Co worker DWI

[Islander]

But, I'm moreover a civil rights activist. I believe more in the constitution, and the right to move about this great land free of harassment. And I believe, while he was drunk, a simple speeding ticket is not Probable Cause to continue with DWI enforcement investigation. Unless there are mitigating circumstances, police officers stop speeders all the time and do not issue DWI enforcement actions. By the mere time of day, or day of week, is not adaquate enough to continue enforcement of DWI, for merely a speeding ticket.

If a police officer stops a speeder and notices that he's "completely trashed", how and why would he ignore that? Freedom of movement is a great right, but if a person puts himself and others at great risk in the course of exercising that right, he should no longer use that means of movement and instead take a bus or taxi, where he's less of a danger to himself and others.

Thursday night he was coming home from a downtown at 1:00 in the morning and was stopped for speeding. Blew a .013 on the breathalizer. Completely trashed.

As well, at that time of night, there are lots of people trying to make it home from bars in varying states of drunkenness and the police are likely looking for any signs of impairment. This guy was speeding. We don't know if that was the only thing about his driving that drew the officer's attention.

[colterphoto1]

Yeah go ahead and let em go on the first offense.

Maybe he kills your Mother or child on his second offense, you ok with that?

Being from foreign soil is no excuse either- you're in America- LEARN ENGLISH and play by the rules.

[dtel]

I need a bumper sticker like that,

" You're in America- LEARN ENGLISH and play by the rules "

[Travis In Austin]

If he blew above the limit, then its done. You can plead what you want but the court will order your priviledge to drive gone for a year and he should feel lucky he didn't kill anybody or himself. A major rethink process is in order on how to handle drinking and move on logically from there, and he has his whole life is in front of him and yes still have a sense of humor.

Not if I'm his lawyer he's not done, and not if he gets someone in his area who knows what he's doing. Thank god for the right to a jury trial. I had a .12 breath test jury trial today as a matter of fact, two word verdict.

Rack em!

Travis

[Travis In Austin]

But, I'm moreover a civil rights activist. I believe more in the constitution, and the right to move about this great land free of harassment. And I believe, while he was drunk, a simple speeding ticket is not Probable Cause to continue with DWI enforcement investigation. Unless there are mitigating circumstances, police officers stop speeders all the time and do not issue DWI enforcement actions. By the mere time of day, or day of week, is not adaquate enough to continue enforcement of DWI, for merely a speeding ticket.

If a police officer stops a speeder and notices that he's "completely trashed", how and why would he ignore that? Freedom of movement is a great right, but if a person puts himself and others at great risk in the course of exercising that right, he should no longer use that means of movement and instead take a bus or taxi, where he's less of a danger to himself and others.

Thursday night he was coming home from a downtown at 1:00 in the morning and was stopped for speeding. Blew a .013 on the breathalizer. Completely trashed.

As well, at that time of night, there are lots of people trying to make it home from bars in varying states of drunkenness and the police are likely looking for any signs of impairment. This guy was speeding. We don't know if that was the only thing about his driving that drew the officer's attention.

As someone pointed out already the number is probably .13 because you are not trashed at a .013. By way of reference the "legal" limt is .08 in every state now. A .013 is a blip on the radar. Even if the number is .13 it does not mean he was "trashed." There is probably a video of him doing the field soberity tests so that is going to be one way to know.

The number from the Intoxilyzer means NOTHING. It is a machine, purchased by the govt. One of the questions I ask of potential juror's is finish this sentence: If theGovt. bought it, it has to be "blank", now fill in the blank.

It is not specific for alcohol (think about that for a minute), it's has technology less advanced then your microwave (eprom chip), having a fever, or naturaly high body temprature will cause it to read high, chewing on white bread and blowing into it, without any alcohol in your system will cause it to read positive for alcohol, if you are a painter you should never blow because you are going to read positive all day every day, etc., etc. etc.

Don't ever take a number the Govt gives you and assume it is accurate.

All we know about this co-worker, fellow citizen, child of God, is that he was pulled over for speeding and a machine that the Govt bought and maintains spit out a piece of paper that says .13 (or .013) on it. What does language have to do with anything?

