DISQUS

The District Weekly: GRISOLIA CAMPAIGN ISSUES STATEMENT ON HIS MOST-RECENT DUI ARREST

  • Shea Shizzle · 10 months ago
    HAHAHA... I love how no matter the topic, it seems Bill and his campaign ALWAYS find someway to work in the Island Sunfish Grill.... what was that? a WHOLE WHEEL OF CHEESE? Oh... no you mean a WHOLE BASKET OF FISH... wow thats quite impressive Bill.... im not even mad!! lol
  • b-dog · 10 months ago
    Not sure if he is confused, or intentionally misleading here. He was charged with two different crimes: driving with .08 or higher, AND driving under the influence. Driving under the influence doesn't require that he have a .08 or higher. Someone with a .04 can be guilty of driving under the influence--it just means that he isn't driving with the caution of a sober person. Further, his comment that he had one cocktail is patently false. Additionally, the explanations seem totally unreasonable when, as the DW reported, this is his 4th DUI encounter. Lastly, why is there mention Bill that the Sunfish Grill hired many 1st District residents? The point of hiring people is to pay them--giving them jobs and stiffing them, as you did, doesn't really help them or the local economy.
  • Duke · 10 months ago
    This explanantion is tripe, it's bullshit, it's denial about a drinking problem and incredibly poor judgment. Got news for ya Xavier Hermosillo- your candidate is a frickin' loser here. He should aspire to "hack". ANYONE with an ounce of sense (not an ounce of tequila, SENSE) who had THREE previous DUI arrests behind them would NEVER get behind the wheel and drive after having even "one cocktail", which is also a load of absolute crap. One, Bill????? And I'm sorry, but really, what does being a cancer survivor have ANYTHING to do with the fact even YOU admitted you had been drinking when stopped. Do us all a favor, Go away, just go away. Who wrote your expanation here, Laura Richardson?
  • John_B · 10 months ago
    The fact that TDW was compelled to describe this unfortunate event as Mr. Grisolia's "most recent DUI arrest" should be all the comment necessary on this matter. One such arrest should be considered a disqualification.

    Any subsequent arrests should result in the City Clerk laughing a prospective candidate right back out of his office.

    But that this "most recent" event occurred after he formally announced his candidacy leads me to suspect that Mr. Grisolia has some serious issues in the realms of alcohol consumption and personal responsibility.

    This does not make Mr. Grisolia a bad person.

    But it should certainly be considered a prima facie disqualification from serious consideration for elected office.

    Also, it concerns me more than just a little whenever anyone, aspiring candidate or not, attempts to mitigate an arrest for driving under the influence by emphasizing that only one of their two breath samples met the legal blood alcohol content standard of .08.

    Are we to assume that this is information that Mr. Grisolia is somehow pleased about or proud of?

    Is our concern over the extremely poor judgment he demonstrated when he made a conscious choice to drink and then drive somehow to be lessened simply because one of his breath samples a blood alcohol content that was 1/100th of a percent less than that which the law expressly prohibits?