I've had the same problems. I got stopped for a DWI, but it turns out that the cops were stopping every car travelling down that sidewalk that day. And that's profiling, and profiling is wrong.

Thanks for the tip about sidewalks. I'll be sure to keep my car off them in the future. Stupid rules!

No, they already have such strength and now lack the social controls that would ordinarily keep them from using it.

Man StunGuns five year old


Somebody oughta hold his ass down and zap HIM a few times....


Sidhe

i don't know if this counts, but i am a middle class white male. i was arrested for dui. i was sitting on the tail gate of my truck, keys in pocket, talking to two friends in my own apartment parking lot. i had 3 beers with dinner with more than an hour before. the cop came through and started hassling me about problems with drunk driving in the area and i told him there wouldn't be any problem here. he then gave me a field sobriety test, which i did fine on, but he was a bike cop and they have no cameras on the bike. his report stated i had to lean on a wall to prevent falling to the ground. (remember i was in a parking lot, no walls) my friends had split. after the field test the bastard spun me around and started to cuff me. i didn't physically resist but i said "what the hell are you doing" SOB dropped me to the cement and pepper sprayed me. he wrote on the report that i resisted and called in backup.

this was about 4 years ago. since then i've become friends with one of his colleagues who said that the cop who got me hates white guys with shaved heads and takes particular pleasure in f'ing up their lives. the cop who jacked me up is hispanic. shit happens both ways. (and no i am not a white supremist, i'm just bald)

the lawyers all said i would probably beat the charge in court but it would cost about $3-4000 grand, if i plead guilty it was 24 hours in sheriff joe's tent city and less than a $1000 fine.

I would have thought that beating the chrage at a cost of $4,000 would have been the cheaper way out once you consider the increase in /loss of insurance.

Has your insurance gone up?

You should have gotten a different lawyer.*

1. You were not observed to be operating a motor vehicle.

2. You were not breath-a-lyzed at the scene, nor do you indicate going to an ER for a blood draw for BAL.

Only thing he could have gotten you on was violation of an open container law, if your town has one, and the resisting, which should have been a reasonably easy defense given the likelihood of the other charges getting dropped.



* the commentary which follows presumes that we are provided an accurate report of the circumstances.

no it never did. i voluntarily surrendered my license for 90 days before trial so i wasn't required to file an sr-22. i have kept the same truck and insurance company with no accidents so the ins. company hasn't run my record since then.

that is an accurate account. i considered another lawyer, but i was trying to get on with a new company at the time. cases which are closed were no problem, but a pending case could have prevented me from getting the job.

i did forget to mention - i was breath a lyzed by the "backup" that came. i blew a .01 which is exactly the legal limit. if i had been operating my vehicle i would admit my guilt, but all i was doing is sitting out there BS'ing with my friends.

Please tell me that you transposed numbers.

most states have a legal limit of .10 for DUI.

Some have dropped it to .08 (like PA).

.01 is the equivalent of "I french kissed a woman who just had a shot right before you had me blow into the little tube."

Also, the breath test is not usually admissable without the blood draw. The breathalyzer does not generate a printout, therefore there is no direct evidence beyond the officer's report of the results.

the breath test is in a mobile van (uh, no shit? why didn't you say a MOBILE van..) anway - it does print out. there is no requirement for blood in arizona. yes i did transpose the numbers, thank you.

i've never looked it up, but they told me that even if i did beat the dui they would nail me with a tag-on charge. something about - not intoxicated, but there was alcohol in the system, presence of keys, and a vehicle. sounds like BS to me, but that is what i have been told.

Someone once told me that if you ever feel you are too drunk to drive, you should pull over and either place the keys under the car or in the trunk, demonstrating that you had no intention of driving intoxicated.

But see what I mean? You "looked" like a skinhead to this guy, you were sitting on the tailgate of a pick-up truck, and from what you describe, I doubt if you were wearing a business suit. I'd like to hear the story of a white male with a regular hair cut, wearing a business suit, sitting in front of his nice suburban home in a well-to-do neighborhood who got the same treatment.

Because a white male with a regular hair cut, wearing a business suit, doesn't sit in front of his nice suburban home in a well-to-do neighborhood. And it doesn't happen to anyone sitting in front of their nice suburban home in a well to do neighborhood because the cops are only looking for people that don't belong there.
It does happen however, to white males with a regular haircuts, wearing business suits, when they're where the police are having trouble.:p

guess again, you don't have to be driving. you have to have control of the vehicle. basically if there are keys, you, and alcohol use you can be convicted of dui. at least in arizona.