BREAKING: Jennifer Wexton’s 1999 Arrest

PAUL20REVERE20ANIMATED

Democratic state sen. candidate Jennifer Wexton, who is running in Tuesday’s special election for the 33rd Dist., was allegedly arrested in the City of Alexandria in 1999.  (Her parents live in Alexandria and she used to live there.)  A Freedom of Information Act request for details of the case was filed on Monday and the city has 3-5 business days to comply.

Wexton, who was not yet married so the arrest is under her maiden name of Jennifer Lynn Tosini, had the original charge reduced to reckless driving.  While the city has stated that some records older than ten years have been destroyed, the FOIA request would still produce a mug shot, what the original charge in the case was, and the results of any Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) tests that were performed.

More on this once the City of Alexandria produces the documents requested.

Makes you wonder if someone might have been partying like it was 1999…

UPDATE 1:

If something is just reduced to reckless driving, the original charge had to be pretty bad given the definition of it in the Virginia Code and the penalties levied.

§ 46.2-852. Reckless driving; general rule.

Irrespective of the maximum speeds permitted by law, any person who drives a vehicle on any highway recklessly or at a speed or in a manner so as to endanger the life, limb, or property of any person shall be guilty of reckless driving.

(Code 1950, § 46-208; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-189; 1983, c. 380; 1989, c. 727.)

§ 46.2-868. Reckless driving; penalties.

A. Every person convicted of reckless driving under the provisions of this article is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

B. Every person convicted of reckless driving under the provisions of this article who, when he committed the offense, (i) was driving without a valid operator’s license due to a suspension or revocation for a moving violation and, (ii) as the sole and proximate result of his reckless driving, caused the death of another, is guilty of a Class 6 felony.

C. The punishment for every person convicted of reckless driving under the provisions of this article who, when he committed the offense, was in violation of § 46.2-1078.1 shall include a mandatory minimum fine of $250.

(Code 1950, § 46-210; 1950, p. 691; 1952, Ex. Sess., c. 16; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-192; 1962, c. 302; 1970, c. 337; 1980, cc. 29, 221; 1989, c. 727; 2004, c. 349; 2013, cc. 752, 790.)

UPDATE 2:

Here’s information on the case:

Jennifer Lynn Tosini
578-98-xxxx
Virginia

Case Number: 510GT9900234300

Offenses:
Offense #1
Offense Date: 1/28/1999
Court Description: Alexandria General District Court
Court Case Number: 510GT9900234300
Court Offense: Reckless Driving ACC
Court Disposition Date: 3/17/1999


27 thoughts on “BREAKING: Jennifer Wexton’s 1999 Arrest

  1. Obviously, this normally means that the original charge was DWI.

    Reckless driving is a crime in Virginia, a misdemeanor. So no one would plead DOWN to a reckless driving charge unless the original charge were either a DWI or perhaps vehicular manslaughter from a death in an accident. On the other hand, it may indicate some weakness in being able to prove the original charge.

  2. Didn’t “W” also have something of that sort?

    Such diligent digging, Thor. Congratulations.
    1999 to 2014 / That’s fifteen years. Guess your hammer has the power of wet noodle.

    Wouldn’t a mug shot just do the trick?!?!

  3. I am not a fan of Wexton, but let’s hold off if it is only “allegedly”. And Sulawesi, I would imagine that W’s case would have been a bigger issue for you than Wexton. What’s good for the goose ought to be good for the gander. In any event, if there is an actual mug shot, well, that would be just dandy wouldn’t it? But, as I recall, we are supposed to hold our judgement and give her the benefit of the doubt. She is a Democrat and supports abortion after all (it’s her primary campaign theme).

    1. As I understand it, there is a conviction, so legally “allegedly” is not needed. However, until I see proof that there was arrest and a conviction (which is apparently on Lexis-Nexis), we will continue to use “allegedly” here when referring to this matter.

    2. FYI – I thought, at the time, that it was a stupid thing to bring up against “W”.
      Don’t believe traffic tickets that were “earned” 15 or more years ago, have any
      bearing on the person’s present abilities to run for office.
      It would be different, if there had been a string of DUI/DWIs.

    3. “supports abortion”
      Correction: She supports the RIGHTS OF WOMEN to have an abortion.
      There’s a difference! Many women who do not approve of abortion
      DO still approve of the RIGHT to have one. The Supreme Court you know,
      that pesky institution.

  4. Seems perfectly reasonable. However, assuming just for the moment that there IS something there — will anyone bother to report it? Blogging about it is one thing, but good Lord, look at politicos like Rep. Moran (announcing his retirement today) — served for as long as he wanted, despite his history of violence against people, including his wife. He’s got that “D” next to his name, so it’s his free pass from the Post and others.

  5. Jennifer Wexton used to be: Jennifer Lynn Tosini

    From a Lexus Nexus search …
    Jennifer Lynn Tosini
    578-98-xxxx
    Virginia

    Case Number: 510GT9900234300

    Offenses:
    Offense #1
    Offense Date: 1/28/1999
    Court Description: Alexandria General District Court
    Court Case Number: 510GT9900234300
    Court Offense: Reckless Driving ACC
    Court Disposition Date: 3/17/1999

  6. Two questions, what is reckless driving ACC? Is that different than a Reckless driving charge without the letters? And what’s the difference between a DUI and a DWI? Which one was she charged with?

    1. Great digging folks.

      As the anonymous poster stated, the ACC of “reckless driving ACC” most likely means there was an accident involved.

      If there was injury a Circuit Court case was likely filed, and should be identified.

  7. So, as a matter of fact, Killing an unborn baby (cancelling out that unborn’s rights) is now a woman’s right?? Great.

  8. And this conjecture is relevant because? If the best line of attack you have is a reckless driving conviction that’s pretty sad. Why not focus on policy, or anything productive for that matter. It’s a sad commentary on the strength of Whitbeck’s campaign if this is the best he can muster up. Maybe that exclusionary nominating process wasn’t such a good idea after all…lets just kiss this seat goodbye and hopefully learn a lesson (don’t worry-I’m fully away that reason/rationality is a lost art in the 33rd).

  9. Typo. I meant to say lost art. Regardless, to paraphrase from Dorothy Parker: Candy is dandy but liquor is quicker!

  10. Anonymous @ Monday the 20th…. That’s not the worst we got. The woman allowed an ACTUAL rapist to walk for time served after he RAPED a woman 4 TIMES IN A 24 HOUR SPAN…..and then the charge was a mere “aggravated assault”.
    How do you think the woman who was raped felt about that?? Like there was a prosecutorial “war” on her????

    1. Sadly, rape is an exceedingly difficult charge to prove as it is incredibly taxing for most complaining witnesses, a.k.a. victims. It really is a punitive process for any victim of violence, but particularly so regarding sexual assault cases.
      You cannot actually believe that any woman would happily abandon the prosecution of a rapist if she had a viable alternative? I can assure you that Ms. Wexton would prefer to put rapists UNDER the jail if she’d had her ‘druthers. Okay, maybe that “under the jail”part’s just me–but she has made it utterly clear that she understands the difficulties encountered by rape victims, not all of whom are equal to the challenges presented by criminal prosecution.

Comments are closed.