AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF VERMONT ADDISON County S.S.
NOW COMES Edward E. James (officer), officiant, being duly sworn and on oath, deposes and says he has probable cause to believe that BARBARA E. FAGAN (defendant) has committed the offense of Driving While Intoxicated, a violation of Title 23, Vermont Statues Annotated §1201.
On January 17, 1979 the above named officer was advised of an auto accident on Route 7, town of New Haven, and the time was approximately 7:20 P.M.. At the time I was notified the added information was given to me that it was an accident where one of the vehicles had failed to stop after the collision.
When I arrived and spoke with the operator of the vehicle that had been struck, he reported that he believed the car was a Ford product and it was traveling north.
The above named Trooper gave the information to Middlebury barracks to broadcast to other Troopers plus the Vergennes Police Department in as much as it was felt that the vehicle had to be relatively close due to the short time having been involved in reporting the accident.
Trooper Otis reported to me via radio that he had found a vehicle he believed to possibly have been the vehicle in question. He further advised that the vehicle was off the road, west side of U.S. Route 7, across from Milly’s Restaurant.
The operator of the vehicle that had been struck accompanied me and I went to that location in New Haven where the vehicle was. I found that the operator was in fact the Defendant by her driver's license and vehicle registration she produced. She made a voluntary statement to me that her car had been struck down the road a short ways.
I observed her fall down in the snow twice plus when walking across U.S. Route 7 saw that her walk was unsteady. There was the odor of an intoxicant on her breath when she passed close to me and when she sat inside my cruiser with me, it was more apparent. Her speech was thick and she seemed to need time to think when she was talking to me.
I advised her of her rights and told her that I was going to request her to submit to a breath test and that I would like to go to Vergennes Police Department office in Vergennes. She agreed to that.
While at the Vergennes Police Department office, I informed her of the implied consent law and she requested to contact her attorney in Burlington. This was done and when I spoke with him after the Defendant he had told me that she was going to take the breath test. After talking with her attorney I again asked the Defendant herself if she wished to take the breath test; she told me Yes. At that time the breath sample was collected.
After having advised the Defendant of her rights to any attorney I asked if she had drunk anything since the accident she was involved in and she said No. I checked her vehicle and found damage to it.
There certainly appears to this Officer to be cause to issue a warrant for the Defendant for driving while intoxicated, and it is requested that same be issued at this time.
|
Commentary:
This page shows the public documents for one of the three known Barbara Kurth DUIs that she pled guilty to. These and the other two sets of DUI documentation revealed at this website counter Barbara Kurth's statements denying DUI convictions. One example of such denial would be her statement in the May 16, 1998 Palm Beach Post where she is quoted as saying, "I wasn't convicted of any kind of driving under the influence. They won't have convictions. As usual, they don't have the documents proving anything they are saying."
While Stephen Fagan's grave concern for the children's safety was based on certain knowledge of Barbara Kurth's drinking problem, the DUI documentation was not available to him at the time of the custody case, and the court ignored the testimony of Kurth's neighbors describing her frequent inebriation. The so-called investigation ordered by Family Services did not even include speaking with the three neighbors who witnessed the abuse and called the police.
In one DUI incident Kurth's blood alcohol level was .25, over three times today's legal limit, while driving with the children, then ages one and four. Had Stephen Fagan not chosen to take extraordinary action, the children would have likely continued to be subject to such extreme danger, with the high potential for disastrous results. Kurth told the court she did not have a drinking problem in spite of these three convictions which she kept secret and which Stephen did not know about at that time. The high blood alcohol levels of the DUIs also underline the baselessness of the narcolepsy defense.
According to Kurth neighbor Helenmary Wilk's affidavit regarding neglect and intoxication, she also states that "Barbara told me that her husband, Warren Waugh, was leaving for California, that she had his ticket, and that she intended to join him there with the children." If Stephen Fagan had not acted before Kurth left with the children, he feared that the opportunity to protect the children from tragedy would have been lost.