REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

I lost a case.

POSTED BY: HERO
UPDATED: Thursday, March 6, 2008 20:12
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2292
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 11:09 AM

HERO


I am no longer undefeated. I note this in the RWED forum because it is big news...a five year undefeated Jury streak shot down. Justice denied.

Years of trials, a streak unmatched in history, and with no evidence of the use of HGH, yet now I am reminded of the words of the Roman slave, "thou art only a man".

Perhaps it was a bridge too far. A Jury with several folks on it with prior convictions for DUI (bad pool, could not get rid of them all). Perhaps it was the lack of facts. Sure, I had enough to charge a DUI...admission drinking, weaving, hitting a curb, odor of alcohol, etc. But the Defendent refused everything...Field Sobriety Tests, Breath test. And the video didn't record (which happens about 1/3 of the time because of our crappy old cameras). Juries like to hear about FSTs or watch videos.

But I had to try it. I can't reward folks for refusing the tests. I just hope Ohio passes the law making it prima facia evidence of guilt if a person refuses...like you fine folks in PA.

And another thing. I only try folks who are guilty...if they are not guilty I work something out. People should know that. Trust that...trial=guilt when I'm the one driving, can't say thats true for everyone with my job...but I'm 100% certain everyone I've jailed has been guilty...of something or other.

But at least it was quick. Full trial, three witnesses, case closed in three hours (with the jury taking another two deciding). They said afterwards they agreed with me (yeah) but they had reasonable doubt(stupid Jury).

Can't win them all. Can win all but one if I have anything to say about it.

I note for the record that the Defendant was convicted of the underlying traffic offense meaning he got stuck with a small fine but court fees of over $500 (for the Jury). I note further he lost his license because he refused the tests which triggered a BMV suspension of his license for a year. And then he lost his job...cause he didn't have a license.

He also paid out the wazzoo hiring two attorneys (cause you can't beat me one on one, even when I have no real evidence).

H


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 11:13 AM

CHRISISALL


I feel for you.

Simonisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 11:19 AM

TANKOBITE


Well, sorry to hear this; can't win 'em all, but God knows we want to.

-----------------------------------------------------------
There's a widow in sleepy Chester
Who weeps for her only son;
There's a grave on the Pabeng River,
A grave that the Burmans shun;
And there's Subadar Prag Tewarri
Who tells how the work was done.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 11:49 AM

FREDGIBLET


Sorry to hear that, are they at least letting you take a few days off t mourn?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 12:32 PM

KIRKULES


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Perhaps it was a bridge too far. A Jury with several folks on it with prior convictions for DUI (bad pool, could not get rid of them all).



Sounds like a possible case of Jury Nullification. There's not much you could do about that.

Can't say I'm totally against Nullification in some cases.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 12:38 PM

WASHNWEAR


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
I am no longer undefeated. I note this in the RWED forum because it is big news...a five year undefeated Jury streak shot down. Justice denied.



Okay, so you're no Denny Crane...but you can still blame it on the mad cow...

Your situation reminds me inexplicably (and not terribly helpfully) of one of the truest observations I ever heard on M*A*S*H, delivered ironically enough by Frank Burns: "If it weren't for war, you wouldn't know what peace was."

'Sides I'm told that humility - while seldom appreciated by the humilitized - is a positive quality...though I grant the folks who told me that probably weren't thinking of trial lawyers...

It was what it was when we got here!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:09 AM

HERO


I want everybody to know that I am back at work this morning and have already sent one poor fella to jail (which brightens up any day...for me anyway...not so much for the person going to jail).

Anyway...the wheels of Justice spinning smoothly again...despite the 10 inches of snow on the ground outside that we've been getting since yesterday morning.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:55 AM

FIVVER


10 inches of snow? Sounds custom made for our fine old southern tradition of chain gangs.

I've sentenced boys younger than you
to the gas chamber.
I didn't want to do it.
I felt I owed it to them.

Judge Smales

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:56 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST


There is liberty in failure my friend... Perhaps a loss isn't such a bad thing in this case. To be concerned with a 'winning streak' for so long clouds the issue no? So much so that the job becomes about that as opposed to justice.

