 2013 at 06:49 PM
Roger - you missed my statement that I do not drink alcohol at all and I do not find this to be intrusive. If it means getting me from point a to point b without being killed or seriously injured, then why wouldn't I? DUI's are happening far too often and at all hours of the day. If you read the Patch's posts each time you'd see these crashes happen when kids are coming home from school, people are going to work, etc. It's not just middle of the night.
Roger January 14, 2013 at 06:53 PM
Sara, It doesn't matter if you don't drink and don't find it intrusive. I do drink (responsibly) and DO find it HIGHLY intrusive and unnecessary. Besides, anyone can bypass the breathalizer by having a friend blow into it. The other features you're describing in cars as being standard such as air conditioning and air bags only became standard because most people don't want a car without those things, and the car manufacturers want to sell cars. The government already costs us way too much money already, I don't need them forcing me to put a feature on my car that will never be needed.
Sara January 14, 2013 at 07:32 PM
Roger - you're taking this discussion way too seriously. The point I was making is it's a good sure way to get drunks off the road. If you can suggest a better way to stop DUI Crashes from happening, please do so.
Roger January 14, 2013 at 07:41 PM
I don't feel I'm taking it way too seriously. You're proposing that all new cars should be manufactured to include a breathalizer ignition lock device, and I think that is a terrible idea. I didn't come here to offer ideas to curb drunk driving. That doesn't mean I can't critique yours.
Sara January 14, 2013 at 07:49 PM
That's fine. But I feel if you took a poll of every driver in America, you'd find the majority are against the seat belt laws. Far too many people feel it infringes on their rights. I suggest you stop by an event that MADD or AIMM hosts. Visit with the victims. There are far too many permanently brain damaged. Then visit with the parents who had to bury their child way too soon. If something so simple as blowing into a device to start your car can save just one life, save someone from permanent disability. Then it's worth it.
Sara January 14, 2013 at 07:50 PM
Sorry, it's AAIM not AIMM.
Roger January 14, 2013 at 07:54 PM
Do you have a reliable source to back up your assertion that most drivers are against seatbelt laws? I find that to be highly unlikely. Besides, nobody has a "right" to operate a motor vehicle, it is a privilege. There are a lot of laws that could be passed relating to a variety of issue that could save lives. That does not mean that they should exist.
Sara January 14, 2013 at 08:00 PM
No data, that's why I suggested a poll. I am basing this off the complaints from when "Click it or Ticket" became a law. The outrage over their rights! To this day when there are seat belt enforcement stops, there's always people complaining (mainly due to them getting a ticket) that it shouldn't be a law. The point is, everyone complains, then everyone gets over it. Why not save a life if we can?
Roger January 14, 2013 at 08:09 PM
Everyone complains because they got caught!! You don't hear many people complaining about laws or cops until they get caught doing something illegal, then suddenly it's a stupid law or the cop's fault for enforcing it.
Sara January 14, 2013 at 09:42 PM
First, excuse my mistype of a word. Lord knows no one else here ever has a typo. I would never suggest banning the sale of alcohol. I don't care who drinks to excess. I do care when they take it out on the streets.
John January 16, 2013 at 08:04 AM
Doubtful. There was just a case in Will Co. where a person got 3 DUI's in about 9 months(at least 4 overall). He pled guilty and got only 1 year and $1700 fine.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something