Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hypothetical DUI Situation

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hypothetical DUI Situation

    Let me just preface this by saying that I have no intention of actually doing this, I'm merely curious.
    I'm sure you know the situation, it's in almost every TV show and movie featuring cops. I'm talking about when the cop pulls over a possible drunk driver, who immediately gets out of his car and takes a giant gulp of alcohol in front of the officer. The officer is usually stumped and can't figure out a way to prove that the person was drunk beforehand and inevitably lets the suspect go.
    That just seems like it would be too obvious and there would have to be a way to arrest him anyways, but I can't think of anything other than charging the person with other crimes. Am I missing something?

  • #2
    Originally posted by alexg View Post
    Let me just preface this by saying that I have no intention of actually doing this, I'm merely curious.
    I'm sure you know the situation, it's in almost every TV show and movie featuring cops. I'm talking about when the cop pulls over a possible drunk driver, who immediately gets out of his car and takes a giant gulp of alcohol in front of the officer. The officer is usually stumped and can't figure out a way to prove that the person was drunk beforehand and inevitably lets the suspect go.
    That just seems like it would be too obvious and there would have to be a way to arrest him anyways, but I can't think of anything other than charging the person with other crimes. Am I missing something?
    I can still arrest based on the impaired driving I saw, then will add-charge for having the open container in the car... There's more, but bottom line, don't believe everything you see on T.V.
    LIFE IS TOO SHORT TO DRINK CHEAP BEER!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by alexg View Post
      Let me just preface this by saying that I have no intention of actually doing this, I'm merely curious.
      I'm sure you know the situation, it's in almost every TV show and movie featuring cops. I'm talking about when the cop pulls over a possible drunk driver, who immediately gets out of his car and takes a giant gulp of alcohol in front of the officer. The officer is usually stumped and can't figure out a way to prove that the person was drunk beforehand and inevitably lets the suspect go.
      That just seems like it would be too obvious and there would have to be a way to arrest him anyways, but I can't think of anything other than charging the person with other crimes. Am I missing something?
      I watch alot of TV and never seen anything like that.
      The liberal politician has the only job where they go to the office to work for everyone but those who pay their salary.

      Comment


      • #4
        And saying that the pants that you are wearing are not yours after the police find 6 crack rocks in the pocket works too!

        Comment


        • #5
          So that would just get him two charges... DUI and then public open container. Would there be a question over it in court? Yes. But if I didn't arrest every DUI just because there would be some issue in court (there always is), then I'd have about 2 DUIs this year.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by alexg View Post
            Let me just preface this by saying that I have no intention of actually doing this, I'm merely curious.
            I'm sure you know the situation, it's in almost every TV show and movie featuring cops. I'm talking about when the cop pulls over a possible drunk driver, who immediately gets out of his car and takes a giant gulp of alcohol in front of the officer. The officer is usually stumped and can't figure out a way to prove that the person was drunk beforehand and inevitably lets the suspect go.
            That just seems like it would be too obvious and there would have to be a way to arrest him anyways, but I can't think of anything other than charging the person with other crimes. Am I missing something?
            I see no problem with this at all. Run them through the SFSTS. If they are intoxicated they will more than likely fail. Take them into custody pending a Datamaster test and/or blood draw. Taking a drink after being stopped is not a valid defense IMO. One would have to slam a awful lot of alcohol in a short amount of time to be over the limit. I believe it takes three ounces of alcohol to test over .08 BAC. I am not a drinker and so I am not sure how much that is. Maybe three (3) shot glasses?
            "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson

            Comment


            • #7
              20 minute s

              It takes awhile anyways to get you from the scene to the machine {hey, that rhymes} so the most current gulp of a Vodka Red Bull will only make it better, FOR ME
              Last edited by e-man; 08-25-2008, 03:12 PM.
              I got nothing for now

              Comment


              • #8
                Sounds like two charges to me.
                sigpic

                I don't agree with your opinion, but I respect its straightforwardness in terms of wrongness.

                Comment


                • #9
                  No problem. I'd run through all SFST's but just wouldn't give them a PBT on-scene. I'd also definitely make sure I get significantly over my observation period before I administer the intox test.

                  Or, I'd just make them pee in a cup.
                  The views expressed in the above post are the sole opinion of the author and do not reflect any official position by the author's employer and/or municipality.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jb5722
                    i have heard of cases getting dropped for this reason but have never seen it first hand.

                    .
                    Usually it's an accident and the drunk claims they drank afterwards and the police were not right there to see it.

                    We had a KCMO command staff wreck, walk to the nearest bar and drink several beers.
                    A Veteran is someone who at one point in their life wrote a blank check made payable to The United States of America, for an amount up to, and including their life. That is honor, and there are way too many people in this country today, who no longer understand that fact!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It still takes a significant amount of time for the alcohol to absorb. I had a DUI case similar to this where the defendant claimed he was chugging alcohol when we approached the vehicle (although I or my partner did not witness such). It has been scientifically proven that to get substantial BAC results (or that of at least .08%), there has to be some time pass for the absorption. I wait the required 20 min, have them submit to the intoximeter, and go on my merry way. Chugging alcohol is not going to "spike" anyone's BAC within 30 min to affect the outcome of the chemical test. The defense attorneys can challenge all they want, but if you are decent at DUI arrests and do your homework, it will not make a difference.
                      I'm 10-8 like a shark in a sea of crime..

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Doesn't really matter that much here about all that technical this or that. The majority here are allowed to plea to Reckless Driving because the Prosecutors don't want to fool with it. I asked why and one Prosecutor told me the guy isn't some big drunk with multiple arrests. So all those tv commercials here warning motorists about being arrested for driving drunk are a joke, at least in this county its a joke.
                        The liberal politician has the only job where they go to the office to work for everyone but those who pay their salary.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by tony.o View Post
                          Doesn't really matter that much here about all that technical this or that. The majority here are allowed to plea to Reckless Driving because the Prosecutors don't want to fool with it. I asked why and one Prosecutor told me the guy isn't some big drunk with multiple arrests. So all those tv commercials here warning motorists about being arrested for driving drunk are a joke, at least in this county its a joke.
                          NHTSA stats show that those drivers involved in an alcohol-related fatality (where one driver has .08% BAC or more) are 8 times more likely to have a prior charge/conviction of DUI/DWI. Make sure and pass along the DA's light attitude about DUI charges to the family of the next victim in your courtroom. Whether it changes anything or not, you will get someone's attention.
                          I'm 10-8 like a shark in a sea of crime..

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by SgtScott31 View Post
                            NHTSA stats show that those drivers involved in an alcohol-related fatality (where one driver has .08% BAC or more) are 8 times more likely to have a prior charge/conviction of DUI/DWI. Make sure and pass along the DA's light attitude about DUI charges to the family of the next victim in your courtroom. Whether it changes anything or not, you will get someone's attention.
                            Having someone from MADD light a fire under the DA helps too. We had a recent fatality where the DA was waivering on prosecuting because the driver was a family member. From what I was told a quick tip to MADD caused the case to go forward.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              First I'd charge him for Consume liquor in a public place - Only because he failed the attitude test BIG TIME!

                              Then I'd wait 10 minutes for any alcohol in his mouth to dissipate and have him participate in a roadside breath test. Then if take the driver to the station for a Breath Analysis. If after then charge if appropriate.

                              For those asking/ wondering why or how can I do that, see my other posts on similar topics. In Australia we have laws which give us power to conduct such tests without the need for probable cause or reasonable suspicion.
                              If at first you don't succeed, remove all evidence of your attempt.

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 5997 users online. 363 members and 5634 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X