Thursday, December 7, 2017

My nephew, Noah Hayes Shuler, gets nailed for driving 88 mph in a 60 zone, but his father (my brother-lawyer David Shuler) is rushing to his defense in Missouri


Noah Hayes Shuler
(From jewellcardinals.com)
Another of my nephews is in trouble with the law here in the Heartland. This time, it's Noah Hayes Shuler, the oldest son of my brother-lawyer (David Shuler) and his wife (Gina Hayes Shuler).

According to public records, a Missouri state trooper clocked Noah driving up to 88 mph in a 60 mph zone on May 22, 2017. Noah is charged with Exceeding Posted Speed Limit (Exceeded By 20 - 25 mph) {Misdemeanor B RSMo: 304.010}.

The statute includes the following language:

11. Any person violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a class C misdemeanor, unless such person was exceeding the posted speed limit by twenty miles per hour or more then it is a class B misdemeanor.

Class B misdemeanors in Missouri include driving while intoxicated and first-degree trespassing, and they carry a possible punishment of up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.

Noah is an 18-year-old freshman at William Jewell College, a liberal-arts school, in Liberty, MO, where he plays on the soccer team. He graduated in 2017 from Greenwood Laboratory School, a private school associated with Missouri State University in Springfield.

Noah's encounter with the law happened at 1:43 a.m., as he was driving at a high rate of speed on U.S. 65, north of Evans Road, which leads into the Millwood golf-course community, where his family lives in a house appraised at $631,300. The residence is part of $1.162 million in real estate that David and Gina Shuler own in Greene County.

Here is Trooper E. Mueller's description of the incident, from a traffic ticket. (See 1731-TR01863 - ST V NOAH HAYES SHULER at case.net.)

Exceeded posted speed limit (exceeded by 20-25 miles per hour). FR radar same, pass test at 0147 hours. OBSV as vehicle passed patrol car and then rapidly increased speed, to as fast as 88 just S/O Battlefield and into 55 MPH zone. Patrol cruise set at 60 MPH. "I was supposed to be home at 0130."


Driving 85, with posted speed limit of 60

US-65 SB N/O Evans Rd.

Noah's excuse to the trooper apparently was that he was supposed to be home by 1:30 a.m., and he was running about 15 minutes late. Hmmm . . .

David Shuler
In his freshman soccer season at William Jewell, Noah played in one match, for four minutes. The team had a 3-14 record under Coach Garrett Jahn. (Yes, Noah's name is misspelled as "Schuler" on the team roster. I've been dealing with that my whole life, and I guess he will be, too. In the digital age, you'd think someone could manage to make that easy correction.)

The traffic incident occurred in May, but the case docket shows it did not become a court case until Sept. 28. The docket shows that Noah entered a plea of not guilty, and his father entered an appearance on his behalf on Nov. 3.

An arraignment is set for 9 a.m. on Dec. 19.

We sought comment from David Shuler, and he responded with some pretty interesting words.

(To be continued)



74 comments:

Anonymous said...

Proving once again, Roger, that you are in serious need of help.

legalschnauzer said...

@6:41 --

You engage in "blaming the messenger" much? You know, I'd think maybe the kid driving 88 mph might need a little help. Maybe the parents who can't teach him right from wrong, and help turn him into a menace on the highway, could use some help.

The people he eventually cripples or kills will really need some help. But you probably don't care about that.

Anonymous said...

I'd say 28 mph over the speed limit is just a tad too fast.

Anonymous said...

The kid plays soccer? Maybe he should take up NASCAR.

Anonymous said...

@6:41 --

You'd enjoy facing this kid on the highway? Maybe you will enjoy seeing the wreckage and the body parts being scraped off the road when he runs into somebody the next time. That should be fun.

Anonymous said...

Looks like he was driving a 2015 Subaru Crosstrek. Those will set you back $20,000 to $25,000.
Must be in the privileged class. Maybe he needs to go shoot an elephant -- just for fun.

Anonymous said...