All the best for the future.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:55 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
There is liberty in failure my friend... Perhaps a loss isn't sauch a bad thing in this case. To be concerned with a 'winning streak' for so long clouds the issue no? So much so that the job becomes about that as opposed to justice.


Thats only a problem if a Defendant is innocent. I never try innocent people. Not once. If I think they are not guilty...I don't try the case.

That said, if I think they are guilty, then I try the case no matter how bad it is (if they don't take a reasonable offer). Thats why this case was such a stretch. Guilty fella, reasonable offer was rejected, not a lot of evidence. Add to that some real bad luck with my jury pool and its a recipe for a loss. Although in this case the Jury said afterwards they were about 70% there but had reasonable doubt (dumb Jury).


H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 7:12 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:

Thats only a problem if a Defendant is innocent. I never try innocent people.

Really- there ARE no innocents. We all exceed the speed limit on occasion, park too far from the curb, have that tiny percentage of alcohol too much in our veins while driving, answer the cell phone while driving in case it's an emergency, roll ever-so-slightly through a stop sign, etc.
Laws that were put in place to effect public safety are now mostly a local government's cash cow.
There is a speed trap on the Long Island Expressway where the road dips down and peeps going 55 inevitably through laws of gravity end up just over 60 on that Nassau County literally DEPENDS on to make money.
Didn't get me, though.

Speed-conscious Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 8:00 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST


Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

Thats only a problem if a Defendant is innocent. I never try innocent people. Not once. If I think they are not guilty...I don't try the case.


That was my stand point. From the point of someone who is innocent. You losing your 'winning streak' is for them a good thing. Now of course, I'll bow to your better judgement at being able to assess an innocent person and so go with your approach, but to the uninitiated hearing that their case is coming up against someone who has never lost and has a record winning streak, if he/she is indeed innocent... It is a serious problem.

That said. Someone such as yourself who can without doubt, jail the guilty and continue to do so knowing that justice has been served then, that's good, and long may your winning streak continue.





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 8:29 AM

HERO


I note for the record that I have always considered convicting guilty folks to be easy. Its convicting the innocent that takes real skill...

And I hear complaints about traffic violations from a lot of people. But most traffic laws make good sense. You want 25mph speed limits in business and residential areas. You need 15mph limits in school zones. No Left Turn means don't turn left...because its a real problem.

Now I agree...speed traps are just plain silly. We have a road that 55, 65, 45, and 55 in the space of five miles. Thats because it goes through four jurisdictions one of which likes to make money off of it. It aint right, I don't prosecute for them. But I think that's different from cops doing speed enforcement near school zones or other problem areas...because they're problem areas...if they were not a problem we'd put those cops somewhere else (or make us a speed trap), but at least for now my City does not need to cheat...we get plenty of tickets from routine enforcement.

And don't get me started on red light cameras or those ones that measure speed...I'm completely against them on principal (how do you cross-examine a camera?)

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 10:33 AM

FREMDFIRMA


That is one of the few places we'll ever be in agreement.

One of them local speed-counter machines (the ones that flash your speed at the top as a reminder to slow down or something) clocked my Targa at over 80mph.

A Targa has a restricted 50cc engine with a 2 speed centrifugal clutch, and off the shelf tops out at 32mph - heavily modified variants have at most topped 48mph.

But 80mph? please - I suspect speed-counter was pinging back off some other moving part like the flywheel due to the lightweight construction of the vehicle, but it does give lie to the accuracy of the device.

The problem with the red light cameras is folks hammering the brakes for a panic stop the instant the light turns yellow and folks behind them piling up - there's an intersection off Rte2 in MD that is SO bad that even when there is not an accident being cleared there, the wash of debris and broken glass tends to cause a lot of flat and blown out tires about a mile or so down the road.

Most problems folks attempt to solve with those red light cameras could more easily be fixed with proper light timing, a 3/4 second yellow is neither enough to stop nor safely clear the intersection.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 10:50 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
The problem with the red light cameras is folks hammering the brakes for a panic stop the instant the light turns yellow and folks behind them piling up - there's an intersection off Rte2 in MD that is SO bad that even when there is not an accident being cleared there, the wash of debris and broken glass tends to cause a lot of flat and blown out tires about a mile or so down the road.


