By Eric Parry , Staff writer, Eagle-Tribune

August 05, 2007 -- The 43-year-old Derry woman who hit a police officer and was arrested on her fourth drunken-driving charge two weeks ago would have been a prime candidate for an ignition interlock device, according to two state representatives who advocated for tougher drunken-driving laws this year.

Susan Foss would not have been able to get behind the wheel and drive had her vehicle been equipped with the device, because it would have prevented her from starting the car, according to John Tholl, R-Whitefield, and David Welch, R-Kingston.

Foss was arrested after she hit Derry Patrolman Robert Moore, 34, while he was directing traffic on Route 28 in Windham July 25. At the time, Foss was free on bail following a July 8 arrest in Pelham on another drunken-driving charge.

Foss also had been convicted of drunken driving twice before, in 1998 and 1999.

When police arrested Foss in the latest incident, they said she was so drunk they did not complete a sobriety test because they felt she might hurt herself.

But Tholl and Welch, both of whom were instrumental in changing one word in the state's drunken-driving law to make it more difficult for repeat offenders to drive, said had the new law been implemented sooner, Foss' latest incident could have been avoided.

The new law allows a judge to order the device on any driver's vehicle, even if he or she is a first-time offender.

Previously, the state's ignition interlock device law said judges "may" require the device for repeat offenders. But this year Tholl and Welch successfully lobbied for a law requiring the device be installed in the automobiles of anyone whose license has been revoked or suspended for an aggravated DWI offense for at least one year.

Foss refused a Breathalyzer test and was granted a temporary 30-day license while she awaited trial for her July 9 arrest in Pelham. The July 25 drunken-driving charges prompted an administrative review of the status of her driver's license, which could be suspended for several years.

Foss may be ordered to have an ignition interlock device installed on her vehicles when she gets her license back.

The ignition interlock device looks like a thick cell phone with a pipe sticking out of it. Before the car will start, the driver must blow into the device and prove his or her blood-alcohol content is below the legal limit.

Thirty-three people in New Hampshire have been ordered by judges to have the ignition interlock devices installed on their vehicles, according to Katie Daly, spokeswoman for the New Hampshire Division of Motor Vehicles.

Tholl, who has been a police officer for 35 years, said he still gets frustrated when he arrests drunken drivers, especially repeat offenders like Foss.

"There is still a public acceptance of alcohol use and overindulgence, especially in children," said Tholl, who currently serves as the part-time police chief in Dalton.

Once a judge orders a device installed on a person's vehicle, the offender must contact one of the two vendors permitted by the state, Consumer Safety Technology or Draeger Safety Diagnostics, for installation. The cost to have one installed and maintained, which is paid for by the offender, is about $50 a month, according to Tholl.

About 45 states have a law on the books mandating or allowing judges to force drunken drivers to use ignition interlock devices.

In Massachusetts, offenders with two or more convictions for drunken or drugged driving must use the device. Drivers whose licenses were suspended for five years or more due to refusing a chemical test also must use it.

Though these devices will help decrease the number of repeat offenders on the road, Tholl said, more needs to be done by the state to decrease drunken-driver convictions.

More important than tougher laws, Tholl said, is the need for the state to increase the availability of alcohol- and drug-treatment centers.

"If you get tough and don't have rehab, we're just wasting our time," Welch said. "How are you going to prevent them from driving whether they have a license or not?"

Convicted drunken drivers are sent through a 28-day alcohol-treatment program, but Tholl said the courts have no way to determine if a person is completely rehabilitated. Often treatment centers recommend more rehabilitation for aggravated or repeat offenders, but the courts don't know if they actually follow through with it.

"There aren't enough probation officers, so you can't make it a condition of conviction because there's no way to follow up," he said.

There's also the problem of who would pay for the rehabilitation, Tholl said.

Welch said putting repeat offenders in jail would not solve the problem. In fact, that strategy would create new problems, he said.

"If they're the primary breadwinner of their family, they're going on welfare, which is another cost to the taxpayer," Welch said.

To see this story in its original context, click here.