Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks, PPs. To answer some of the questions, he was not belligerent at all. He said he was completely stunned and very cooperative. The police kept him overnight and did not let him make a phone call - is that legal? They released him the next day after his blood/alcohol level was stable.

Sorry if I'm not using the correct terminology, I'm not in the legal field nor am I familiar with these charges. He texted me pictures of the ticket/summons, with the charges - public intoxication and possession of alcohol under age 21.

A PP mentioned security clearances and this is exactly what we're concerned about as he hopes to work with the intelligence community at some point.

We've contacted a couple of lawyers in the college town and hope to talk to them tomorrow. Thanks so much for all of your advice.

Do something to show contrition -- e.g. alcohol and drug education. Getting drunk in college once will not hurt an intelligence or law enforcement career unless he LIES about it. The thing he needs to be aware of if he ever wants to hold a position with a security clearance is that they will speak to people who knew him back in college and ask about his habits, drug use, alcohol use.

What idiots would go To college and then want to work in intelligence work. Talk about a step backwards. To strive to be a goon and work for cia or nsa? Foolish

There’s one on every thread ^^^.

Anonymous wrote:Regarding security clearance, almost any military or contractor work requires a security clearance. Most federal agencies will also want you to be able to qualify for a clearance. The Intel work requires a polygraph on top of background check. Check out job postings. Clearance will get you $15k - $20k more per year in DC area.

True but a college drinking arrest will not impede clearance — but you must fully disclose the arrest (even if it was dismissed and or expunged). As me how I know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the kids? the schools? No fault anywhere else?

It is illegal for kids to drink before they are 21. Those laws are thoroughly evaluated, and have saved thousands of lives. You can make it all sound as harmless as you want. But the police are enforcing a law that matters. Remember when that boy was let go with a warning by police a few years back, and he died walking home (drowned, I believe in a small stream...or died from hypothermia). They were crucified for not doing more. The point is, it is not safe to walk around by yourself when you are drunk. If you have taught your kids that such laws came about to line the pockets of small town cops, you have done them a disservice.

OP here. You are absolutely right, and I am actually grateful that they didn’t leave my son to just wander around by himself. However, surely they could have taken him the station, allowed him to sober up, read him the riot act, and given him a citation or warning? Especially as he has nothing else on his record - this is his first offense. It seems like throwing a class 1 and class 4 misdemeanor at him was excessive, to say the least. That will be permanently on his record if it is not expunged, and even then will show up on a security clearance investigation. And that’s even if he’s able to get it dismissed and/or expunged in the first place - by paying an expensive attorney, no less.

I completely agree that he could have been hurt, however for first-time offenders, they could have released him the next day with just a warning. That would have been plenty to ensure he never does this again.

We were completely mortified when our daughter was ticketed for underaged drinking at a party at UVA a few years back. She never told us, hired her own lawyer and was found guilty. She had her driver's license revoked for six months. It's on her record. However, we have been really surprised that this has not kept her from getting great summer jobs and internships, even when she was required to declare that this had occurred and provide details on an employment form. She is currently a senior who is getting multiple job interviews with great firms. Apparently it's more common than we thought and not necessarily considered to be a big deal particularly if your child is capable of discussing what happened in a mature fashion and dwelling on what they learned from it if asked. It's funny how when our kids are little we overshare about their big accomplishments (walking, playing peek a book, reading) but when they get older we clam up and never share these doubts, set backs and disappointments. Instead, we all walk around thinking that this has never happened to anyone else. You'd be surprised. I'm ok posting here but none of my neighbors or work colleagues etc. know that this even happened and I'm not planning on telling them.

What is done is done. Hire a good lawyer. Your child will learn from this.

You sound like a conscientious parent, and I am sorry you are having to deal with this stress. Console yourself with the fact that the phone call could have had much worse news.