@6:41 --

You're actually defending someone driving 88 mph in the middle of the night? You have no concern about public safety? You sound like a real winner.

Anonymous said...

William Jewell College must be a great place to learn ethics and citizenship.

legalschnauzer said...

To be fair to the college, this happened about three months before he enrolled. Can't blame it on them, although it might not be past my brother to try.

Anonymous said...

Interesting that this is the equivalent of a DUI. It should be; extremely dangerous.

Anonymous said...

@9:04 --

Will look great on the young man's record.

Anonymous said...

Roger Shuler, "Investigative Journalist"

legalschnauzer said...

@9:14 --

You think stories re: public safety don't matter? Is that because you are a DUIer yourself? We'll see if your tune changes when you are scraped up off the highway someday from running into a Noah Shuler type with car keys and a massive sense of entitlement.

Anonymous said...

Plenty of other public safety stories out there. Even ones that illustrate the actual consequences you feign to care about. But no, out of everything, you choose your nephew.

Anonymous said...

You are a vindictive creeper, aren't you.

YOur motive here is clear to any outside observer - to embarrass your family who you believe has crossed you and abandoned you.

Your young relative's speeding ticket/curfew race is only of interest to you as a means of retribution. You are an awful, awful, crazy person who picks on kids and their youthful indiscretions to get revenge.

No wonder you've been written off by everyone who ever tried to help you.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, "public safety" is not your motive, revenge is.

If it's a matter of public concern, you are clearly motivated in spreading the story for self-serving reasons.

TRACY IRELAND said...

Hey anonymous what is your problem? Hater?

legalschnauzer said...

@9:38 --

So, you're a mind reader? Can you point to anything that is inaccurate in the story or anything that suggests this kind of wild speeding isn't a public safety issue? I didn't think so. Guess that's why changing the subject is an attractive option for you.

legalschnauzer said...

@9:37 --

We've got some wonderful people helping us. And I have a record of helping others. I've gotten two innocent people out of jail. You ever done that? Doubt it. Whoever has written us off probably was not really trying to help us.

As for my family, I'd say they are doing a pretty good job of embarrassing themselves. They don't need help from me.

legalschnauzer said...

@9:36 --

Send me a public-safety story of your choosing, and I will be happy to report on it. It needs to be accurate and backed up by public documents, as this story is.

I look forward to receiving your information.

BTW, I happen to know of a Missouri lawyer with a DUI on his record, for which he got two years of probation. You will be reading about that shortly, and he's not related to me in any way.

Anonymous said...

Gee, how pitiful that some people can only attack the messenger. The story is important and accurate, so these thugs have nothing else to do. Certainly can't lay blame on the kid -- or the parents who enable him.

Some of these commenters must be Trump voters.

Anonymous said...

Let me guess, your brother is a tough on crime Republican.

legalschnauzer said...

@11:04 --

He's a Republican. The tough on crime part probably applies to the families of other people.

Anonymous said...

@9:37 --

You're borrowing the old "youthful indiscretions" line? How pathetic. Trying using that line on the families of those who have lost loved ones to reckless drivers.

Roger's Scrotum is Hairy said...

"inspires one couple's fight against injustice."

please change your tagline--it's simply not true.

legalschnauzer said...

@11:26 --

Classy title you have chosen for yourself. Certainly a good way to be taken seriously. I'll show you more respect than you deserve and ask this: How does this post make our tagline not true.

You suggest ignoring stories like this, and that somehow serves justice?

Anonymous said...

Maybe the folks at William Jewell College need to learn about this.

Anonymous said...

Is there some way the well meaning and gullible can contribute to this young man's legal defense? Or to help him to maintain an adequate lifestyle? It would be sad to if he had to miss any car payments or if any of his planned holiday and spring vacations are cancelled because of the hard times that may be affecting his personal finances due to his youthful indescretion with respect to obeying the traffic laws.

Anonymous said...

atta boy Roger. Takes this family down to the ground.

legalschnauzer said...

@11:47 --

Maybe they do. The president's name is Dr. Elizabeth MacLeod Walls. Her contact info:


(816) 415-5026 | macleodwallse@william.jewell.edu

legalschnauzer said...

@11:50 --

You might be surprised to learn that Noah Shuler was the one clocked at 88 mph, not me.

Anonymous said...

"Youthful indiscretion," my ass. A youthful indiscretion is soaping someone's window or papering a tree. Driving 88 in the middle the night ain't no "youthful indiscretion."

Anonymous said...

@11:50 --
Don't you think Noah and his family are doing a pretty good job of taking themselves down to the ground? If somebody doesn't teach Noah a thing or two about accountability, he's going to be putting people "under ground."

Anonymous said...

Look at you threatening to contact his college over a speeding ticket. Pathetic.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, no one needs your help to "teach accountability" to anyone, except as an object lesson of attempting to avoid it.

Anonymous said...

If this happened in May, why is there just now an arraignment in December?

legalschnauzer said...

@12:13 --

My best guess is that somebody didn't tell his parents, and they only found out when something appeared in the mail -- perhaps a notice about a court appearance.

Anonymous said...

A question for Neanderthals:

Who drove 88, Noah Shuler or Roger Shuler? Who put lives at risk, Noah Shuler or Roger Shuler?

Try answering those questions with a straight face, if you can.

legalschnauzer said...

@12:08 (No. 2)

Your anonymous trolling says a lot about your view of accountability.

legalschnauzer said...

@12:08 (No. 1)

Yep, a "speeding ticket" that is the legal equivalent of a DUI. Noticed you left that little part out.

Anonymous said...

@12:08 --

Speaking of accountability, are you and Noah (and David) aware that people can pay speeding tickets and make them go away? Had this been done five months ago, I imagine this story never sees the light of day. By Noah hiding it from his parents (probably), and his parents choosing to take it to court because daddy is a lawyer with connections, the David Shuler family brought this on themselves.

Of course, it's easier for lazy butts like you to blame this on LS. Noah and David might try looking at their own actions, if they are capable of that.

Anonymous said...

Is this the same brother who is a millionaire, but went to GoFundMe to con people into paying for his disabled son's therapy?

legalschnauzer said...

Actually, I think his wife mostly did the GFM thing, but yes, it's the same bunch.

Anonymous said...

At least his car payments and his parent’s house payments are probably getting paid. At least one Shuler is not a deadbeat.

Anonymous said...

Brought what on themselves, one of Roger's creepy revenge posts? This is how he vents his rage, and it's super weird and ugly. Fortunately for his targets the author is more likely to bring them sympathy than any other consequence.

There are lots of good reasons to challenge a ticket in court. Chances are good it will be reduced, and/or worked off with time served in court and driving school.

A kid racing home from curfew got caught, FILM AT ELEVEN. or not. But Roger's weird fixation with embarrassing others who have crossed him (or are related to people who have crossed him) is the real story.

legalschnauzer said...

@1:17 --

See if you can answer the question at 12:16. I doubt you have the integrity to do it, but give it a shot. What are your answers?

BTW, no one's saying Noah doesn't have the right to challenge the ticket in court. But as a commenter above notes, that increases the chance of news coverage. So those who bitch about that . . . well, David and Noah brought this on themselves, as noted. If this had been paid months ago, I never would have noticed the case.

BTW, funny that you automatically buy the curfew story. Buying such a cockamamie story -- now, that's super weird and ugly.

Just for laughs, have to bring this up: You say it will be worked off for "time served." Time served where, doing what? You are clueless about the court process, and yet you feel compelled to comment on the subject. CREEPY.

Anonymous said...

@1:17 --

You refer to this as a "revenge" post. You seem to be admitting that Mr. and Mrs. Schnauzer have been screwed over -- a lot. After all, it wouldn't be a "revenge" post if Mr. and Mrs. Schnauzer didn't have a reason to seek revenge, right? Plus, you seem to be admitting that David Shuler played a significant role in that screw job. Why else, in your view, would Mr. Schnauzer write a "revenge" post about David's son?

Gee, it couldn't be because the son actually did exceed the speed limit by more than 25 mph, could it?

As a long-time reader of this blog, I appreciate you admitting that Roger and Carol have, in fact, been wronged. I've known that for a long time. Glad to see you recognize it, too.

legalschnauzer said...

@1:09 --

For the record, my car is paid off -- has been for years. And my housing expenses are paid, right up to the minute. On top of that, Carol and I probably have paid more in state and federal taxes than you can even dream of.

Want to try another wise-ass tactic?

Anonymous said...

How does one go about defending a driver who was going 88 mph in a 60 zone?

legalschnauzer said...

@1:50 --

Good question. I'm not an expert on this, but I can think of a strategy or two:

(1) Hope and pray the state trooper doesn't show up on trial date. My understanding is that happens a lot in speeding-ticket cases. It might not happen, though, in one this severe;

(2) Try to make the trooper look like a dope who can't count to 10 and wipe his own fanny at the same time. I'm sure the trooper will appreciate that.

(3) If one has the resources, pay the trooper not to appear, or offer a little something under the table for the judge. I'm sure both of those have been known to produce fantastic results.

Anonymous said...

I keep waiting for someone to attack the accuracy of Roger's post. No one has even tried. Says a lot about certain commenters.

legalschnauzer said...

@1:58 --

Thanks for your comment. The ticket is sitting right there at the end of the post, so I'm not sure what one could attack with the post itself. That's probably why it's convenient to attack the messenger. That strategy is Trumpian -- and creepy.

Anonymous said...

"One sign of being mentally ill is that figures of speech are taken literally. "Time served in traffic court" is a sentence regularly handed out by judges who wish to be lenient with someone caught committing an infraction. That is, they dismiss the charges in part or altogether recognizing that the process (lost time at work or school or other inconveniece, having to wait through numerous other cases, prostrate oneself before the court etc etc is punishment. You clearly did not get the joke.

A serious moving violation is not usually waved away like that but if there is no adverse testimony, or evidence is proved unreliable, the charge might be dismissed. If there is reason to be merciful, such as an otherwise clean driving record and no one hurt, driving school with dismissal down the road is possible.

Anonymous said...

You had to scrounge around for a photo. Honestly, what purpose does an image serve? It just makes you look evil to dig up photos of your family.

BTW, if "wouldn't be surprised" is the journalistic standard to which you adhere, I'll just add I wouldn't be surprised if your contact with your brother about this story comprised some form of extortion.

I've no specific information that it did, but I wouldn't be surprised at all.

legalschnauzer said...

@2:20 --

Sounds like you've spent a lot of time in traffic court. I haven't, so I don't get those inside jokes. Also, I don't see driving 88 mph as a joke, so maybe I don't find traffic offenses as amusing as you do.

legalschnauzer said...

@2:23 --

You sure seem to be annoyed about the idea of Doug Jones being involved in our eviction. I wonder why that is. This must be your 3rd or 4th comment on the subject. Almost sounds like you think it's true. I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case.

legalschnauzer said...

@2:23 --

Yep, I had to scrounge around for a photo. It's straight from the college Web site. Real hard to find.

Anonymous said...

Maybe you are right but I doubt it. Working for UAB for 20 years means you made about what I make in a year or two. I am glad you are up to date on your rent. Maybe you finally learned your lesson. I am proud of you. Keep up the improvement.

legalschnauzer said...

You are full of shit, and I know it. Our house note in Birmingham was paid on time every month for 23 years. We would have gotten back on time if I had not been thrown in jail. We had two cars, both paid for. Everything inside our house was paid for. Our rent was timely paid when we were evicted in Missouri.

I've probably forgotten more than you will ever know about paying things on time. So take your "lesson" and jam it up your ass. And just so you know, I couldn't care less about pride from a prick like you.

Why don't you contact me directly, and ID yourself, and we'll discuss this directly -- you arrogant, consdescending asshat. While I'm at it, shove a corn cob up your butt.

legalschnauzer said...

Memo to @3:47 --

My phone no. is (205) 381-5673

My email is rshuler3156@gmail.com

Contact me and ID yourself, and I will be happy to discuss.

Otherwise, you are a prick, an asshat, and a coward. You also have no clue what you are talking about. But we both know you don't have the balls to talk under your real name. Typical puss.

To be honest, I don't need your ID. I know your name, and I know your address. Had a digital footprint for a long time. But go ahead and call me anyway, loser.

Anonymous said...

@1:09 . . .
Why the comments about house payments and rent payments? What does that have to do with the subject of this post? Was Noah Shuler clocked at 88 mph or not? Is his daddy going to try to get him off the hook or not? Have daddy and mommy raised a spoiled brat, who has no respect for the safety of others?

Maybe Noah will slam into you next time and crush your head against the windshield like a grape. Won't that be fun?

Why are you tap dancing around the subject? It doesn't fit your agenda? And what is your agenda -- breaking out the knee pads for wealthy lawyers and their wayward spawn?

Anonymous said...

I find it interesting that when the police go after Roger, they are always wrong, but when it's his nephew, everybody suddenly believe the officer did everything right. Perhaps it wasn't even the nephew driving, but a friend who knew his license number and information. It wouldn't be the first time. Maybe that is why he didn't tell his parents, since he would not have know about the ticket.

@1:35 You do realize that if someone believes you have wronged them, even if you haven't, they may seek revenge on you. It doesn't confirm anything other than, given the information at hand, this post appears that Roger is lashing out at his brother's family for perceived wrongdoings.

legalschnauzer said...

@7:26 --

I find it interesting that a supposed adult could write such a shallow, ignorant comment:

(1) I haven't just said police were wrong in cases involving Carol or me; I've shown exactly how they were wrong, under the law. Please do this for us: examine (a) My arrest in Shelby County; (b) Our eviction in Missouri; and (c) the breaking of Carol's arm in MO. Then, tell us how cops acted lawfully in those three case. Can't wait to read the results of your research. You apparently believe cops acted lawfully, so show us how.

(2) This post doesn't say anything about whether the officer did everything right. It describes information in the ticket about the incident, which is pretty much all we have to go on at the moment. If it's proven the trooper screwed up, and Noah comes away not guilty, I will report that.

(3) Your excuse about Noah not being the driver is about as nutty as anything I've ever read. Someone else is going to have Noah's driver's license, his registration, his insurance papers, they confiscated his vehicle, and they were driving directly toward Noah's house. Sorry, but it sounds like you've had a few nips or you are way "around the bend," in some fashion.

(4) You and others seem to ignore the fact that I defended my other nephew, Blake Shuler, in a case where he was the victim of an unlawful search. David Shuler acted as Blake's lawyer, but there is no evidence that he did a thing on the Fourth Amendment violation. Blake has a criminal record, thanks to David's inaction, and it's the result of police misconduct that wasn't challenged.


https://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2017/07/my-nephew-blake-m-shuler-faced-harsh.html

Anonymous said...

Actually, no where on the ticket does it say that a license was presented. So just his information would have been enough to convince an officer that he was Noah. No where does it say who the vehicle is registered to on the ticket. Again you are assuming it was Noah or his parent's vehicle. Heck, for all I know, it could have been Doug Jones behind the wheel, framing another Shuler.

Would you have reported on Blake's case had it not been your nephew? I haven't seen anything to lead me to believe you would.

legalschnauzer said...

@6:27 --

Actually, you need to adjust your glasses. The driver's license number is on the ticket -- big as life. That means a license was presented, or the trooper reached in the driver's pocket and yanked it out. I'm not assuming anything. The driver's license obviously was presented, and it included the name and address and photo of Noah Shuler. Now, under those circumstances, why would anyone think the driver was Noah Shuler. Can't imagine.

David Shuler was given an opportunity to comment, and even he made no mention of the driver not being Noah. You apparently are the only lunatic who has considered that. But let me guess . . . you think I am the paranoid, conspiratorial type. Hah!

You sure seem obsessed with Doug Jones, especially since I noted that I would be zero surprised to learn he was involved in our unlawful eviction that led to Carol's broken arm. Not sure why I would think that since it's clear Jones was involved in cheating me out of my job at UAB. Probably never occurred to you that I might know just a bit more about this stuff than you do.

As to what you may or may not believe, I don't give a loose stool about either.

Anonymous said...

The license number appearing on the ticket doesn't prove that the license was presented. If a driver doesn't have their license in their possession, but can give the officer all of their information from memory, ie: license number, social, date of birth etc., the officer could write that information on the ticket. I am not saying that Noah wasn't the driver, but I am saying there are other possibilities. You should look at other possibilities before saying that it was obviously Noah, because he obviously gave his drivers license to the officer. You are making summations and I thought journalism is about the facts.

legalschnauzer said...

You think some other person is going to remember Noah's driver's license number, plus all of his other info from memory? Heck, most people don't know their own driver's license number, much less someone else's.

You are trying to press the notion that the driver was someone other than Noah, and this is the third or fourth time you've done it. I have to wonder about your agenda because you sound like you are out of your gourd.

Journalism is about facts, and the post presents the facts as they exist on a public document, the traffic ticket. Journalism is a bit like the law in that you look in other directions if you see "probable cause" to believe there might be some alternative explanation for things. I see no such "probable cause" at this point. If I do see it, I will look into it. For now, I see no reason to believe the driver was anyone other than Noah Hayes Shuler.

BTW, your scenario makes no sense as a matter of law. Someone who tries to reel off all this information by memory, but cannot present any of the documents to the cop, is likely to have additional charges -- driving without a license, etc.

Anonymous said...

So all public documents contain facts? Is that your position as a journalist?

legalschnauzer said...

I've run numerous public documents that don't contain facts, and I've shown exactly how they are off target. A classic example are the police narratives in the case involving my wife, Carol.

In a speeding case, about all we have at the moment is the ticket. Can you show how that is not accurate? Would you suggest I check the Dead Sea Scrolls? Even you claimed you don't seriously doubt that Noah was the driver, so why do you keep harping on the subject?

BTW, do you care about clear police misconduct in Carol's case (and others), or do you care only about Noah's situation?

Anonymous said...

Just seeing what your guiding principles are, that's all. So some public documents contain facts, and some don't. Gotcha. And what do you care what I care about?

legalschnauzer said...

Some public documents contain information about events I witnessed, so I know they contain inaccurate information. I wasn't present for Noah's speeding incident, so for now, all I have to go on is the speeding ticket. I gave Noah's attorney a chance to comment, and he chose not to. He said nothing about the driver being anyone other than Noah. Other than in your fantasy world, I'm not aware of anyone who doubts the driver was Noah Hayes Shuler. If you know of facts pointing in that direction, feel free to let me know.

As for your final point, you can ask me questions, but I can't ask any of you? That sounds like a real healthy perspective on things. Why so defensive?

Anonymous said...

I wasn't present at Carol's arrest. All I have to go on is public documents and what you say. What you say is generally suspect. That's the reputation you have anyway. Fact.

I'm not defensive at all. Just reasoning with you as much as you can handle. Some of my comments make it through. Some are rejected, and you claim to your reading public that they are trash, bathroom stall comments, not worthy of exposure. But in Fact, all are an attempt to reason with you. You just can't handle certain facts and don't want them exposed to your other readers. Fact.

Anonymous said...

But you'll allow that what the officer "witnessed" or assessed could be unreliable?
You have such a strange ability to defy your own logic.

legalschnauzer said...

"What you say is generally suspect. That's the reputation you have anyway. Fact."

You're so full of feces that it's coming out your ears. The above statement is based on "logic" and "reason," in your fantasy world.

You can't even see how weak and stupid you are. You base your opinion of someone on "the reputation you have." Hah, and you consider that "fact"! What a joke. You really have the "courage" of your convictions. You are so weak minded you can't form your own opinions.

Go back to fantasizing about the driver of Noah's vehicle and consult your comic books for the outcome on that one. That's pretty much your speed.