- 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: Fool proof way to avoid a DWI or proof of a fool??
Posted on 8/8/14 at 6:34 pm to Real Pirate
Posted on 8/8/14 at 6:34 pm to Real Pirate
quote:
What behavior? You step out, chug, and say "take me to jail."
The P.C. for pulling you over. This is the biggest part.
Then you exit and start drinking = Swaying, red eyes, poor balance, slur speech, etc.
You are booked. DWI. Next.
1
Posted on 8/8/14 at 6:36 pm to Nativebullet
quote:
Swaying, red eyes, poor balance, slur speech
"I'm tired."
DWIs are not cut and dry like you seem to think they are.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 6:39 pm to Real Pirate
quote:
DWIs are not cut and dry like you seem to think they are.
Actually, my friend. They are. But it's ultimately up to the judge. I'm just replying to that OP.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 6:40 pm to TexasTiger01
Good chance you get shot.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 6:45 pm to Nativebullet
No, just because you are arrested for dwi, they still have to show proof that you were drunk while driving the vehicle.
Is it impossible to think somebody might be pulled over for a taillight being out?
They step out, chug. The cop tells them to submit to a field sobriety test. They refuse. An hour later blood is drawn.
They have now been arrested for a dwi, but I'm fairly certain a competent lawyer could shed enough doubt on the case to have it thrown out, at least the dwi portion.
Innocent until proven guilty. All the bac test proves in that scenario is that the alcohol you ingested after exiting the vehicle is now in your system.
Most likely the case. Especially at night, stepping out of a vehicle with something in your hand.
Is it impossible to think somebody might be pulled over for a taillight being out?
They step out, chug. The cop tells them to submit to a field sobriety test. They refuse. An hour later blood is drawn.
They have now been arrested for a dwi, but I'm fairly certain a competent lawyer could shed enough doubt on the case to have it thrown out, at least the dwi portion.
Innocent until proven guilty. All the bac test proves in that scenario is that the alcohol you ingested after exiting the vehicle is now in your system.
quote:
Good chance you get shot.
Most likely the case. Especially at night, stepping out of a vehicle with something in your hand.
This post was edited on 8/8/14 at 6:47 pm
Posted on 8/8/14 at 6:50 pm to Real Pirate
quote:
Is it impossible to think somebody might be pulled over for a taillight being out?
They step out, chug.
You don't go DWI hunting and pull over of a taillight. You get good P.C. i.e. Crosses Fog line twice, then drifts over double-white center line. Boom.
How about this Butt Pirate, try chugging some whiskey once you get pulled over and tell me how that goes for you (OP imply you are already intoxicated)
Posted on 8/8/14 at 6:55 pm to Nativebullet
quote:
You don't go DWI hunting and pull over of a taillight.
My buddy came and picked us up from the bulldog and was pulled over for not putting his signal on early enough. This was after the cop watched him pull out of the parking lot.
He was sober. Cop let him go but was clearly fishing for DUI since his first question was "how much have you had to drink tonight"
Posted on 8/8/14 at 6:56 pm to Nativebullet
Intoxicated is. 08 or higher. For a lot of people that is 2 beers.
Do you think people are falling over with blood shot eyes after 2 beers?
Name calling doesn't help your case.
LINK
Nothing in the about him swerving etc...
Do you think people are falling over with blood shot eyes after 2 beers?
quote:
How about this Butt Pirate
Name calling doesn't help your case.
LINK
quote:
Troopers say they discovered a driver was drunk after stopping him for having a rear tail light dangling down to the rear bumper of his vehicle.
Nothing in the about him swerving etc...
Posted on 8/8/14 at 7:01 pm to Real Pirate
quote:
Name calling doesn't help your case.
I'm sorry, I was not focused. Just saw "Pirate".
Stand corrected. You're right.
Now go chug some whiskey once you get pulled over. Have the cop and the whole court system scratching their heads.
I'm trying to tell you that this does not work, but give it a shot.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 7:03 pm to Nativebullet
Are you a cop, judge, or DA?
Posted on 8/8/14 at 7:28 pm to AngryBeavers
quote:
Exiting your vehicle during a traffic stop is just inviting a trigger happy cop to shoot you.
Usually I am asked to get out of the car on traffic stops.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 7:28 pm to Real Pirate
quote:
they still have to show proof that you were drunk while driving the vehicle.
Not really.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 7:33 pm to Asgard Device
quote:
not really
Go on.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 7:56 pm to Nativebullet
quote:
You don't go DWI hunting and pull over of a taillight. You get good P.C. i.e. Crosses Fog line twice, then drifts over double-white center line.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 8:03 pm to Asgard Device
quote:
they still have to show proof that you were drunk while driving the vehicle.
quote:§98. Operating a vehicle while intoxicated
Not really.
A.(1) The crime of operating a vehicle while intoxicated is the operating of any motor vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, vessel, or other means of conveyance when:
(a) The operator is under the influence of alcoholic beverages; or
(b) The operator's blood alcohol concentration is 0.08 percent or more by weight based on grams of alcohol per one hundred cubic centimeters of blood; or
Posted on 8/8/14 at 8:10 pm to Real Pirate
quote:
Wrong.