Regarding security clearance, almost any military or contractor work requires a security clearance. Most federal agencies will also want you to be able to qualify for a clearance. The Intel work requires a polygraph on top of background check. Check out job postings. Clearance will get you $15k - $20k more per year in DC area.

Anonymous wrote:Guessing JMU. There was a thread a while back about the small town trap, money making scheme. No Miranda rights, outright arrest of 1st time offenders not openly carrying alcohol or public disturbances. There are attorneys who've set up shop in Harrisonburg just to handle the overwhelming number of cases. Why wouldn't an 18 year old be allowed to call their parents?

Find a local attorney in the town that handles these specific arrests. They know what they're dealing with. Good luck, OP.

For cases like this, the “yellow pages” type law firms, located near the courthouse, are the way to go. These lawyers are in court everyday and know the system, the prosecutors and the judges. I’m a lawyer in a niche civil industry and was amazed (and disheartened) at the access available to these lawyers that simply doesn’t exist for others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the kids? the schools? No fault anywhere else?

It is illegal for kids to drink before they are 21. Those laws are thoroughly evaluated, and have saved thousands of lives. You can make it all sound as harmless as you want. But the police are enforcing a law that matters. Remember when that boy was let go with a warning by police a few years back, and he died walking home (drowned, I believe in a small stream...or died from hypothermia). They were crucified for not doing more. The point is, it is not safe to walk around by yourself when you are drunk. If you have taught your kids that such laws came about to line the pockets of small town cops, you have done them a disservice.

OP here. You are absolutely right, and I am actually grateful that they didn’t leave my son to just wander around by himself. However, surely they could have taken him the station, allowed him to sober up, read him the riot act, and given him a citation or warning? Especially as he has nothing else on his record - this is his first offense. It seems like throwing a class 1 and class 4 misdemeanor at him was excessive, to say the least. That will be permanently on his record if it is not expunged, and even then will show up on a security clearance investigation. And that’s even if he’s able to get it dismissed and/or expunged in the first place - by paying an expensive attorney, no less.

I completely agree that he could have b, however for first-time offenders, they could have released him the next day with just a warning. That would have been plenty to ensure he never does this again.

No he broke the law. They arrested him because he was drunk in public and a minor. Get off you high horse, direct your anger towards your son not the police or the laws. He will most likely get everything taken off his record because you are going to spend the money to game the system. Oh looks like it’s Virginia everyone - class 1 and class 4 misdemeanor.

Guessing JMU. There was a thread a while back about the small town trap, money making scheme. No Miranda rights, outright arrest of 1st time offenders not openly carrying alcohol or public disturbances. There are attorneys who've set up shop in Harrisonburg just to handle the overwhelming number of cases. Why wouldn't an 18 year old be allowed to call their parents?

Find a local attorney in the town that handles these specific arrests. They know what they're dealing with. Good luck, OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks, PPs. To answer some of the questions, he was not belligerent at all. He said he was completely stunned and very cooperative. The police kept him overnight and did not let him make a phone call - is that legal? They released him the next day after his blood/alcohol level was stable.

Sorry if I'm not using the correct terminology, I'm not in the legal field nor am I familiar with these charges. He texted me pictures of the ticket/summons, with the charges - public intoxication and possession of alcohol under age 21.

A PP mentioned security clearances and this is exactly what we're concerned about as he hopes to work with the intelligence community at some point.

We've contacted a couple of lawyers in the college town and hope to talk to them tomorrow. Thanks so much for all of your advice.

Do something to show contrition -- e.g. alcohol and drug education. Getting drunk in college once will not hurt an intelligence or law enforcement career unless he LIES about it. The thing he needs to be aware of if he ever wants to hold a position with a security clearance is that they will speak to people who knew him back in college and ask about his habits, drug use, alcohol use.

What idiots would go To college and then want to work in intelligence work. Talk about a step backwards. To strive to be a goon and work for cia or nsa? Foolish

Beats Starbucks barista, I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks, PPs. To answer some of the questions, he was not belligerent at all. He said he was completely stunned and very cooperative. The police kept him overnight and did not let him make a phone call - is that legal? They released him the next day after his blood/alcohol level was stable.

