Laws in general> DUI in particular

[akarunway 1]

I was just watching the news about Mel Gibson. He's being charged w/> DUI (misd.) >BAC over .08 (misd.) Also cited for open container. I in no way condone his behavior. But (Lawrocket or any other lawyers) isn't the DUI charge and the over .08 the same fuckin thing? Also, they need to go after the fuckin police for the coverup. Joe Smo wouldn't get preferential treatment. He must be buddies w/ the Kennedys eh?

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

I was just watching the news about Mel Gibson. He's being charged w/> DUI (misd.) >BAC over .08 (misd.) Also cited for open container. I in no way condone his behavior. But (Lawrocket or any other lawyers) isn't the DUI charge and the over .08 the same fuckin thing? Also, they need to go after the fuckin police for the coverup. Joe Smo wouldn't get preferential treatment. He must be buddies w/ the Kennedys eh?

They can be the same or diff. You can be charged with DUI above or below .08. .08 is a slam dunk, whereas if it's below they need to collect other evidence to establish you were influenced by the alcohol.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

sn't the DUI charge and the over .08 the same fuckin thing

Yep. .08 is a slam dunk. It was put there because there are some cats out there with insane tolerances that are perfectly fine with a .08. Meanwhile, softies like me can be feeling it qite nicely after only a couple, and while I may blow only a .04, it may be enough to find that my mental ablities are impaired to the extent where I am incapable of driving with the same caution as a sober person.

As afr as a coverup, I dont' see any need to do that. You would be shocked at the shit people say to cops. So, should enhanced scrunity be placed on Mel Gibson for making comments about owning Malibu and Jews when Joe Schmo can bitch about his Constitutional Rights to Silence being violated by pig motherfucker po-lice?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 1,853]

Quote

Quote

sn't the DUI charge and the over .08 the same fuckin thing

Yep. .08 is a slam dunk. It was put there because there are some cats out there with insane tolerances that are perfectly fine with a .08. Meanwhile, softies like me can be feeling it qite nicely after only a couple, and while I may blow only a .04, it may be enough to find that my mental ablities are impaired to the extent where I am incapable of driving with the same caution as a sober person.

As afr as a coverup, I dont' see any need to do that. You would be shocked at the shit people say to cops. So, should enhanced scrunity be placed on Mel Gibson for making comments about owning Malibu and Jews when Joe Schmo can bitch about his Constitutional Rights to Silence being violated by pig motherfucker po-lice?

Not in any way condoning drunk driving, but why should someone who is not impaired but has BAC >.08 be a problem to anyone.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

why should someone who is not impaired but has BAC >.08 be a problem to anyone.

THat's what we in law call a "political question." It's the policians that make those decisions....

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

why should someone who is not impaired but has BAC >.08 be a problem to anyone.

THat's what we in law call a "political question." It's the policians that make those decisions....

That's funny, it seems it's the Politicians who get the lion's share of the DUI's

[Lucky... 0]

Now, Lawrocket, tell the nice people what the cops do if you refuse to submit to a BAC blood or breath test.

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

Now, Lawrocket, tell the nice people what the cops do if you refuse to submit to a BAC blood or breath test.

I'm not LAW, but I do believe you automaticlly lose you license.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

But (Lawrocket or any other lawyers) isn't the DUI charge and the over .08 the same fuckin thing?

The "law" you've seen on TV is not really law and the laws governing such differ from state to state. If you're really curious, google the state law in which Gibson was arrested under. The law is the law and the case law defines it. It should only take an evening of study, you might end up with a headache, but you might understand it better (or not, legalise language is amazingly hard to understand without some training sometimes).

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Now, Lawrocket, tell the nice people what the cops do if you refuse to submit to a BAC blood or breath test.

I'm not LAW, but I do believe you automaticlly lose you license.

In CA, yes. Other states may vary, though I imagine most are the same.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

But (Lawrocket or any other lawyers) isn't the DUI charge and the over .08 the same fuckin thing?