You refuse the field sobriety test.
An hour later when you make it to the breathalyzer or blood taking place, the alcohol that you just drank OUTSIDE of the vehicle on the cops camera is now in your system.
Your move.
Again, who is going to tell all of this to the jury? The DA is going to submit the evidence of the reason for the traffic stop. Then the cop is going to testify that he smelled alcohol and that you failed the field sobriety test, because you did. Remember, the reason you did this in the first place is because you knew you were driving drunk. Also remember that the video you're going to use later to point out that you drank something nicely shows you failing the frick out of the FST very shortly after it shows you drinking something. Then, the DA is going to submit the results of the certified breathalyzer or blood test taken after your arrest. Then he's going to close his case. The state sure as hell isn't going to offer up evidence that it's maybe possible that you might have maybe been below the limit while you were driving.
Your attorney might point out to the jury during the video that you drank something after you got out of the car and may ask the cop if he saw it, but who's going to testify to WHAT you drank? That's the important part, isn't it? You can prove that you drank something, but that's not the part that is the cute little technicality, is it? Proving WHAT you drank is the key to this harebrained scheme. If it wasn't alcoholic, your defense is suddenly completely gone, isn't it? If the state didn't collect the bottle, handle it properly, and submit it into evidence, the bottle and its contents are lost. Without that, there are only two people on the planet who could possibly testify as to the contents of that bottle. The cop sure as hell isn't going to testify that it was definitely whiskey. That leaves you, and here you have a problem. See, you can't just get up there and say 'yep, I sure as hell drank that whiskey' and just skip off, flipping everyone off as you beat the rap. The instant you get on the stand, you're subject to the questions of the DA under oath. Even if you answer everything truthfully and there is nothing else for the DA to trip you up on, the only thing you have to add to the record is that you testified at your own DUI trial that you drank some whiskey after you drove when every other piece of evidence that has been submitted is painting you guilty as frick.
The DA then just reminds the jury during closing arguments that the guy on trial is the only person on the planet that is saying he's got evidence that the guy on trial couldn't have done it and then he reminds them that there is the video evidence of the traffic stop, sworn testimony of an officer of the law that you failed the FST, and the results of the chemical test.
You made a fun exercise of it, but you're still convicted of DUI.
This post was edited on 8/8/14 at 8:40 pm
Posted on 8/8/14 at 8:31 pm to Real Pirate
quote:
Posted by Real Pirate quote: not really Go on.
People get DUI's all the time based solely on the officer's word.
Hell, people have passed the sobriety test and still got slapped with a DUI and then lost in court.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 8:34 pm to TigerstuckinMS
You keep speaking about falling the fst.
Don't take them. What if there are no visible signs your drunk?
You get out of the car, stand straight with normal eye colors. Drink half a bottle of liquor.
Obviously your breath smells like alcohol now, so that's null and void.
You don't do any other test, you're immediately arrested.
You fail the breathalyzer later.
In the end, all they have proof of us a broken taillight, you drank outside of your vehicle with the keys out of the ignition.
Is this impossible?
Why wouldn't the cop keep the bottle and the liquor that's left in it? That's evidence, right?
I'm Obviously not saying this is a fool proof plan. It would take all of the right circumstances and a lot of luck to have it work, but I certainly think it's possible. Just not fool proof.
Don't take them. What if there are no visible signs your drunk?
You get out of the car, stand straight with normal eye colors. Drink half a bottle of liquor.
Obviously your breath smells like alcohol now, so that's null and void.
You don't do any other test, you're immediately arrested.
You fail the breathalyzer later.
In the end, all they have proof of us a broken taillight, you drank outside of your vehicle with the keys out of the ignition.
Is this impossible?
Why wouldn't the cop keep the bottle and the liquor that's left in it? That's evidence, right?
I'm Obviously not saying this is a fool proof plan. It would take all of the right circumstances and a lot of luck to have it work, but I certainly think it's possible. Just not fool proof.
Posted on 8/8/14 at 8:39 pm to Real Pirate
Why would you take the breathalyzer after refusing the FST? After refusing the FST, you're going to jail for suspicion of driving while intoxicated. Taking the breathalyzer after the arrest doesn't do anything.
Maybe I'm missing something.
Maybe I'm missing something.
This post was edited on 8/8/14 at 8:40 pm
Posted on 8/8/14 at 8:44 pm to boom roasted
If you don't comply to the breathalyzer they will pull blood anyways.
Either way, doesn't matter, they will figure out your bac. But that reading SHOULD be void since you drank after getting out of the vehicle.
They're not proving you were drunk while driving, they're just proving your drunk, which very well could have been due to that half a bottle of whiskey you drank on the side of the road.
Also, I know just as many people who have gotten out of DWIs as those who have gotten screwed over on them.
The difference every time?
Good lawyer and money.
Either way, doesn't matter, they will figure out your bac. But that reading SHOULD be void since you drank after getting out of the vehicle.
They're not proving you were drunk while driving, they're just proving your drunk, which very well could have been due to that half a bottle of whiskey you drank on the side of the road.
Also, I know just as many people who have gotten out of DWIs as those who have gotten screwed over on them.
The difference every time?
Good lawyer and money.
Page 8 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News