The real problem is the enforcement. It pictures your plate, prints a ticket, and mails it to you. Only its not a traffic ticket...its an administrative ticket, which means there are no criminal sanctions for just saying 'screw you' and not paying. You get no trial...you get a hearing, in front of a City official, not a judge or magistrate. They require no proof. Note this is Ohio and may differ in your state.

If a Police Officer issues a ticket he must appear. He must identify the driver as the driver of the car. He must testify as to the violation he observed, his qualifications (including both training and employment as an active police officer...on duty, in uniform, in a marked police cruiser), and venue (City, county, State). If he used a Radar he has to testify about his training, exactly how he calibrates the unit, and that he calibrated it before coming on duty, and that it was working properly. If any of these things get left out, its case over.

Now the camera is not calibrated daily, there is no way to identify the driver of the vehicle, the cameras are owned and operated by a private corporation, and in many cases the radars they use have not been accepted by local courts (not saying they could not be...just that they have not gone to the trouble).

Guilty or not you wont catch me paying a ticket like that till the Supreme Court of Ohio says I have to and maybe not even then.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:50 PM

FREMDFIRMA


I'll grant the logical requirement for the officers testimony - BUT...

Cops are people, and people lie.

The only ticket I ever got in my life was for 56mph in a 35mph zone when I was nineteen, and the bitch of it was that I was DOING 33mph at the time as was the truck in front of me.

I see the cop, check the speedo and worry no more.

And up he comes with flashing lights.

And hands me a freakin ticket.

The area he supposedly clocked me in, has a 45mph speed limit, the sign is in the MIDDLE of the road, on a thin strip of concrete, but it's there, and I brought a photo to court with me.

The cop lied top to bottom, they were flat gonna burn me cause I was nineteen and that was that, the judge KNEW he was lying and even corrected him to make his story more palatable, twice.

The transcript has no record those corrections.
Nor was any record of the radar shot requested or shown at any time, it was the officers word alone.

And the sumbitch, for daring to protest innocence, AND for the absolute temerity of bringing that picture, slapped me with $105.00 in court costs on TOP of the ticket, which stood, in spite of absolute proof that the area in question was a 45mph zone, NOT a 35mph zone.

His dis-honor had a right nice set of rims on his car, which paid the ticket and the fine with a little left over, so there is justice in the world after all - you just wont find it in a courtroom.

Maryland has a pretty awful record of abusive and corrupt behavior by the police against teens, but I gave the courts the benefit of the doubt.. ONCE.

Since then, for a few years after, my personal car mounted an anti-radar Bollix with a range of several hundred yards, but eventually I realized that the real offense that day was simply my youth, and time had rendered the device pointless.

The way that courts automatically discount the word of anyone under 21 while automatically accepting the word of a cop - is a corruption of the process, any witness should be judged on the quality and corroboration of their testimony alone rather than age or employment.

To that end, and because of that, every single youngling I know has a recording device of some kind, to even the odds.

As an aside, suddenly it's become SOP for Baltimore City police to confiscate all electronic devices from teens while they're being "questioned".... gee, I wonder why.

Do me just the one favor, Hero - if you catch a Cop Testilying, even if you *have* to close the case, at the very least take him aside and deliver a damn scary verbal ass kicking, it's polluted the process to the point where MD Juvie courts almost universally discount police testimony as complete BS, which has indirectly resulted in the "street justice" incidents we've been seeing.

Someone has to put a leash on perjurious cops, and as a prosecutor and agent of the state - that should be you.

Just sayin,

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:00 PM

SIMONWHO


What's going on? Hero is making jokes that are actually funny, he's losing cases...

Who are you and what have you done with the original Hero? Just curious, not asking for him back or anything.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:17 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by SimonWho:
What's going on? Hero is making jokes that are actually funny, he's losing cases...


His Girlfriend is having an amazingly positive affect on him...

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:58 PM

VETERAN

Don't squat with your spurs on.