Sorry if I'm not using the correct terminology, I'm not in the legal field nor am I familiar with these charges. He texted me pictures of the ticket/summons, with the charges - public intoxication and possession of alcohol under age 21.

A PP mentioned security clearances and this is exactly what we're concerned about as he hopes to work with the intelligence community at some point.

We've contacted a couple of lawyers in the college town and hope to talk to them tomorrow. Thanks so much for all of your advice.

Do something to show contrition -- e.g. alcohol and drug education. Getting drunk in college once will not hurt an intelligence or law enforcement career unless he LIES about it. The thing he needs to be aware of if he ever wants to hold a position with a security clearance is that they will speak to people who knew him back in college and ask about his habits, drug use, alcohol use.

What idiots would go To college and then want to work in intelligence work. Talk about a step backwards. To strive to be a goon and work for cia or nsa? Foolish

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain the difference between having the charges dismissed vs having them expunged? I’m not clear about which is the more favorable option.

dismissed is far more favorable

no expungement means they remove all records of the case

But it will still turn up on a government investigation, correct? And don’t you still have to admit you were arrested on forms like the SF-86?

Does anyone know the answers to these questions?

Preferably the case is dismissed and expunged.

Either way, you need to answer the question asked. So, if the question asks if you’ve ever been arrested, the answer is yes. You’ll have an opportunity to explain the circumstances (including the disposition of the case). Failure to disclose on a govern or form is a federal offense punishable with 5 yrs prison.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain the difference between having the charges dismissed vs having them expunged? I’m not clear about which is the more favorable option.

dismissed is far more favorable

no expungement means they remove all records of the case

But it will still turn up on a government investigation, correct? And don’t you still have to admit you were arrested on forms like the SF-86?

Does anyone know the answers to these questions?

You should say you were arrested for public drunkenness and also that the case was expunged.

Anonymous wrote:He’ll be fine for future employment as long as he doesn’t lie. And as long as he doesn’t make this a pattern.

I was arrested for the same thing in college and So were several of my friends. Absolutely NONE of us told our parents the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So sure, believe your child’s story but verify with the police report. Consider your son is not being completely forthright.

We saw the police report. He was being completely forthright.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain the difference between having the charges dismissed vs having them expunged? I’m not clear about which is the more favorable option.

dismissed is far more favorable

no expungement means they remove all records of the case

But it will still turn up on a government investigation, correct? And don’t you still have to admit you were arrested on forms like the SF-86?

Does anyone know the answers to these questions?

Anonymous wrote:And the kids? the schools? No fault anywhere else?

It is illegal for kids to drink before they are 21. Those laws are thoroughly evaluated, and have saved thousands of lives. You can make it all sound as harmless as you want. But the police are enforcing a law that matters. Remember when that boy was let go with a warning by police a few years back, and he died walking home (drowned, I believe in a small stream...or died from hypothermia). They were crucified for not doing more. The point is, it is not safe to walk around by yourself when you are drunk. If you have taught your kids that such laws came about to line the pockets of small town cops, you have done them a disservice.

OP here. You are absolutely right, and I am actually grateful that they didn’t leave my son to just wander around by himself. However, surely they could have taken him the station, allowed him to sober up, read him the riot act, and given him a citation or warning? Especially as he has nothing else on his record - this is his first offense. It seems like throwing a class 1 and class 4 misdemeanor at him was excessive, to say the least. That will be permanently on his record if it is not expunged, and even then will show up on a security clearance investigation. And that’s even if he’s able to get it dismissed and/or expunged in the first place - by paying an expensive attorney, no less.

I completely agree that he could have been hurt, however for first-time offenders, they could have released him the next day with just a warning. That would have been plenty to ensure he never does this again.