Here is the biggest fact of all which you all really have to sit back and consider. The U.S. is the land of the FREE and the home of the brave, right? In Canada they have more rights and more protections on a DWI arrest then we do in the United States. I don't advocate drunk driving one iota, if you are drunk then you should pay.

Islander, you live in the land of the free when it comes to DWI.

Travis

[J.4knee]

"If theGovt. bought it, it has to be "blank", now fill in the blank. "

....and what do you do when they respond with "acquired on a purchase order"?

[Travis In Austin]

I need a bumper sticker like that,

" You're in America- LEARN ENGLISH and play by the rules "

Well now I know for sure that you don't have any real coona$$ in you if you are against drinking in driving.[]

Do you know why the roads are so bad in LA? Because they were one of the last hold outs on passing an open container law and from going to 21 for drinking age. They were willing to turn away fed highway funds.

The reason why they would not pass an open container law (law that makes it illegal for driver or passenger to have an open container of alcohol in the car) and I'm not kidding you, they thought it would destroy cajun culture if they were not allowed to drive from place to place on Sat and Sun a.m. if they didn't have a beer in their hand.

Travis

[Travis In Austin]

LOL, never had that reponse, but something close "on backorder." It is usually along the lines of "over priced, behind schedule, outdated, worthless, useless, etc." I have never had a postive response. Helps if you ask someone who served in the military, or works for the state.

Travis

[Travis In Austin]

Folks usually stop drinking when it causes them enough pain. Hopefully this fellow will get some help. If the court mandates rehap or other measures he would do well to attend and pay attention.

As a great american once said, "the 9 most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

Ronald Reagan (GRHS)

[dtel]

Well now I know for sure that you don't have any real coona$$ in you if you are against drinking in driving.

Well to be honest I have done it plenty, but that was many years ago, now I let someone else drive who has not been drinking or I am the one to drive and everyone else was drinking.

I have to say everything is not nearly as funny when you are the only one not drinking.

Your right about Louisiana, you can pull up to a drive thru daiquiri store and get a gallon of your favorite flavor almost 24 hours a day.

Where we live 30 miles into Mississippi it's a dry county [] but don't think for one second these rednecks aren't drinking especialy at the rate they slide off the road and take out telephone poles around here.

You can go 30 miles in two different directions from here and cross the state line into Louisiana and the first store you come to sells more liquor than gasoline.

[djk]

No one should drive impared.

My grandmother was killed by a drunk driver, so I'm kind of against driving drunk.

Is the legal limit a meaningful number?

NO!

Back when I only weighed 285lbs, two beers would make me woozy, three and I was staggering. Now in Drivers Education they had us calculate how much beer we could drink for out bodyweight and be under the legal limit (was 0.1 back then). The calculations showed I could drink a twelve-pack and still be legal. On the other hand, I could drink an entire fifth of hard stuff and not feel woozy at all (but be at the leagal limit).

For a while I worked with a bunch of boozers. They would get caught in a minor trafic violation (as this guy did). If was not their driving skills, but their bad license-plate light that got them stopped. Their average blood levels were around 0.28%!!! One guy got stopped and blew a 0.4%!!! (you're supposed to pass out at 0.3% and be dead at 0.4%) Even though he stayed in jail for the 48hrs (hardly anyone does the whole time), they wouldn't let him leave until he was under 0.1% (which meant he was in until Tuesday, after being picked up on Saturday).

That guy probably got up with a level of more that 0.1% every day. He couldn't concentrate enough to work until he had an entire fifth! It would have been interesting to see what his level was at this point.

After I was too trashed to walk after three beers, I would have one of these guys drive me home (because they could drive better than I could).

0.08% is a good number for generating revenue. I don't see the correlation with driving skills.

They fired a guy at work for being over 0.02%! He came in on a Saturday morning for some overtime.

[Travis In Austin]

What is 'winnable' about putting a drunk behind the wheel again? This guy needs help, not a better attorney.

You don't know this guy was drunk. If he blew a .013, which I doubt, he is not drunk, it's less than an half a beer. If it is a .13 it still means nothing, that number means nothing without knowing about 100 other things. Does he have GERDS, was he around solvents in the last 24 hours, when was the machine calibrated, serviced, was any rf present during the test, was he running a fever, what dental work does he have in his mouth, etc., etc. He drove home after drinking, I didn't see anything about the number of drinks he had, over what period of time, what he ate, when, etc., etc. All we know right now is that he was pulled over for speeding, blew in a device that won out on a low bid, and has a co-worker that assumes he was "trashed." And from this it is sad? He needs help?

Yeah lets send him to rehab on the company's dime, or thier insurance carrier's dime, 30 day program, with pay, oh no lets make it court mandated so it's our dime, 10,000 to 20,000 grand, company is required to pay his wages while he is in rehab. No, he should pay it himself, if he can't afford it he should be jailed until he can pay it. Naw, lets save time and money, let's just shoot him. Better yet, let's deport anyone, citizen or not, who has gets arrested for DWI, or has a drinking problem. Let's make it Canada's problem Better yet, lets outlaw alcohol all together, why didn't we think of this before. Give real harsh prison sentences to anyone caught with booze in there house. We can train a bunch of booze sniffing dogs, something like those beautiful dogs like J4Knee has. Govt. can search your house when it wants, so long as it is random, they are only looking for booze, and they don't profile. And booze and driving, life without baby. When the prisons get too full, start executing 'em.

My god, what are we thinking, this guy had something to drink, don't know how much, but we know it's something, and he had the audacity to drive home. Who does he think he is? He wasn't even born here by golly, we'll show him. That stuff he had to learn to become a citizen, like a nation of laws, not men, right to a jury trial, presumption of innocence, right to counsel, forget that. Were going to show you how good we are at identifying what is wrong with you and then we are going to fix you. Oh, by the way, first rule: The more you say you don't need fixing, the more fixing you really need.

Y'all are turning someone who is a U.S. Citizen and got arrested for drinking while he is driving home after getting pulled over for speeding without knowing how much he had to drink, into someone who needs help. He needs help alright, he needs a good lawyer to protect him from all the do gooders who want to help him.

Charlotte has two very good DWI lawyers there that I know of, I sure hope Winchester's co-workers can get hooked up with one of them so that they can tell him some facts, what he is or isn't looking at based on all of the facts of the case, his situation in life, etc. Although my suggesting he seek the best possible legal advice when his liberty, and possibly job are at stake, I can see the drawbacks of this and where someone would want to turn to a bunch of audio experts instead.

I mean, I know hen I have a tax problem first thing I think of is, ask about it on audio forum. When I feel a mass under my skin that I suspect is cancerous I ask about it on the audio forum, when I need some good investment advice for a secure retirement I ask about it on the audio forum, when I need some good advice about speakers, I ask my urologist, and that's no [bs], I really do.

Travis

[Travis In Austin]

Thursday night he was coming home from a downtown at 1:00 in the morning and was stopped for speeding. Blew a .013 on the breathalizer.

That is a potentially a winable case, that kid needs to see someone who knows how to handle DWI cases before he does anything.

Travis

Travis,

Could you say more about the issues here relating to a potentially winable case?

The main point is that you can tell nothing, absolutely nothing from the number .13 (if it was .13) It if is .013 he has a pretty good civil rights case against the law enforcement agency since he is well below the legal limit. It it was a .13, he is 1 1/2 times over the legal limit if they don't have a split limit system in some states .04/.08.

There are a whole host of things that can cause a braeth test of .13 where the blood test would be well below .08. Are they required in that jurisdiction to offer a blood test if you test over an .08? If so, did they? How long was the test after the arrest? Does he have a medical condition that is know to cause false high positives on the Intoxizlyer 5000 ( I think that is what they use there, but it may be the Drager), such as GERDS or is he diabetic. Has he recently fasted or been on a high protien diet, both documented to cause a false high on breath testing equipment. Was he rununing a fever, etc., etc., etc.

That is just a few issues relating to just the Intoxilyzer. Then he may have technical defenses available, cause to request field soberity tests, then probable cause to arrest after those coordination tests, then proper warning about taking or refusing the breath test, etc.

All I am saying, before we cart this poor kid off to rehab, or to try and "help" him, maybe he should consider letting someone who knows what they are doing take a look at it so he can know what his real options are. Not the family lawyer who wrote the will, not his brother-in-law who practices real estate and personal inury, because they ask what the test is and tell him to plead guilty just the same as any goofball off the street, but someone how specializes in DWI.

It may be he was a drunken fool, and he was lucky and he needs help. Or, it may be that a cop who makes overtime with every DWI arrest was a little over zaealous and there is a problem with the machine or the test, he gets the case reduced, and learns a valuable lesson after all. Win or lose, after they pay my fee, most of my clients have learned a lesson and they don't need "help" thank you very much. That is 95% of them, never see them again but here get updates from friends and family they refer. Unfortuantely, 5% are repeat clients and then we try and get them some help when appropriate.

The thing is that he really needs to talk a lawyer who knows what he or she is doing in that area, and it requires a specialist.

Travis

[colterphoto1]

Drinking and driving is stupid and illegal. The guy was speeding, therefore exhibiting poor judgement and being wreckless with a vehicle.

Getting them 'off' on some technicality is even more stupid.

I'm done here.

[colterphoto1]

.

[anarchist]

Drinking and driving is stupid and illegal. The guy was speeding, therefore exhibiting poor judgement and being wreckless with a vehicle.Getting them 'off' on some technicality is even more stupid.

Wrong on every point. Drinking over a certain arbritary limit is illegal. That limit is adjusted based on revenue stream. Speeding itself demonstrates nothing. 100 MPH through Montanta is perfectly fine but 57MPH on a local 55MPH highway is poor judgement? Nonsense. Speed itself is certainly not a reckless activity. They are convicted on technicalities but you object to the defense being based on a technicality?

The facts are he could have been doing 1 MPH over the speed limit due to a poorly calibrated speedometer, the cops speedometer or radar gun could have been off, and the room may have recently been painted where he was given the breathalyzer. The original post gave virtually NO information to make ANY judgements
on yet in the land where everyone is innocent til proven guilty, you
guys have bought into MADD's marketing so badly, you are ready to send
a guy to forced rehab and/or prison the rest of his life.

Drunk driving is a problem but judgmental people are worse. EVERY person I have known demonstrates the exact same knee-jerk reaction and opinion... until they are caught and realize it ain't some evil element doing the deed but themselves. Those 1 or 2 beers you have... under the right circumstances will land YOU in jail. Have two beers and get in a car accident where YOU are hit; in many states, you are guilty. You want the book tossed at you then?

Cell phone drivers are more dangerous. Teen age drivers are more dangerous. Yet we demonize "drunks" all because of MADD. MADD - whose own studies have proven cell phones cause more accidents but fight against their ban because they want their people to be able to report "drunks."

Thanks DWIlawyer. It was nice to read a post where someone made a rational argument and not an emotional one.

[colterphoto1]

,

[kelA]

But, I'm moreover a civil rights activist. I believe more in the constitution, and the right to move about this great land free of harassment. And I believe, while he was drunk, a simple speeding ticket is not Probable Cause to continue with DWI enforcement investigation. Unless there are mitigating circumstances, police officers stop speeders all the time and do not issue DWI enforcement actions. By the mere time of day, or day of week, is not adaquate enough to continue enforcement of DWI, for merely a speeding ticket.

If a police officer stops a speeder and notices that he's "completely trashed", how and why would he ignore that? Freedom of movement is a great right, but if a person puts himself and others at great risk in the course of exercising that right, he should no longer use that means of movement and instead take a bus or taxi, where he's less of a danger to himself and others.

Thursday night he was coming home from a downtown at 1:00 in the morning and was stopped for speeding. Blew a .013 on the breathalizer. Completely trashed.

As well, at that time of night, there are lots of people trying to make it home from bars in varying states of drunkenness and the police are likely looking for any signs of impairment. This guy was speeding. We don't know if that was the only thing about his driving that drew the officer's attention.

As someone pointed out already the number is probably .13 because you are not trashed at a .013. By way of reference the "legal" limt is .08 in every state now. A .013 is a blip on the radar. Even if the number is .13 it does not mean he was "trashed." There is probably a video of him doing the field soberity tests so that is going to be one way to know.

The number from the Intoxilyzer means NOTHING. It is a machine, purchased by the govt. One of the questions I ask of potential juror's is finish this sentence: If theGovt. bought it, it has to be "blank", now fill in the blank.

It is not specific for alcohol (think about that for a minute), it's has technology less advanced then your microwave (eprom chip), having a fever, or naturaly high body temprature will cause it to read high, chewing on white bread and blowing into it, without any alcohol in your system will cause it to read positive for alcohol, if you are a painter you should never blow because you are going to read positive all day every day, etc., etc. etc.

Don't ever take a number the Govt gives you and assume it is accurate.

Travis

Which is probably one of the worst defenses to go on IMO. Any good prosecutor will come to the table with necessary documentation ie maintenance, and validation records to disprove faulty equipment. I am sure this angle is tested at every trial and would assume is mostly debunked.

[Coytee]

Don't ever take a number the Govt gives you and assume it is accurate.

You mean I should doubt what they govt is saying all these financial bailouts and healthcare reforms are going to cost? [:|]

I thought they always did their homework and were limited to an error factor of 2,450 times the original estimate.

[oscarsear]

Thursday night he was coming home from a downtown at 1:00 in the morning and was stopped for speeding. Blew a .013 on the breathalizer.

That is a potentially a winable case, that kid needs to see someone who knows how to handle DWI cases before he does anything.

Travis

Travis,

Could you say more about the issues here relating to a potentially winable case?

The main point is that you can tell nothing, absolutely nothing from the number .13 (if it was .13) It if is .013 he has a pretty good civil rights case against the law enforcement agency since he is well below the legal limit. It it was a .13, he is 1 1/2 times over the legal limit if they don't have a split limit system in some states .04/.08.

There are a whole host of things that can cause a braeth test of .13 where the blood test would be well below .08. Are they required in that jurisdiction to offer a blood test if you test over an .08? If so, did they? How long was the test after the arrest? Does he have a medical condition that is know to cause false high positives on the Intoxizlyer 5000 ( I think that is what they use there, but it may be the Drager), such as GERDS or is he diabetic. Has he recently fasted or been on a high protien diet, both documented to cause a false high on breath testing equipment. Was he rununing a fever, etc., etc., etc.

That is just a few issues relating to just the Intoxilyzer. Then he may have technical defenses available, cause to request field soberity tests, then probable cause to arrest after those coordination tests, then proper warning about taking or refusing the breath test, etc.

All I am saying, before we cart this poor kid off to rehab, or to try and "help" him, maybe he should consider letting someone who knows what they are doing take a look at it so he can know what his real options are. Not the family lawyer who wrote the will, not his brother-in-law who practices real estate and personal inury, because they ask what the test is and tell him to plead guilty just the same as any goofball off the street, but someone how specializes in DWI.

It may be he was a drunken fool, and he was lucky and he needs help. Or, it may be that a cop who makes overtime with every DWI arrest was a little over zaealous and there is a problem with the machine or the test, he gets the case reduced, and learns a valuable lesson after all. Win or lose, after they pay my fee, most of my clients have learned a lesson and they don't need "help" thank you very much. That is 95% of them, never see them again but here get updates from friends and family they refer. Unfortuantely, 5% are repeat clients and then we try and get them some help when appropriate.

The thing is that he really needs to talk a lawyer who knows what he or she is doing in that area, and it requires a specialist.

Travis

Curious here. Would you be just as emphatic at trying to find a legal loophole for this person if he had actually harmed people? Would you defend him if he admitted his guilt to you? You know full well that the breathylizer is a well understood tool that has calibration records. The method of employing the tool is simple and its application in this case was also probably videotaped. Are you inferring that all gov't agencies are totally corrupt intent on incarcerating anyone, anytime for any reason? Is this your line of defense for every defendant regardless of the the allegations? The police lied, used fake equipment, planted evidence, manufactured or doctored video tapes.