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
I am no longer undefeated. ....I note for the record that the Defendant was convicted of the underlying traffic offense meaning he got stuck with a small fine but court fees of over $500 (for the Jury). I note further he lost his license because he refused the tests which triggered a BMV suspension of his license for a year. And then he lost his job...cause he didn't have a license.

He also paid out the wazzoo hiring two attorneys (cause you can't beat me one on one, even when I have no real evidence).

H




Sounds like a Pyrrhic victory for the defendant. I'll bet in some states that punishment for a 1st time DWI isn't as severe as all that you described. Plus to lose his job too, ouch.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 28, 2008 8:55 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


That's why DUI lawyers advise their clients to refuse all "tests" and to never speak to police, which is their right according to the US Constitution. You know, what Bush calls a "goddamed peice of paper", that you swore an oath to serve and protect.

Yes, it's easy to win during a total SECRET Prohibition on alcohol, with "sobriety" tests that have no "passing score", since a person is already under arrest for DUI BEFORE the test. And "alcohol test" machines that cannot test for alcohol. BTW, alcohol has no "odor". You always win by cheating. Only 1% of defendants have at least $10,000 cash to hire an attorney, and most of those make the fatal mistake of not hiring a DUI specialist. Convicting the innocent is ike shooting fish in a barrel.

As you confess in this post, you care nothing about justice, only "winning" by cheating. And we have a Constitutionally guaranteed God-given Natural right to travel by driving, without a Communist internal passport driver license contract extorted at gunpoint by police state death squads.

I do agree with your legal advice to never pay a robocop ticket, for lacking mandatory personal service of process. Over 1,000 robocops have been killed by bullets, firebombs, Thermite and The Law:
http://piratenews.org/kill-robocops.html

Quote:

"Strictly speaking, a driver can register a BAC of 0.00% and still be convicted of a DUI. The level of BAC does not clear a driver when it is below the 'presumed level of intoxication.'"
—Tennessee Driver Handbook and Driver License Study Guide
http://www.state.tn.us/safety/handbook.html

"One of the major defects in many methods of blood-alcohol analysis is the failure to identify ethanol to the exclusion of all other chemical compounds. Thus a client with other compounds in his blood or breath may have a high 'blood-alcohol' reading with little or no ethanol in his body. If you look at the warranties - it is sort of interesting - none of the breath machine manufacturers warrant these things to actually test blood alcohol."
—Lawrence Taylor, attorney at law, DUICENTER.COM, Drunk Driving Defense, 5th Edition (2000)
http://www.duicenter.com

"Let me start with law enforcement conacts with respect to traffic stops, for suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The Fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights states that we are not to be forced to incrimnate ourselves. The actual wording is, you cannot be compelled to be a witness against yourself. If you are stopped for suspicion of DUI, these are your rights regardless of the laws of your state. First of all, you are to deny having consumed any alcoholic beverages whatsoever. You are never to admit to having one or two drinks. If you admit to consuming even one drop of alcohol, you open the door to 'probable cause', allowing the police officer to search your car for open containers. Next, you are never to submit to a Field Sobriety Test. You are to refuse to do so. They cannot make you walk the line, they cannot make you balance or anything else. Now when you are arrested, you are to refuse to allow a blood-alcohol test, regardless of what state law 'requires', such as revocation of driving priveleges for a period of time. That's an attempt to compel you to be a witness against yourself. Supreme Court decisions in this area are very specific with regards to your rights as folows: Lefkowitz vs Turley, and the Fifth Amendment, provides that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, and permits him to refuse to any any other qustions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings."
—George Gordon Law Hour, The Policeman is not your friend - He is your adversary, October 30, 2007
http://db.georgegordon.com/index.php?yr=2007

"I saw two officers as before, who rode up to me, with their pistols in their hands, said God damn you stop, if go an Inch further, you are a dead Man, and swore if we did not turn in to that pasture, they would blow our brains out. Major Mitchel of the 5th Regt clapd his Pistol to my head, and said he was going to ask me some questions, if I did not tell the truth, he would blow my brains out. I told him I esteemed myself a man of truth, that he had stopped me on the highway, & made me a prisoner, I knew not by what right; I would tell him the truth; I was not afraid."
—Paul Revere, owner of RevereWare¨, sworn affidavit: "Memorandum on Events of April 18, 1775" (declassified Top Secret), while under arrest (and subsequent escape) from Redcoat martial-law traffic police at Minute Man National Historic Park, Paul Revere Capture Site, on the eve of the American Revolutionary War and kicking off the Battle of Lexington and Concord, against the army, navy and courts of King George III, heriditary dictator of England who attempted "gun control" by an Assault Weapons Ban of defensive 50-caliber muskets and cannon, Paul Revere's Ride, by David Hackett Fischer
http://www.patriotresource.com/documents/revere.html

"Mr. Speaker, my subject today is whether America is a police state. If we are, what are we going to do about it? Most police states, surprisingly, come about through the democratic process with majority support. The masses are easily led to believe that security and liberty are mutually exclusive, and demand for security far exceeds that for liberty. Our government already keeps close tabs on just about everything we do and requires official permission for nearly all of our activities. One might take a look at our Capitol for any evidence of a police state. We see: barricades, metal detectors, police, military soldiers at times, dogs, ID badges required for every move, vehicles checked at airports and throughout the Capitol. The people are totally disarmed, except for the police and the criminals. But worse yet, surveillance cameras in Washington are everywhere to ensure our safety. Like gun control, people control hurts law-abiding citizens much more than the law-breakers. Centralized control and regulations are required in a police state. Not only do we need a license to drive, but we also need special belts, bags, buzzers, seats and environmentally dictated speed limits. Or a policeman will be pulling us over to levy a fine, and he will be toting a gun for sure. Let's reject the police state."
—Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, MD (R-TX, 1988 Libertarian Party candidate for President, Landslide GOP candidate for president in 2008), speech in House of Representatives, United States Congress, "Are We Doomed To Be a Police State?" June 27, 2002
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr062702.htm

"There's a report out tonight that 24-years ago I was apprehended in Kennebunkport, Maine, for a DUI. That's an accurate story. I'm not proud of that. I oftentimes said that years ago I made some mistakes. I occasionally drank too much and I did on that night. I was pulled over. I admitted to the policeman that I had been drinking. I paid a fine. And I regret that it happened. But it did. I've learned my lesson."
—President George W. Bush, CNN Larry King Live, November 2, 2000


Dick Cheney has 2 DUI arrests and convictions

THE PROHIBITION TIMES
AMERICA'S SECRET HISTORY OF THE CURRENT PROHIBITION ON ALCOHOL
http://piratenews.org/theprohibitiontimes.html





Terminator: The Summer Glau Chronicles
FOX SAYS THE END OF USA ON APRIL 19/21 2011
(Anniversary of Govt Massacres at Battle of Lexington and Concord, Waco, OK City Bombing)
Free downloads of all TV episodes:
http://www.fox.com/fod/player.htm?show=tscc
Official website of TTSCC with River Tam's topless torso:
http://fox.com/terminator/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendi_Deng
Hanoi Hannity: "I voted for the Sino-American Alliance."
"US ports owned by Commie China is good for me."
"Dead and disabled US soldiers are good for me."
"Outsourcing your job is very good for me."
"Sir Rupert dines with Hillary every week."
"Ron Paul does not exist in my 'Verse."
"Vote for Billary not McCain."

"As far as Chinese goes, I resented it."
-Adam Tudyk, The Making of Firefly


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 28, 2008 9:35 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by piratenews:
That's why DUI lawyers advise their clients to refuse all "tests" and to never speak to police, which is their right according to the US Constitution.


I remind everyone the PN is not a lawyer. I don't need to remind you he's also somewhat unhinged.

He is right that refusal to do anything creates an evidence problem.

However, I do note for the record that a growing number of states have made refusal to take the test proof that you were intoxicated, which solves the problem. Ohio is considering this in our new DUI law (which we get every two years). Also if you have a CDL (aka a truck driver) then in Ohio you can lose it for refusing the tests...even if you are being cited for driving your car (as opposed to your rig).

