I wonder why Barkus wasn’t charged with injuries to Rehberg’s other staffer. No criticism here, just curious. I believe the county attorney took his time and did this right.

If it were you or me, we’d have been charged a long time ago.  Neither you nor I would have been treated with the kids’ gloves (or tax-payer funded health insurance) with which Senator Barkus was during this month or so of investigation.  Nor would we have been able to lawyer up and be flown to Seattle for treatment; nor would we have been able to pay the bills, now would we.

I still have a question about one of the earliest statements from Rep. Rehberg:  Just who did pay for his employees’ medical care?  That which he paid through their employer funded plan, or did he get them attached to a Congressional plan?

One can say that this whole issue has been a delicate matter because of the personages involved, but that whole delicacy is counter to justice for one, justice for all.  The rest of us would have been in the slammer and charged a long time ago.

The mill wheels of justice in Flathead County grind exceedingly slowly, but at least they do grind.  It will be interesting to see whether Greg Barkus will now stand up and take his medicine like a man or disgrace himself further by continued evasion, gag orders and other lawyerly tricks.  The performance of Denny Rehberg, the other adult in the boat, has also been less than stellar, particularly with regard to confirming that the personal injury and rehabilitation expenses of his staffers are fully and completely covered.

dsrobins, everyone in that boat was an adult.

FINALLY…the “truth” comes out. As long as this process took, I had concluded Barkus must have been well over the legal limit or the news would’ve hit the papers shortly after the accident.
  Rehberg did not see if Barkus was drinking at the restaurant? Didn’t they have dinner together?

Well, according to an early news story, it was a “family” party.  Not a lot of drinking going on if one remembers the earlier reports.  No mention made that the event was at a public place.  But no matter, Rehberg’s fault here was perhaps, spinning the story so well that the public was mislead, or that the reporters were, or second, that Rehberg didn’t notice, or choose to notice, that Barkus shouldn’t have been driving.

In any event, Rehberg wasn’t driving, Barkus was.  One can only hope that Rehberg’s “memory” recovers in time for any subsequent, or continuing, investigation.

I agree that if it were us everyday folk, the BAC would have been out 1-2 days after the accident and we would have been charged. Waiting 6 weeks is highly suspect. But finally, it’s out. A BAC of .16 after 1.75 hours means maybe .18 or even .2 at the time of accident. Depends somewhat on weight. That is quite drunk. Though anyone with a usage tolerance may not show signs of the impairment that exists. The experts report alleging 40 mph in a boat with 4 passengers, approaching a rocky shore at night was very telling in itself. Even 25 or 30 mph is fast enough. And considering the passengers, the dinner and drinks gathering, and the possibility of boating in the dark, wouldn’t bringing a spotlight or powerful flashlight have been a good idea when sober? Boaters tool kits are supposed to include a flashlight.

I don’t want to pile on Mr. Barkus. We all make mistakes, and I, for one, have boated under varying degrees of influence. Fortunately, I never went very fast, rarely drove in the dark and had sighting assistance from passengers. But I will say, and this has been reported, he and the others are very lucky the boat launched and landed on the rocks.

It is a tragic event for all concerned. Now let justice be served.

...“Rehberg has said he did not see whether Barkus was drinking at the restaurant, and did not see any sign that he was impaired at all as the group got back on the boat. He released a statement Wednesday: “I was surprised to learn the results of Greg’s blood alcohol test. He didn’t appear to be impaired to me when we got on the boat for the return trip to Big Fork…” 

See, that’s the bugger about alcohol consumption.  It’s not obvious to the drinker or his peers that impairment has occurred.  Hence the campaigns to educate people that if you are driving, TWO had better be your limit. (try holding a commercial driver’s license which has an even LOWER legal limit).  Legal limits are set based upon scientific evidence, NOT to show a level of obvious impairment.  If you use the “oops, I can’t walk straight” test then you are likely waaay past the legal limit. 

The public isn’t going to let this one pass, even if Barkus enjoyed a stellar reputation (which he doesn’t) and had crafted legislation which was noteworthy (which he hasn’t), felony charges (convicted or not) just won’t fly with the current constituent attitude.  Any further attempt to cover, manipulate or escape will be seen exactly for what it’s worth and dismissed as easily. 

Barkus’ only hope here is to quickly spin this into a new career as a lecturer on the AA circuit.  As for his political career….well, he’d have a better chance at winning the lottery.

While writing my comment above, the update on Barkus contending the BAC was posted.

Aww, geeze Greg…give it up!  The writing is on the wall; you’ve got too much history and current evidence to fight this sucessfully.  Perhaps the pain meds or further imbibing are contributing to your choice to fight this.  The common man (assuming he is sober) would see that this is over…there is no fighting this in either the legal court OR the court of public opinion.

Firebeam - his ego won’t allow him to admit guilt, or to admit being RESPONSIBLE. His “family values” don’t include felony criminal behavior; therefore, in his mind, he couldn’t possibly be guilty.  Bottom line: he’s a lush who has finally run out of “get out of jail free” cards. It’s my understanding that anyone who worked at or frequented the Bulldog when it was located in the same bldg as Barkus’s office can tell you what kind of daily drinker this guy is. People who drink on a regular/daily basis get pretty good at appearing sober when necessary- I’m not surprised our uber-observant congressman didn’t notice.

