ILNews

Indianapolis officer faces more drunken-driving charges

IL Staff
April 30, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The suspended Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department officer accused of killing one motorcyclist and injuring two others in an August 2010 crash has been arrested and charged with two misdemeanor drunken-driving offenses.

David Bisard is set to go on trial in October in Allen County on charges of reckless homicide and multiple operating while intoxicated charges. Bisard drove his police cruiser into three motorcyclists stopped at an Indianapolis intersection on Aug. 6, 2010. His case has received a lot of publicity in central Indiana, and the change of venue to Allen County was granted in February.

Bisard was arrested Saturday afternoon by police in Lawrence on suspicion of drunken driving after crashing his truck into a guardrail and utility pole. No other cars were involved. Police found an open bottle of vodka in his vehicle. According to the probable cause affidavit, Bisard admitted to drinking. A blood draw determined his blood alcohol level to be 0.22.

The Marion County Prosecutor’s Office filed two Class A misdemeanor charges Monday – operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated and operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.15 grams or greater.

Bisard was suspended without pay while awaiting trial. The prosecutor’s office has filed a motion to revoke bond in the 2010 case.

An initial hearing in this case has been set for 8:30 a.m. May 1 in Marion Superior Court.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • does the punishment fit the crime?
    You can drive a motor vehicle on public roads in Indiana endangering the public while 3 times the limit for public intoxication and be charged with a misdemeanor yet if you are in your own home possessing or smoking marijuana you can be charged with a felony.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT