- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: DWI lawyer gets arrested
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:19 pm to tigerpimpbot
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:19 pm to tigerpimpbot
quote:yep, not happy that the lawyer is costing him his precious madd awards and bonus
The cop is butthurt that the attorney has been trying to frick with his quota.
0
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:20 pm to monsterballads
LRS 14:329
A. Interfering with a law enforcement investigation is the intentional interference or obstruction of a law enforcement officer conducting investigative work at the scene of a crime or the scene of an accident by refusing to move or leave the immediate scene of the crime or the accident when ordered to do so by the law enforcement officer when the offender has reasonable grounds to believe the officer is acting in the performance of his official duties.
Flashing lights is not and the courts have ruled as such
A. Interfering with a law enforcement investigation is the intentional interference or obstruction of a law enforcement officer conducting investigative work at the scene of a crime or the scene of an accident by refusing to move or leave the immediate scene of the crime or the accident when ordered to do so by the law enforcement officer when the offender has reasonable grounds to believe the officer is acting in the performance of his official duties.
Flashing lights is not and the courts have ruled as such
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:21 pm to monsterballads
quote:
Can you show me where that is?
quote:
329. Interfering with a law enforcement investigation
A. Interfering with a law enforcement investigation is the intentional interference or obstruction of a law enforcement officer conducting investigative work at the scene of a crime or the scene of an accident by refusing to move or leave the immediate scene of the crime or the accident when ordered to do so by the law enforcement officer when the offender has reasonable grounds to believe the officer is acting in the performance of his official duties.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:21 pm to theenemy
That's designed for people coming up to a crime scene or accident and fooling with shite. Not for an attorney telling his client to stfu.
This post was edited on 3/22/14 at 3:22 pm
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:22 pm to theenemy
quote:
If a person invokes their right to counsel, the police cannot question them without the counsel is present.
It doesn't mean the attorney automatcically gets to come into the scene or speak with his/her client at that moment.
It just ends questioning until the cops choose to interview the suspect with the attorney present.
From the story it seems like she invoked her right to counsel but the officer had her go through the sobriety test anyway. Now, does the law see the test as "questioning"? I have no idea and I think that's what this will hinge on.
If the sobriety test is considered "questioning" then the officer was barring her counsel from being present by demanding he remain in the vehicle. If the sobriety test isn't considered "questioning" then he's screwed.
quote:
Ambeau’s driver, Shannon Bottoms, was issued citations for improper lane usage and failure to change address on a driver’s license
This is the most telling thing to me. These are low-level bullshite types of charges usually reserved for raising money, punishing someone for being difficult after being pulled over or both. What this tells me is she was charged as a punitive measure against Ambeau.
If this makes it to court, it should be interesting to see what happens.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:23 pm to Golfer
quote:
That's designed for people coming up to a crime scene or accident and fooling with shite. Now for an attorney telling his client to stfu.
Wrong!
The law is in reference to the scene of an investigation.
Traffic stops are considered investigations in the eyes of the courts.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:23 pm to Golfer
quote:
That's designed for people coming up to a crime scene or accident and fooling with shite. Now for an attorney telling his client to stfu.
Wrong.. That is for any investigation, which a traffic stop is. Especially, when it is for a possible DUI
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:24 pm to Golfer
Can we all see what is really happening in this situation? Using the interference statute is complete bullshite and I have to believe everyone with a brain understands that. The cop was upset that this lawyer was potentially going to cost him a DWI conviction.
Anyone with some common sense can figure that out.
Anyone with some common sense can figure that out.
This post was edited on 3/22/14 at 3:25 pm
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:25 pm to rebelJCL
quote:
Wrong.. That is for any investigation, which a traffic stop is. Especially, when it is for a possible DUI
We need investigations for improper lane usages and wrong addresses on ID's?
You're missing the point of my post, though. Cops use the loosely written law for their advantage. Everything is an "investigation" or "official duties" to them.
This post was edited on 3/22/14 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:26 pm to monsterballads
It's just like when cops arrest people for videoing them breaking the law.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:26 pm to Golfer
It's clear that there are tons of people that support a police state.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:29 pm to monsterballads
I appreciate good cops and they work they do. I also don't mind DWI enforcement. But in this case someone is doing the right thing with a DD and still has to deal with their crap.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:32 pm to Bard
quote:
Ambeau’s driver, Shannon Bottoms, was issued citations for improper lane usage and failure to change address on a driver’s license
This is the most telling thing to me. These are low-level bullshite types of charges usually reserved for raising money, punishing someone for being difficult after being pulled over or both. What this tells me is she was charged as a punitive measure against Ambeau.
If this makes it to court, it should be interesting to see what happens.
exaclty BRPD ain't gonna let you go on your way and have a good night (if you are sober and pass their test). I had one pull me over coming out of tigerland when I was a pledge DD. I passed all the test and he gave me a ticket for the tint on my windows.
Freak BRPD
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:33 pm to monsterballads
quote:
Can we all see what is really happening in this situation? Using the interference statute is complete bullshite and I have to believe everyone with a brain understands that. The cop was upset that this lawyer was potentially going to cost him a DWI conviction.
Anyone with some common sense can figure that out.
One of the most dangerous things during a traffic stop is when the passenger gets out of the vehicle without the officer's permission.
Many officers have been injured and killed due to this. It is a huge officer safety concern.
Nothing causes a traffic stop to go to shite faster than the passenger not following instructions. It is dangerous for the officer and most times will end with the passenger being arrested.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:34 pm to theenemy
quote:
One of the most dangerous things during a traffic stop is when the passenger gets out of the vehicle without the officer's permission. Many officers have been injured and killed due to this. It is a huge officer safety concern.
Only took two pages to bring up that an officer could die.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:34 pm to monsterballads
No, not a police state, just the enforcement of the laws..
If you don't like the laws, call your legislature and have them change the laws or take it off of the books
Are there officers that step out of line, yeah it does happen. And those should and most often are held accountable. Some get away with it., unfortunately.
Don't blame the officer that follows the laws. Again if you think the law is chickenshit, then lobby the lawmakers to change it.
I completely disagree with the government telling an adult they have to wear a seatbelt.. I wear mine but that is my choice, if someone does not want to that's their dumbass decision for them to make
If you don't like the laws, call your legislature and have them change the laws or take it off of the books
Are there officers that step out of line, yeah it does happen. And those should and most often are held accountable. Some get away with it., unfortunately.
Don't blame the officer that follows the laws. Again if you think the law is chickenshit, then lobby the lawmakers to change it.
I completely disagree with the government telling an adult they have to wear a seatbelt.. I wear mine but that is my choice, if someone does not want to that's their dumbass decision for them to make
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:37 pm to Golfer
quote:
I appreciate good cops and they work they do. I also don't mind DWI enforcement. But in this case someone is doing the right thing with a DD and still has to deal with their crap.
He di do the right thing with the DD... however if he would have done the right thing by staying in the vehicle or going back when the officer told him, the driver would have been written the tickets and they would have been on their way.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:37 pm to rebelJCL
Seems to me that the drivers lawyer was telling her to not consent to any bullshite tests and he was arrested for it.
Did he assault the cop? Nope
Did he do anything illegal? Nope
"Interfering" with police investigation is complete bullshite in this situation but I don't expect statists to agree.
Did he assault the cop? Nope
Did he do anything illegal? Nope
"Interfering" with police investigation is complete bullshite in this situation but I don't expect statists to agree.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:38 pm to theenemy
quote:
One of the most dangerous things during a traffic stop is when the passenger gets out of the vehicle without the officer's permission.
Safety? Yeah, so he can make the driver, who he suspects is drunk, walk a straight line and hop on one leg right next to the roadway. Seems like a legit safety concern to me.
Posted on 3/22/14 at 3:39 pm to rebelJCL
quote:
the right thing
He got out of the car and told his client to stop talking. Hardly a crime. That's ridiculous to insinuate that he was breaking the law.
This is all about revenue, not public safety.
Page 3 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News