The "law" you've seen on TV is not really law and the laws governing such differ from state to state. If you're really curious, google the state law in which Gibson was arrested under. The law is the law and the case law defines it. It should only take an evening of study, you might end up with a headache, but you might understand it better (or not, legalise language is amazingly hard to understand without some training sometimes).

LMAO Trust me I KNOW the law. I've had 3 DUI's. I just think it's fucked up. I'm not normal til I'm .08 LOL And I've played my own lawyer on a number of occasions and won.Edit to add: I haven't had a drivers license for 19 yrs. They make you pay one way or another. Who needs a stinkin license anyway?

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Gawain 0]

Gibson is apparently a high-profile supporter of LASD. I thought that DUI was a felony. Damn, there is some thing I don't know...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Gibson is apparently a high-profile supporter of LASD. I thought that DUI was a felony. Damn, there is some thing I don't know...

Nowadays it's (felony) the 3rd or 4th in most states me thinks. Looking at 5 yrs. w/ Bubba

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Andy9o8 1]

I'm familiar with this subject from having both prosecuted and defended many DUI cases. The reason why many states have separate (but seemingly redundant/overlapping) offenses for "driving under the influence" and "driving while BAC is over [whatever number]" is to cover all bases and close loopholes that can be exploited by the defense. Certainly it would be against the public interest to let a drunk driver escape conviction by simply refusing a BAC test (either Breathalyzer or blood test). So, if a suspect refuses a BAC test (which still happens a lot), the state still needs an alternative means to present evidence of impairing intoxication. So, if the police officer can testify to enough extrinsic factors – such as the person's driving was erratic, his breath smelled of alcohol, his speech was slurred, he couldn't pass a field sobriety test (walk the straight line, count backwards, etc.), that can be enough to permit a jury to conclude the person was intoxicated while driving.

By the way, in most states, if a defendant refuses a BAC test (aside from the fact that that will get his license suspended and or result in a separate charge for that), the fact of the refusal will be admitted into evidence at trial, so the judge/jury will understand why they're not being presented with BAC evidence.


The reason why states' laws generally (in one form or another) make a certain BAC limit (such as 0.08, or 0.10, or whatever) a "strict liability" offense is what LR referred to as the "political" decision - in other words, the legislature has decided that there needs to be a specific threshold of BAC above which a person is simply not legally permitted to drive, regardless of the fact that maybe 20% of the population can still drive more or less OK at that level. So in that case, it's to close the loophole that goes, "Sure my BAC was 0.11, but I, personally, was still able to drive OK at that level, so I didn't really break the law." Laws enacted by legislatures reflect public policy considerations like that all the time.

Most states these days do have a system of graduated severity for DUI, so that each subsequent
offense is either a higher degree of offense than the last one, or is subject to a higher mandatory minimum sentence than the last one, or both.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I've had 3 DUI's. I just think it's fucked up. I'm not normal til I'm .08 LOL

and you are saying the "system" is what's wrong?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[1888 0]

Hey law rocket. Don't know where you got your degree but they should have taught you that the right to silence applies to "in custody questioning" not to spontaneous statements or utterances made by an enraged drunken fool. No doubt Gibson was in custody, but unless his statements were made in response to questioning, they are not protected.

[Casurf1978 0]

Quote

Also, they need to go after the fuckin police for the coverup. Joe Smo wouldn't get preferential treatment.

Put yourself in the cops shoes. You just pulled over one of the richest and most powerful people in Los Angeles who could possibly make your life a living hell. What would you do? Gibson made over $200 million last year and I'm not taking into account that his Passion of the Christ made over $600 million worldwide. That aint chump change, and how much do you think a cop makes. I can see why wealthy and powerful people get away with crap like this. I know it's not fair, but what can you do.

[SpeedRacer 1]

what was the coverup??? They released the friggin hand-written police report in the first article I read.

what got covered up?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[lawrocket 3]

What I wrote was:

Quote

Joe Schmo can bitch about his Constitutional Rights to Silence being violated by pig motherfucker po-lice?

First - I am not a criminal attorney. However, I understand the basic workings of the Fifth Amendment - it's the kind of thing they test for on the Bar. Therefore, I understand the implications of "spontaneous statements" not made pursuant to answering questions by police."

Perhaps it is my higher education and my abilities to make subtle allusions to irony that tend such things to go over the heads of others. However, I felt most people would comprehend that the situation I wrote about was intended to be an oxymoron - you know, a person bitching and yelling to police about the right to remain silent? Understand?

"You are violating my right to remain silent?" Get it?
"You cops are making me talk when I don't have to." See it now?
"I have the right to remain silent?" Yep, so shut up. Hee hee!

God, I kill myself. Oh, ho. That slays me. I should be a stand-up comedian. A new version of Dennis Miller. I'll make jokes about obscure cultural references that come at people faster than Art Arfons. See? "Art Arfons" is "fast?" Get it? HA HA!!

Over their heads? I'll make them stand up! Get it? The jokes will be "over their heads" if the sit down but they'll understand the jokes if they "stand up?"

Oh, man, I'll be the second coming of Bert Williams!

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I thought that DUI was a felony.

I believe it's only a felony in Cali if you cause damage or injury when driving while drunk. If you get pinched before any accident, it's a misdemeanor. But I'm not a criminal attorney and my law school didn't teach me this.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Casurf1978 0]

I was just commenting on the fact that Gibson is a very powerful man in LA and can see why a cop would give preferential treatment to him. I'm not saying there was a cover up. Personally, I think this whole Gibson DUI thing is being blown out of proportion. The guy is an alcoholic with serious problems and made a few stupid comments while drunk. People are crucifying the poor man. I feel sorry for the guy. He has all that anyone could want, but still isn't happy and has to deal with alcoholism.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

You just pulled over one of the richest and most powerful people in Los Angeles who could possibly make your life a living hell.

I disagree. Someone from Gibson's demographic isn't going to make your life hell the same way, let's say, a Congressowman would, i.e., Cynthia McKinney.

Internal Affairs investigations make policemen's lives hell, not Mel Gibson. In fact, Gibson owned up to it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Airman1270 0]

During my stellar radio career I visited the police station daily to check the reports. I once asked the nice lady on duty about a situation where a guy was arrested for DUI, but blew a real low BAC number, well within the legal limit.

I asked why he was charged when the evidence indicated he had complied with the law. She gave me some partial bullshit answer about a legal category called "less safe to drive."

There comes a point when we must muster the courage to stop blaming alcohol for every unfortunate incident that might occur in its presence. Show me a guy who is a dangerous driver after drinking two beers and I'll show you a dangerous driver. The alcohol is irrelevant.

If a drunk guy is stopped at a red light and is rear-ended by a sober driver, was the incident "alcohol related?"

Cheersh,
Jon S.

[masterrig 1]

I really don't see what all the fuss is over Mel Gibson
being charged DUI. California law states that all the charges are misdemeanors. Is it just because he is a 'big' name? Like many drunks, he shot-off his mouth and because he is Mel Gibson, suddenly the lynch mob mentality comes out. Mr. Gibson has come-out, repentant and has apologised. That doesn't seem good enough. Why, don't we let it play-out in the courts and see what happens. I also, haven't really seen any 'preferential treatment' towards him, either. I think, he's getting raked-over the coals fairly well.
I really wonder... would it have been different had he been under the influence of cocaine or heroin? Usually, in those cases folks say the poor man needs help! Seems like, since this case involves alchohol, Mr. Gibson is a no good drunk who should be jailed forever. As for Joe Schmo? Nobody cares... he doesn't have a 'big' name.

Just my opinion.


chuck

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Now, Lawrocket, tell the nice people what the cops do if you refuse to submit to a BAC blood or breath test.

I'm not LAW, but I do believe you automaticlly lose you license.

You lose your ass. They will 4 or 5 fine officers and slam your ass to the ground and forcibly pull your blood from you. Of course they wake the judge to get their telephonic warrant to searcha nd seize your body for evidence. It used to, "Shock the conscious" of the SCOTUS, but not now.