Barkus’ attorney - “We adamantly disagree with those alleged levels set forth in the charging document,” Glazier said in the statement. “We have several witnesses that will testify that Mr. Barkus was not impaired at the time of the accident. In fact, the dinner receipt will show that Mr. Barkus did not consume enough alcohol to be impaired when he left the restaurant shortly before the accident, nor was there any alcohol aboard the boat.”

Say what?  Barkus is stating that two independent scientific tests (BAC) are lying and invalid?  That the court should believe a dinner ticket over scientific tests?

Give me a break.  What’s the matter with this person?  Why does he not want to own up and take responsibility for what he’s done?

If the campers had not been there to get him out of the water, Dustin Frost probably would have drowned.

This man does not uphold the law.  Why is he where he is at, and should he continue to be there as a law maker?  I don’t think so.

And Barkus is calling the woman who he caused injury to, Kristin Smith - Rehberg’s aide - a liar?

And he is calling the waitress at the Docks a liar who has verified along with a host of other witnesses who saw Barkus throughout the evening, that not only did Barkus drink two Scotch’s but also had red wine in his hand throughout the evening?

It’s not the untruths and evasions that are so damaging.  It’s that the people he serves - the public - will never place trust in this man again.

Forgive my multiple posts—-the more I think about this, the madder I get.

Okay Mr. Barkus…lets for sake of argument, set aside the Blood alcohol levels found in your blood. 

Now we’re left with the fact that you operated your boat recklessly.  Am I supposed to trust someone, let alone a public official, who has so little common sense and little regard for the safety of his passengers as to operate a boat after dark at speeds capable of launching the craft airborne???  You really expect me to believe 40+ MPH after dark on the lake is safe under ANY circumstances—-even with a floodlight???

Your stupid, reckless actions led to serious bodily harm to you, your family and your associates—-that alone is enough for me to throw you out of office.  Never mind that I have absolutely no doubt that you had enough alcohol in your system to impair your abilities and judgement.

But you go ahead and seek to have the BAC removed from the equation—-you’re still left with recklessness, carelessness and idiocy.  So it’s your choice; either you can leave the BAC and use it as your excuse for your behavior, OR we can take it out and be left with the impression that even sober, you don’t have enough brains to operate a car or boat in public. 

Your legal wrangling aside, we your contituents have a pretty good idea that you’re a jerk, sober or not.

Barkus you are just like a good republican.  You Greg Barkus are making excuses and refusing to take responsibility for your actions.  You are denying a scientific test on your blood alcohol?  Are you kidding me?  You were drunk, the test does not lie.  Now be a good little boy and fess up, take responsibility and apologize to the people you damaged. 

This is a very good example of your type of leadership and the party you represent.  Just as the republicans fail to take responsibility for the failed war we were lied into in Iraq.

Grow up Greg.

Grow up and take responsibility.  You were legally and by all means…....DRUNK. 

The only reason you are not being held more responsible and being treated as lightly by the system as you are, is because of your position.  That sickens me.  Anyone else would be punished more severely and more quickly.  I hope they throw the book at you.

You are a criminal.

GUILTY

Once again, we see a politician trying to cover his butt and not take responsibility.  He’s violated the public trust and is drawing out the legal proceedings as long as he can to soften the verdict and lessen sentencing.  C’mon Barkus, face the music like the rest of us have to do when we get into trouble.

You know, some of you who claim that the County Atty treated Barkus different from us regular folk are just plain wrong… That Sliter gal who injured the people in the car accident a few months back was just recently charged….

Instead of bad mouthing the County Atty, you should be thankful that he took his time and as they say “put all his ducks in a row”, before pursuing charges.

Oh, and for those of you who like to use this to bash republicans, I ask what purpose does it serve? Democrats are just as corrupt as republicans….

It’s incredible that no one is discussing Judge Swandal’s ties to the GOP. He is a major Republican donor and has contributed to Rep. Rehberg (a potential witness????).

Hopefully this Barkus lush will come to his senses (he’s forbidden to drink), remember that he’s a member of the law-and-order wing of the Repub’s and plead guilty, take his lumps, and save the taxpayers a jury trial. That way the judge will have little to say on the matter. Unfortunately this is far from over. It is interesting to note that his atty was also arrested for a DUI - by one of the MHP officers who later lost his life. Because the officer isn’t available to testify, he hasn’t gone to court and sadly, might get out of it. What a pair - Barkus and Glazier. Community leaders insuring that justice prevails. To a point. For some. Maybe. If you’re connected.

For me, the issue I have isn’t what Barkus’s criminal punishment will be or the controversial details over his BAL or degree of impairment, it’s about him getting treatment for his drinking and psychological problems and publicly taking responsibility for what happened.  Whether he was legally intoxicated or not or was blatantly reckless or not in this particular incident, he caused serious harm due to more than a few severe errors in judgement. I have not yet seen Mr. Barkus take the initiative to correct any of these issues to get his own life back on track and restore the public trust.