Finally, it should be noted that this case was a fifty-fifty shot at best, I think if I had one or two more indicators or perhaps a video of the driving I'd have gotten them. And most juries don't leave me stuck with folks with a prior DUI conviction ON the jury...just hardly ever happens that I can't knock them all off (I get three challenges).
Quote:


Yes, it's easy to win during a total SECRET Prohibition on alcohol, with "sobriety" tests that have no "passing score", since a person is already under arrest for DUI BEFORE the test. And "alcohol test" machines that cannot test for alcohol. BTW, alcohol has no "odor".


No odor? Tell that to the guy who showed up drunk this morning. He had an odor I'd call alcohol and you could smell it 10 feet away (he blew a .28).

Each FST has a number of possible clues, for example the Horizontal Gaze (the pen test) has 6. You need 4 to arrest. All an officer needs is to hit the arrest point on one of the three tests. Note, he can still arrest, but your going to get a deal. It happens sometimes that folk just should not be driving, even if they are not legally intoxicated (like a fella passed out in traffic at a green light...it happens). Most times we get them home safely, sometimes they get charged (especially if they are disorderly or have a record).

As for the BAC machine. If I blow in it right now, I'll get .000. If I go have enough drinks, its going to measure .08, the legal limit. It measures alcohol content of the breath sample. Other machines measure blood and urine. Those cool new SCRAM units measure sweat.
Quote:


You always win by cheating.


Please quote the line what I said that indicates I cheat. I don't have to cheat...cause I'm fairly good at what I do and folks in my area don't tolerate DUIs.
Quote:


Only 1% of defendants have at least $10,000 cash to hire an attorney, and most of those make the fatal mistake of not hiring a DUI specialist.


Wow, $10,000. Hell, I'd only charge somebody $1500 ($1,000 down and $500 for a trial) and I am a fracking expert. Most attorneys will charge a similar amount. Some less, but you get what you pay for. DUIs are pretty standard fee affairs...if your paying more then say $2,000 or so your really getting taken. That would not include the cost of an expert if you want one.

So yes, most don't have $10,000 for a lawyer...but then I've never met an honost lawyer who'd charge that much. Maybe in LA...
Quote:


As you confess in this post, you care nothing about justice, only "winning" by cheating. And we have a Constitutionally guaranteed God-given Natural right to travel by driving, without a Communist internal passport driver license contract extorted at gunpoint by police state death squads.


The word "driving" is not in the US Constitution...and I'm pretty sure its not in the Bible.
Quote:


I do agree with your legal advice to never pay a robocop ticket, for lacking mandatory personal service of process.


Thats a typical Freeman argument, but in Ohio service by mail is sufficient. Those tickets are not valid for a lot of reasons...but service is not an issue.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 5, 2008 2:25 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Ohio is in the federal 6th Circuit, which has many case citations from Ohio requiring proper personal service of process. Mail is not good enough, and there must be a signature from the adult defendant, as required for all federal civil lawsuits per FRCP Rule 4.

Quote:

"Strictly speaking, a driver can register a BAC of 0.00% and still be convicted of a DUI. The level of BAC does not clear a driver when it is below the 'presumed level of intoxication.'"
—Tennessee Driver Handbook and Driver License Study Guide
http://www.state.tn.us/safety/handbook.html



There is no passing score for a DUI test, since a sucker is already under arrest before the test.

If prosecutors drop DUI charges against an innocent person, the victim can sue for false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, and criminal charges can be filed against the cop and prosecutor, and the prosecutor can be disbarred, like Mike Nifong.

There is no such thing as a "passing score" for a BAC test, which this next sucker found out the hard way, after spending many $1,000s of dollars. That's why copsters rig most BAC machines to never score below 0.02%.

Quote:

Man passes breathalyzer, cited anyway

By CARL BURNETT JR.
The Eagle-Gazette Staff
cburnett@nncogannett.com

Lancaster — When Russell Errett went out to play a game of pickup basketball with friends April 19, he didn’t expect it to cost him thousands of dollars and end up in a court case. But that’s exactly where it is headed.

Errett, 50, was charged with operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated and weaving outside lanes of traffic.

“It makes no sense to me,” said Errett’s attorney, James Linehan. “He cooperated with police, took the breathalyzer test and scored zeros, and yet he was still cited for OVI (Operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated). Clearly he wasn’t intoxicated.”
City Prosecutor Terre Vandervoort said her office had started reviewing the case on Wednesday.

“We are talking to the officers who were present, reviewing any video tape,” Vandervoort said. “There could be a number of reasons why someone could not score on breathalyzer and still be cited. We are certain he was driving in a way that was putting other people in risk. We are in the process of reviewing everything.”
Errett had gone out earlier on that Thursday with friends, according to police reports. He had told the officer who had pulled him over he had a beer earlier in the day, but that was all.

“He was the designated driver for his friends,” Linehan said. “They were drinking but he wasn’t. He was taking them home when he got pulled over.

Lancaster police patrolman J.D. Devereaux stopped Errett’s Lincoln LS sedan at 12:47 a.m.

A review of the police reports and the supplementary investigation report say Errett was polite, but failed the field sobriety test. Errett was then read his Miranda rights and arrested; his car was impounded.

Errett readily agreed to take the breathalyzer test, maintaining his innocence. He told the officer he had been confused and nervous when taking the field sobriety test.

When he took the test, the result came back with all zeros. He had no alcohol in his system.

“The legislature, the courts and law enforcement officers all want people to take a breath test when requested by law enforcement. Fair enough,” Linehan said. “But why take the test if being completely innocent is no defense against being arrested for a crime you didn’t commit? If I get a call from a potential client at 3 a.m. don’t I have to tell him, ‘Yeah you could take the test, but even if you test .000, you will still be arrested?’ ”

Errett was given the ticket, had to put up a $1,000 bond, pay to get his car out of the impound lot and hire an attorney with his trial scheduled for later this month.

“Coming on the heals of the sanctions against Prosecutor Attorney Mike Nifong in the Duke rape case, it is my hope that we have reached a point where it is no longer acceptable for the state to continue to prosecute innocent people. There should be some sanction for arresting someone the officer should reasonably know to be innocent,” Linehan said.

“In this case the officer had a scientific test, a scientific test which officers ask juries to believe everyday, which told the officer that my client was innocent,” Linehan said.

“And even with the knowledge that my client was innocent, he was still charged. The state should be held accountable for that. My client has been unfairly embarrassed and has had to expend attorney fees for a crime he didn’t commit. At an absolute minimum he is owed an apology and the community is owed an explanation as to why our officers are arresting people they know to be innocent.”

Linehan said with the trial pending, he has asked his client not to speak to the media.

The police department declined to comment and referred all questions to the Prosecutor’s Office.

http://www.ridl.us/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2412



In this case, "DUI" charges were dismissed by the prosecutor before trial. But those articles are not available on the web without a fee.
http://search.lancastereaglegazette.com/sp?aff=100&keywords=Errett&sub
mit=Go




Dick Cheney has 2 DUI arrests and convictions

THE PROHIBITION TIMES
AMERICA'S SECRET HISTORY OF THE CURRENT PROHIBITION ON ALCOHOL
http://piratenews.org/theprohibitiontimes.html

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 6, 2008 8:12 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Haha.....

You'd do best to get me off the jury if you were ever prosecuting anyone in my neck of the woods. I will never, ever, ever, ever, ever deliver anyone into the hands of the beast.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russian losses in Ukraine
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:45 - 982 posts
Punishing Russia With Sanctions
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:44 - 496 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:27 - 3338 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:09 - 709 posts
Elections; 2024
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:08 - 1982 posts
Grifter Donald Trump Has Been Indicted And Yes Arrested; Four Times Now And Counting. Hey Jack, I Was Right
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:06 - 753 posts
MO AG Suing Large Nationwide Child Sex-slave Trafficker
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:24 - 2 posts
New Peer-Reviewed Research Finds Evidence of 2020 Voter Fraud
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:21 - 7 posts
RCP's No Toss-Up State Map (3-15-2024)
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:19 - 2 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Mon, March 18, 2024 08:03 - 6091 posts
Israeli War
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:27 - 31 posts
CNN: Is the US on the brink of another civil war?
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:22 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL