DUI Blog

DUI Bloghttp://prisonplace.com/blogs/dui_blog/default.aspxenCommunityServer 2007.1 (Build: 20910.1126)Police Using DUI Roadblocks Illegallyhttp://prisonplace.com/blogs/dui_blog/archive/2007/12/06/police-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally.aspxThu, 06 Dec 2007 18:46:00 GMT623edb09-2630-4479-9dc1-212c1bc98669:2856arhunt2http://prisonplace.com/blogs/dui_blog/rsscomments.aspx?PostID=2856http://prisonplace.com/blogs/dui_blog/archive/2007/12/06/police-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally.aspx#comments    <img alt="" />This Blog is compliments of <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" target="_blank">THE LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE TAYLOR</a> A law firm of 11 <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/dui_law_firm/drunk_driving_defense_attorneys.html" target="_blank" title="California DUI Defense Attorneys">California DUI lawyers</a> (including 4 former prosecuting attorneys) practicing criminal DUI Defense exclusively, the Law Offices of Lawrence Taylor serves clients from offices in <a href="http://losangeles.duicentral.com/" title="Los Angeles">Los Angeles</a>, <a href="http://sanfrancisco.duicentral.com/" title="San Francisco">San Francisco</a>, <a href="http://orangecounty.duicentral.com/" title="Orange County">Orange County</a>, <a href="http://riverside.duicentral.com/" title="Riverside">Riverside</a>, <a href="http://sandiego.duicentral.com/" title="San Diego">San Diego</a>, <a href="http://sanfrancisco.duicentral.com/marin_county.html" title="Marin County">Marin County</a> and Las Vegas. Supported by a staff of 5 former law enforcement <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/dui_law_firm/drunk_driving_defense_experts.html" target="_blank" title="DUI Experts">DUI experts</a>, including 3 former DWI police officers, each <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/dui_law_firm/dui_lawyer.html" target="_blank" title="DUI Lawyer">DWI lawyer</a> in the firm focuses entirely on drunk driving defense and criminal DUI related <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/drivers_license_suspension/" target="_blank" title="DMV License Suspensions">DMV license suspensions</a>. No cases but misdemeanor or <a href="http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc23153.htm" target="_blank" title="Felony DUI">felony DUI</a> defense (<a href="http://www.dmv.ca.gov/dl/driversafety/dsalcohol.htm" target="_blank" title="Driving Under the Influence">driving under the influence</a> of alcohol and/or <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/dui/drugs.html" title="Drugs">drugs</a>) are accepted.  <div class="post" id="post-756"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/09/05/ready-made-dui-arrest-reports/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Ready-Made DUI Arrest Reports">Ready-Made DUI Arrest Reports</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on September 5th, 2008 <div class="entry"> An increasing number of police officers are using pre-written arrest reports in drunk driving cases. In other words, they are writing out a batch of phony reports — including driving symptoms, slurred speech, failed field sobriety tests, admissions of drinking — and then just filling in the names, dates, etc., when they actually make an arrest.  Saves a lot of time. In this computer age, however, this practice is commonly abbreviated even further by using computer templates: word processing forms which have all of the “facts” already entered, with blanks to fill in for name, date, etc.   Following is an example of this time-saving approach to DUI law enforcement: DUI Suspects May Go Free Due to Questionable Arrest Reports <a href="http://www.wftv.com/news/5341891/detail.html">Orlando, FL  November 16</a> — Channel 9 Investigates has uncovered dozens of DUI suspects that may go free because sheriff’s deputies appear to be using pre-written arrest reports. There are some experts who believe this may even amount to perjury. When a deputy makes a DUI bust, the officer writes an arrest report. It’s the official record of what the deputy says happened. But Eyewitness News has uncovered dozens of Orange County DUI arrest reports that apparently have come from pre-written templates. One report, for instance, says the suspect “stumbled slightly when walking and swayed moderately … with a three inch to five inch orbital rotation/sway.” At least ten reports, written by the same deputy over a six-month period, use the exact same phrase. Even reports written by other deputies contain that exact phrase. In many reports, the deputy noticed the “strong odor of an alcoholic beverage within my interior cab.” That exact phrase appears in report after report. And it’s there whether the suspect’s blood alcohol content was anywhere from .03 to .16.  9 Investigates found 11 other reports, written by a different deputy, that use those exact words, again, no matter how much the suspect had to drink. “It just doesn’t smell right,” said DUI defense attorney Stu Hyman. “It’s a sad state of affairs when somebody hasn’t even committed the offense yet, but the report has already been written.” 9 Investigates found one deputy whose suspects always do an “orbital rotation” and always “counter-clockwise.” Five deputies always leave their suspects in the car for exactly five minutes before smelling alcohol. In one case, a suspect was described as “he/she.” It all leads Hyman to believe the reports were pre-written. “Why is it that everyone is swaying three to five inches? Why isn’t it two to eight? Why not one to seven inches?” questioned Hyman…. 9 Investigates found court testimony where a deputy indicated the sheriff’s office has computer DUI templates. The deputy testified, “I’ve been told people use them. I just choose not to.” None of this comes as any surprise to experienced DUI attorneys, who are used to seeing what I have called in my book and lectures “xeroxed symptoms”. This has been going on for a long time. (Years ago, I used to get a court order for copies of an arresting officer’s DUI reports for the previous 30 days; when the reports became an embarrassment, the Orange County (California) D.A.’s office finally appealed and stopped the judges from issuing the orders — but never prosecuted a single officer for perjury or filing a false report.) </div> An increasing number of police officers are using pre-written arrest reports in drunk driving cases. In other words, they are writing out a batch of phony reports — including driving symptoms, slurred speech, failed field sobriety tests, admissions of drinking — and then just filling in the names, dates, etc., when they actually make an […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F09%2F05%2Fready-made-dui-arrest-reports%2F&title=Ready-Made+DUI+Arrest+Reports">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F09%2F05%2Fready-made-dui-arrest-reports%2F&title=Ready-Made%20DUI%20Arrest%20Reports">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/09/05/ready-made-dui-arrest-reports/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=Ready-Made%20DUI%20Arrest%20Reports&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F09%2F05%2Fready-made-dui-arrest-reports%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/09/05/ready-made-dui-arrest-reports/#comments" title="Comment on Ready-Made DUI Arrest Reports">7 Comments »</a> </div> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/30/blood-draws-in-the-back-seat-by-the-dashboard-light/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Blood Draws in the Back Seat by the Dashboard Light">Blood Draws in the Back Seat by the Dashboard Light</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on August 30th, 2008 A few years ago, citizens suspected of DUI were given a choice to submit to either breath, blood or urine testing for alcohol concentration.  In the hysteria of MADD’s "War on Drunk Driving", however, things have changed.  Today, citizens (supposedly presumed innocent) are being told they must submit to a blood test — and, if they refuse, are being forcefully restrained by a blood technician (referred to as a phlebotomist).   See my post <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/07/15/taking-blood-by-force-2/">Taking Blood by Force</a>. Why?  Well, cops are aware that breathalyzers are relatively inaccurate and unreliable, and take time to set up, administer and keep records.  But they still preferred breath testing because they didn’t have to find a phlebotomist to draw the blood sample, usually requiring a trip to a hospital. The solution: draw the blood sample yourself.  Cops are throwing suspects across the  hoods of cars or pinning them down in back seats and forcefully jamming needles into screaming citizens suspected of having a .08% blood-alcohol level.  And this is a growing practice across our country.  See, for example, <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/10/18/forced-blood-draws-by-cops-in-back-seat/">Forced Blood Draws by Cops in Back Seat</a>, <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/26/forced-blood-draws-by-cops-spreading/">Forced Blood Draws by Cops Spreading </a>and <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/03/05/catheter-forced-into-penis-after-dui-arrest/">Catheter Forced Up Penis After DUI Arrest</a>. Judges, of course, are generally cowed by MADD and the political consequences of appearing "soft on drunk driving" at the next election.  But once in awhile, some judge remembers why he’s wearing black robes…. Judge: Troopers’ DUI  Blood Tests Unconstitutional <div class="storydeck" style="margin-left:40px;">Collecting sample in squad car with flashlight called inadequate</div> <div class="storydeck" style="margin-left:40px;"> </div> <a href="http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/local/95312.php">Tucson, AZ.  Aug. 30  </a>-  A Pima County Superior Court judge tossed out blood-alcohol evidence in an alleged drunken driving case, saying the state’s method of field blood draws is unconstitutional. <div style="margin-left:40px;">"Romantic though it may sound, phlebotomy in the back seat by the dashboard lights is, in this humble trial judge’s opinion, unconstitutional," Judge Richard S. Fields wrote in his opinion, issued Wednesday…</div> <div style="margin-left:40px;"> </div> <div style="margin-left:40px;">Chief Criminal Deputy County Attorney David Berkman said prosecutors will dismiss Noceo’s DUI charges and appeal Fields’ ruling.  "It’s just Judge Fields’ opinion," Berkman said Friday. "It doesn’t change anything."</div> <div style="margin-left:40px;"> </div> <div style="margin-left:40px;">Noceo’s blood was drawn as he sat in the dimly lit back seat of a DPS cruiser, with one officer holding a flashlight, Fields wrote in his ruling. The officer drawing the blood noted he wore gloves, but didn’t indicate whether he washed his hands beforehand.</div> <div style="margin-left:40px;"> </div> <div style="margin-left:40px;">The former director of University Medical Center’s emergency medicine unit, Dr. Kenneth Iverson, testified in an evidentiary hearing that blood draws by law enforcement officers are "degraded medicine," Fields wrote.</div> <div style="margin-left:40px;"> </div> <div style="margin-left:40px;">"Lack of medical oversight and self-correction were noted as criticisms of the program," Fields wrote. "Dr. Iverson noted that the law enforcement phlebotomists failed to follow protocols which themselves were drafted without medical input."</div> <div> </div> <div style="margin-left:40px;">Blood draws "carried out in roadside situations with poor lighting and in less than sanitary conditions" subject suspects to "an unreasonable risk of infection and injury," Fields wrote.</div> <div style="margin-left:40px;"> </div> <div style="margin-left:40px;">The state police agency’s failure to ensure procedures are being followed, Fields wrote, violates the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.</div> <div style="margin-left:40px;"> </div> <div style="margin-left:40px;">Fields said law enforcement agencies have alternatives such as using breath testers or having medical providers draw blood. "The goal of obtaining evidence cannot be allowed to wholly trump the goals of medical safety and human dignity if the intrusion is to pass Fourth Amendment muster," Fields wrote. </div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>Try to imagine yourself, an American citizen, stopped late at night on a highway with alcohol on your breath, thrown in the dark back seat of a police car, pinned down and struggling while a cop keeps trying to find your vein with a needle…</div><div class="post" id="post-751"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/19/the-drinking-age-debate-madd-vs-college-deans/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to The Drinking Age Debate: MADD vs College Deans">The Drinking Age Debate: MADD vs College Deans</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on August 19th, 2008 <div class="entry"> The debate over the minimum drinking age has continued for decades, with the recent focus being on whether it makes sense to send American youth to fight and perhaps die in foreign countries – but not to drink alcohol.  Our generals have expressed strong views on the subject.  See  <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/11/05/madd-vs-usmc/">MADD vs USMC</a>.  Mothers Against Drunk Driving, ever vigilant in its Prohibitionist goals (see <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/11/26/madd-and-the-new-prohibition/">MADD and the New Prohibition</a>), has fought hard (and successfully) against exposing our troops to the evils of alcohol.  A second front, long simmering, has now errupted: the drinking age for college students.  MADD, whose  "Mission Statement" was amended a few years ago from preventing drunk driving to including preventing underage drinking, is adamantly against lowering the age to 18.  But, as with their run-in with our military leaders, this powerful group has suddenly been confronted with a another formidable enemy. College Presidents Seek Debate on Drinking Age <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jWXhmLxHPcv8q_iFiN7nLt7RP8CgD92KSIBO0">Associated Press, Aug. 18  </a>- College presidents from about 100 of the nation’s best-known universities, including Duke, Dartmouth and Ohio State, are calling on lawmakers to consider lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18, saying current laws actually encourage dangerous binge drinking on campus. The movement called the Amethyst Initiative began quietly recruiting presidents more than a year ago to provoke national debate about the drinking age. "This is a law that is routinely evaded," said John McCardell, former president of Middlebury College in Vermont who started the organization. "It is a law that the people at whom it is directed believe is unjust and unfair and discriminatory." But even before the presidents begin the public phase of their efforts, which may include publishing newspaper ads in the coming weeks, they are already facing sharp criticism. Mothers Against Drunk Driving says lowering the drinking age would lead to more fatal car crashes. It accuses the presidents of misrepresenting science and looking for an easy way out of an inconvenient problem. MADD officials are even urging parents to think carefully about the safety of colleges whose presidents have signed on. "It’s very clear the 21-year-old drinking age will not be enforced at those campuses," said Laura Dean-Mooney, national president of MADD…  The statement the presidents have signed avoids calling explicitly for a younger drinking age. Rather, it seeks "an informed and dispassionate debate" over the issue and the federal highway law that made 21 the de facto national drinking age by denying money to any state that bucks the trend. But the statement makes clear the signers think the current law isn’t working, citing a "culture of dangerous, clandestine binge-drinking," and noting that while adults under 21 can vote and enlist in the military, they "are told they are not mature enough to have a beer." Furthermore, "by choosing to use fake IDs, students make ethical compromises that erode respect for the law.".. Duke President Richard Brodhead declined an interview request. But he wrote in a statement on the Amethyst Initiative’s Web site that the 21-year-old drinking age "pushes drinking into hiding, heightening its risks." It also prevents school officials "from addressing drinking with students as an issue of responsible choice." (Chuck) Hurley, (CEO) of MADD, has a different take on the presidents. "They’re waving the white flag," he said. (Thanks to Susan Sullivan and Lance Maxon.) </div> The debate over the minimum drinking age has continued for decades, with the recent focus being on whether it makes sense to send American youth to fight and perhaps die in foreign countries – but not to drink alcohol.  Our generals have expressed strong views on the subject.  See  MADD vs USMC.  Mothers Against Drunk Driving, ever vigilant […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F19%2Fthe-drinking-age-debate-madd-vs-college-deans%2F&title=The+Drinking+Age+Debate%3A+MADD+vs+College+Deans">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F19%2Fthe-drinking-age-debate-madd-vs-college-deans%2F&title=The%20Drinking%20Age%20Debate%3A%20MADD%20vs%20College%20Deans">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/19/the-drinking-age-debate-madd-vs-college-deans/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=The%20Drinking%20Age%20Debate%3A%20MADD%20vs%20College%20Deans&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F19%2Fthe-drinking-age-debate-madd-vs-college-deans%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/19/the-drinking-age-debate-madd-vs-college-deans/#comments" title="Comment on The Drinking Age Debate: MADD vs College Deans">1 Comment »</a> </div> <div class="post" id="post-750"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/18/ignition-interlock-devices-the-view-from-the-prosecution/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Ignition Interlock Devices: The View from the Prosecution">Ignition Interlock Devices: The View from the Prosecution</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on August 18th, 2008 <div class="entry"> I’ve railed in past posts about the ineffectiveness of ignition interlock devices (IIDs).  See <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/05/06/the-truth-about-ignition-interlock-devices/">The Truth About Ignition Interlock Devices</a>.  This latest sure-fire weapon, which <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/21/finally-an-end-to-drunk-driving/">MADD loudly claims will "eliminate drunk driving once and for all"</a>, is currently sweeping the country. We know what the Mothers think.  What about the prosecutors in the trenches? Prosecutors Express Doubt About New DUI Law <a href="http://www.myjournalcourier.com/news/doubt_19212___article.html/prosecutors_breathalyzer.html">Jacksonville, IL.  Aug. 2</a>  - While mandatory ignition locks equipped with a breathalyzer are suppose to prevent convicted first-time, drunken drivers from driving illegally, several area prosecutors doubt they will accomplish that purpose. The new mandate won’t take effect until Jan. 1, but prosecutors for Morgan, Scott and Greene counties are skeptical about how the offenders will be able to afford the costly monitoring device and pay their DUI fines, which the counties already find difficult to collect… He and other prosecutors see holes in the system. “It’s a step in the right direction,” said Scott County State’s Attorney David Cherry. “And, yet, it’s a costly device and doesn’t guarantee 100 percent that they won’t drive when they shouldn’t. That’s a problem.” “If you have a crazy drunk who is going to drink and drive, this doesn’t necessarily stop them from driving,” Mr. Bonjean noted. “It only stops them from driving the vehicle that they put the (breathalyzer) device in. “That doesn’t mean they can’t go get in their friend’s vehicle or their kid’s vehicle or get in their wife’s vehicle, which would be a violation, and drive that,” Mr. Bonjean said. Greene County State’s Attorney Matt Goetten echoed the two prosecutors’ concerns, adding, “What’s to prevent them from having someone not drinking blow into it and start the car up?”.. Mothers Against Drunk Driving called the new law one of the most important pieces of DUI legislation passed in Illinois in several years, because ignition interlocks stop vehicles from being driven by those who are drunk, Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White said in a press release he issued last month. Those on the front lines are skeptical. “I personally don’t think it will have much, if any, effect on DUI offenders,” Mr. Bonjean said. “The only thing I think it is going to do is create a larger market for the (breathalyzer) devices, themselves. “I think whoever owns stock in these (breathalyzer) companies is probably going to do fairly well, because this opens up a new (sales) avenue for them,” he said.   Exactly.  See my earlier post, <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2006/11/21/ignition-interlock-devices-dangerous-but-profitable/">Ignition Interlock Devices: Dangerous But Profitable</a>. </div> I’ve railed in past posts about the ineffectiveness of ignition interlock devices (IIDs).  See The Truth About Ignition Interlock Devices.  This latest sure-fire weapon, which MADD loudly claims will "eliminate drunk driving once and for all", is currently sweeping the country. We know what the Mothers think.  What about the prosecutors in the trenches? Prosecutors Express Doubt About New DUI Law Jacksonville, IL.  Aug. […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F18%2Fignition-interlock-devices-the-view-from-the-prosecution%2F&title=Ignition+Interlock+Devices%3A+The+View+from+the+Prosecution">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F18%2Fignition-interlock-devices-the-view-from-the-prosecution%2F&title=Ignition%20Interlock%20Devices%3A%20The%20View%20from%20the%20Prosecution">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/18/ignition-interlock-devices-the-view-from-the-prosecution/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=Ignition%20Interlock%20Devices%3A%20The%20View%20from%20the%20Prosecution&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F18%2Fignition-interlock-devices-the-view-from-the-prosecution%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/18/ignition-interlock-devices-the-view-from-the-prosecution/#comments" title="Comment on Ignition Interlock Devices: The View from the Prosecution">4 Comments »</a> </div> <div class="post" id="post-749"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/14/another-life-sentence-for-drunk-driving/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Another Life Sentence for Drunk Driving">Another Life Sentence for Drunk Driving</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on August 14th, 2008 <div class="entry"> So what do you do with someone who has the genetic disease of alcoholism – and continues to drink and drive?  Get him treatment for his disease?  Or maybe you throw him in prison for the rest of his life…. Wichita County Man Gets Life Sentence for 10th DWI <a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/5932916.html">Wichita Falls, TX.  Aug. 8 </a> -    A man with nine previous drunken driving convictions was sentenced to life in prison.  Kenneth Chris Oneal, 58, received the maximum sentence Thursday after jurors convicted him of driving while intoxicated-repetition, his 10th drunken-driving related offense… Well, you say, he may be an alcoholic, but he didnt have to choose to drive.  But that’s a Catch-22, isn’t it?  I mean, part of the legal definition of driving while intoxicated is impaired judgment – the inability to make rational and intelligent choices. This sentence is far from an aberration.  See, for example, <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/08/third-dui-life-in-prison/">Third DUI = Life in Prison</a> and <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2006/10/08/99-years-for-drunk-driving/">99 Years for Drunk Driving</a>.  For 15 years now, the DUI fatality rate has remained fairly stable (see <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2006/05/30/maddness/">MADDness</a> and  <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/05/27/latest-figures-in-madds-war-on-drunk-driving/">Latest Figures in MADD’s War on Drunk Driving</a>).   In view of the fact that most fatalities are caused by recidivists — usually alcoholics — isn’t it time to consider alternatives to MADD’s hysterical vengeance/prohibition approach?  Read <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2006/06/07/time-for-a-change/">Time for a Change </a>. (Thanks to Tom Termini) </div> So what do you do with someone who has the genetic disease of alcoholism – and continues to drink and drive?  Get him treatment for his disease?  Or maybe you throw him in prison for the rest of his life…. Wichita County Man Gets Life Sentence for 10th DWI Wichita Falls, TX.  Aug. 8  -    A man with […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F14%2Fanother-life-sentence-for-drunk-driving%2F&title=Another+Life+Sentence+for+Drunk+Driving">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F14%2Fanother-life-sentence-for-drunk-driving%2F&title=Another%20Life%20Sentence%20for%20Drunk%20Driving">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/14/another-life-sentence-for-drunk-driving/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=Another%20Life%20Sentence%20for%20Drunk%20Driving&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F14%2Fanother-life-sentence-for-drunk-driving%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/14/another-life-sentence-for-drunk-driving/#comments" title="Comment on Another Life Sentence for Drunk Driving">5 Comments »</a> </div> <div class="post" id="post-748"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/12/the-slow-death-of-the-fourth-amendment/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to The Slow Death of the Fourth Amendment">The Slow Death of the Fourth Amendment</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on August 12th, 2008 <div class="entry"> The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects American citizens from being subjected to police intrusions without "probable cause".  The Michigan Supreme Court held that DUI roadblocks violated this constitutional protection.  On appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, however, that decision was reversed.  In a 5-4 decision, the Court found a "DUI exception" to the Fourth Amendment.  Although admittedly a violation of the Fourth Amendment, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote, the "minimal intrusions" into citizens’ privacy was  "outweighed" by the governmental interest in apprehending drunk drivers.  <a href="http://caselaw.duicenter.com/sitz01.html">Sitz v. Michigan</a> I’ve often reminded readers of this blog that we are a nation of legal precedent:  once a legal doctrine is adopted by the courts in a specific situation, it is thereafter applied in a broader context.  The danger of the Sitz decision goes far beyond the DUI roadblock situation:  if  police can stop you without reason for possible drunk driving today, then they can stop you for any reason tommorrow.  (See <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2006/06/05/sobriety-checkpoints-the-slippery-slope/">Sobriety Checkpoints: The Slippery Slope</a>.)   Community Declares War on Crime Mayor issues curfew order <a href="http://www.helena-arkansas.com/news/x960030171/Community-declares-war-on-crime-Mayor-issues-curfew-order">Helena, Ark.  Aug. 7</a>  -  Mayor James Valley Thursday issued an executive order declaring an emergency curfew in certain sections of Helena-West Helena effective immediately. In his order, Valley states the city has the duty to provide protection for its citizens and visitors and that certain areas of the city have been “under siege” with repeated gunfire, loitering, drug dealing and other general mayhem. Valley has ordered H–WH officers to treat the “curfew zone” as a “zero tolerance zone”, which means that no loitering, “hanging out” will be permitted. All foot traffic, bicycle, horseback, moped, motorcycle, riding mower, golf cart or other mode of transportation will be subject to stop and investigation. (Emphasis added)   And this is how it starts…. (Thanks to David O’Shea) </div> The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects American citizens from being subjected to police intrusions without "probable cause".  The Michigan Supreme Court held that DUI roadblocks violated this constitutional protection.  On appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, however, that decision was reversed.  In a 5-4 decision, the Court found a "DUI exception" to the Fourth Amendment.  Although admittedly […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F12%2Fthe-slow-death-of-the-fourth-amendment%2F&title=The+Slow+Death+of+the+Fourth+Amendment">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F12%2Fthe-slow-death-of-the-fourth-amendment%2F&title=The%20Slow%20Death%20of%20the%20Fourth%20Amendment">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/12/the-slow-death-of-the-fourth-amendment/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=The%20Slow%20Death%20of%20the%20Fourth%20Amendment&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F12%2Fthe-slow-death-of-the-fourth-amendment%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/12/the-slow-death-of-the-fourth-amendment/#comments" title="Comment on The Slow Death of the Fourth Amendment">5 Comments »</a> </div> <div class="post" id="post-747"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/07/dui-logic/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to DUI Logic">DUI Logic</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on August 7th, 2008 <div class="entry"> For those of you unfamiliar with the logic of The War on Drunk Driving, consider the following story from yesterday’s news… Recent DUI Checkpoint A Success <a href="http://www.wpxi.com/news/17111803/detail.html">Pittsburgh, PA.  Aug. 6</a>  -  The final statistics have been assessed from a recent sobriety checkpoint conducted by the West Hills Task Force in Stowe Township.  Police checked 275 vehicles that went through the Route 51, Island Avenue checkpoint on Friday night.  Of the cars that were stopped, there were six DUI arrests, three drug arrests and three citations for underage drinking. Now consider this story from last week, mentioned in my <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/01/dui-logic-roadblocks-effective-because-theyre-ineffective/">previous post</a>: No Arrests Make Stops a Success DUI checkpoints are working, police say <a href="http://www.dailyitem.com/0100_news/local_story_213001543.html">Lewisberg, PA  July 31</a>  -  Police officers say a checkpoint that catches no drunken drivers should not be considered a failure.   "It’s a deterrence program," said Douglas Lauver, alcohol enforcement coordinator and co-coordinator of the North Central Highway Safety Network’s Regional DUI Enforcement Group. "Ideally, the goal is not to make any arrests for DUI."  (Sgt. Scott) Hahn agreed, saying by making the scene a spectacle with lights, trucks and cars, the checkpoints make an impression on motorists going through them and prompt them to talk about the stops with others… Get it?  If there are a bunch of DUI arrests, the roadblock is a success.  But if there are no arrests at all, then the roadblock is, well…a success. </div> For those of you unfamiliar with the logic of The War on Drunk Driving, consider the following story from yesterday’s news… Recent DUI Checkpoint A Success Pittsburgh, PA.  Aug. 6  -  The final statistics have been assessed from a recent sobriety checkpoint conducted by the West Hills Task Force in Stowe Township.  Police checked 275 vehicles that went through […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F07%2Fdui-logic%2F&title=DUI+Logic">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F07%2Fdui-logic%2F&title=DUI%20Logic">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/07/dui-logic/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=DUI%20Logic&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F08%2F07%2Fdui-logic%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/07/dui-logic/#comments" title="Comment on DUI Logic">10 Comments »</a> </div> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/08/06/slurred-speech/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to “Slurred Speech”">“Slurred Speech”</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on August 6th, 2008 <div class="entry"> As with the odor of alcohol on the breath, few police reports will fail to include an observation by the arresting officer that the arrestee exhibited “slurred speech”. (See my earlier post, “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/12/11/alcohol-on-the-breath-evidence-of-dui/">Alcohol on the Breath: Evidence of DUI?</a>”).  The officer fully expects to hear slurred speech in a person he suspects is intoxicated, particularly after smelling alcohol on the breath, and it is a psychological fact that we tend to “hear” what we expect to hear. And hearing it supplies the officer with corroboration of his suspicions. Even assuming the honesty of the officer that the defendant’s speech was slurred, there is little evidence that this is symptomatic of intoxication. Impairment of speech is, for example, a common — and sober — reaction to the stress, fear and nervousness that a police investigation would be expected to engender.  Fatigue is another well-known cause. Skeptical?  Consider the following excerpt from Discover magazine (Saunders, “News of Science, Medicine and Technology: Straight Talk”, 21(1) Discover (Oct. 2000). Bartenders, police officers and hospital workers routinely identify drunks by their slurred speech. Several investigative groups judged the captain of the Exxon Valdez oil tanker to be intoxicated based solely on the sound of his voice in his radio transmissions. But a team led by Harry Holien, a phonetician at the University of Florida, has found that even self-proclaimed experts are pretty bad at estimating people’s alcohol levels by the way they talk. Hollien asked clinicians who treat chemical dependency, along with a group of everyday people, to listen to recordings made by volunteers when they were sober, then mildly intoxicated, legally impaired, and finally, completely smashed. Listeners consistently overestimated the drunkeness of mildly intoxicated subjects. Conversely, they underestimated the alcohol levels of those who were most inebriated. Professionals were little better at perceiving the truth than the ordinary Joes…. He thinks his research could encourage police to be more wary of making snap judgments: Mild drinkers might come under needless suspicion. </div><div class="post" id="post-641"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/04/police-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Police Using DUI Roadblocks Illegally">Police Using DUI Roadblocks Illegally</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on December 4th, 2007 <div class="entry"> A few years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court found yet another “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/05/09/the-dui-exception-to-the-constitution/" class="">DUI Exception the Constitution</a>” in permitting police to set up roadblocks — even though they admittedly violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against stopping citizens without probable cause.  See my earlier post <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/17/dui-sobriety-checkpoints-unconstitutional/" class="">DUI Sobriety Checkpoints: Unconstitutional?</a>  The Court, of course, was careful to restrict the use of such roadblocks to apprehension of drunk drivers exclusively. Sure.  I predicted that this pathetic Rehnquist decision would prove yet another tool for police to circumvent the Constitution in non-DUI situations — resulting in a continuing erosion of that great document through a growing list of exceptions and word games.  And this has repeatedly proven to be the case.  From yesterday’s news: <blockquote> Police At DUI Checkpoints Find More Than Drunk Drivers <a href="http://www.wkyt.com/news/headlines/12097881.html" class="">Johnson County, KY</a>   Dec. 3  — Police at DUI checkpoints in one eastern Kentucky county find more than drunk drivers. Police say they found marijuana and prescription pills in three un-related cases.  Five suspects are in jail after sheriff deputies say they caught them red-handed with drugs, but some of the suspects put up a fight and tried to escape. Johnson County Sheriff deputies say they noticed more traffic than usual on Highway 11-07 in Thelma. After complaints from neighbors, deputies set up a DUI checkpoint to find out what was going on… Officers call the checkpoint a success, “Nine bags of marijuana were taken off the streets and that means there’s nine bags of marijuana that won’t go into the hands of children in the Thelma area or Johnson County,” Sgt. Wyatt said </blockquote> “…deputies set up a DUI checkpoint to find out what was going on”.  And the reporter didn’t even notice anything wrong with that. </div> A few years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court found yet another “DUI Exception the Constitution” in permitting police to set up roadblocks — even though they admittedly violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against stopping citizens without probable cause.  See my earlier post DUI Sobriety Checkpoints: Unconstitutional?  The Court, of course, was careful to restrict the use […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F04%2Fpolice-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally%2F&title=Police+Using+DUI+Roadblocks+Illegally">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F04%2Fpolice-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally%2F&title=Police%20Using%20DUI%20Roadblocks%20Illegally">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/04/police-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=Police%20Using%20DUI%20Roadblocks%20Illegally&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F04%2Fpolice-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/04/police-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally/#comments" title="Comment on Police Using DUI Roadblocks Illegally">1 Comment »</a> </div><div class="post" id="post-641"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/04/police-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Police Using DUI Roadblocks Illegally">Police Using DUI Roadblocks Illegally</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on December 4th, 2007 <div class="entry"> A few years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court found yet another “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/05/09/the-dui-exception-to-the-constitution/" class="">DUI Exception the Constitution</a>” in permitting police to set up roadblocks — even though they admittedly violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against stopping citizens without probable cause.  See my earlier post <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/17/dui-sobriety-checkpoints-unconstitutional/" class="">DUI Sobriety Checkpoints: Unconstitutional?</a>  The Court, of course, was careful to restrict the use of such roadblocks to apprehension of drunk drivers exclusively. Sure.  I predicted that this pathetic Rehnquist decision would prove yet another tool for police to circumvent the Constitution in non-DUI situations — resulting in a continuing erosion of that great document through a growing list of exceptions and word games.  And this has repeatedly proven to be the case.  From yesterday’s news: <blockquote> Police At DUI Checkpoints Find More Than Drunk Drivers <a href="http://www.wkyt.com/news/headlines/12097881.html" class="">Johnson County, KY</a>   Dec. 3  — Police at DUI checkpoints in one eastern Kentucky county find more than drunk drivers. Police say they found marijuana and prescription pills in three un-related cases.  Five suspects are in jail after sheriff deputies say they caught them red-handed with drugs, but some of the suspects put up a fight and tried to escape. Johnson County Sheriff deputies say they noticed more traffic than usual on Highway 11-07 in Thelma. After complaints from neighbors, deputies set up a DUI checkpoint to find out what was going on… Officers call the checkpoint a success, “Nine bags of marijuana were taken off the streets and that means there’s nine bags of marijuana that won’t go into the hands of children in the Thelma area or Johnson County,” Sgt. Wyatt said </blockquote> “…deputies set up a DUI checkpoint to find out what was going on”.  And the reporter didn’t even notice anything wrong with that. </div> A few years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court found yet another “DUI Exception the Constitution” in permitting police to set up roadblocks — even though they admittedly violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against stopping citizens without probable cause.  See my earlier post DUI Sobriety Checkpoints: Unconstitutional?  The Court, of course, was careful to restrict the use […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first"></a> <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F04%2Fpolice-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally%2F&title=Police+Using+DUI+Roadblocks+Illegally"></a> <div class="post" id="post-643"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/11/of-madd-wars-and-einstein/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Of MADD, Wars and Einstein">Of MADD, Wars and Einstein</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on December 11th, 2007 <div class="entry"> For the past decade we have seen increasingly severe punishment for misdemeanor drunk driving offenses, often exceeding those imposed for serious felonies.  Spurred on by MADD’s “War on Drunk Driving”, this never-ending flood of politically-popular laws has continued to blindly accept the idea that imposing harsher sentences will reduce DUI-caused traffic fatalities.  With each new law, MADD issues press releases trumpeting their latest achievement with promises of an end to the “carnage on the highways” — along with solicitations for contributions to their $51 million annual revenue.  Has it worked? <blockquote> NTSB: Nation Stuck in ‘Decade-Long Plateau’ of Drunk Driving Deaths <a href="http://www.ohsonline.com/articles/52573/" class="">Wash., DC.  Nov 1, 2007</a>  –  More needs to be done to get drunk drivers off the nation’s streets and highways. That was the message of National Transportation Safety Board Chair Mark V. Rosenker, testifying last week before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Transportation Safety, Infrastructure Security, and Water Quality. Addressing the effectiveness of federal drunk driving programs, Rosenker noted that, “while alcohol-related fatalities have decreased since 1982, there has been little improvement in the last 10 years.” The nation has been stuck in “a decade-long plateau” where alcohol-related fatalities are concerned, he said. </blockquote> Albert Einstein once defined insanity as “Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. Maybe it’s time for a change…. I have not dealt with 1000s of DUI clients over the years without drawing certain conclusions: <blockquote> 1. The system, clearly, does not work: despite unfair laws, constitutional violations and increasingly harsh penalties, the problem remains…and people continue to die on the highways. 2. <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/23/a-closer-look-at-dui-fatality-statistics/">Playing games with statistics</a>, as MADD and the government are so fond of doing, only obscures the problem. 3. The problem is not black-and-white, but involves shades of gray. It is convenient to punish anyone with a .08% blood-alcohol concentration, but neither fair nor productive. It is easy to lump all offenders into the same category of “drunk drivers” and simply adjust jail time by a reading on a machine, but neither fair nor productive. 4. You cannot simply identify what the problem is (“drunk drivers are dangerous”), but who the problem is. The problem is not people who drive with .08% BAC or higher, but people who represent a real danger to others on the highway. Who are they?</blockquote> The problem is the person who severely abuses alcohol and chooses to drive. You can call him an “alcoholic”, but it has been my experience in dealing with those 1000s of clients that there are different kinds of “alcoholics” and that using a simple label is no answer (we do love to put things in neat categories). Statistics repeatedly show that the vastly disproportionate majority of alcohol-caused injuries and deaths are caused by a few “problem drinkers” (for want of a better term). Thus, the first objective in any solution is to identify these individuals. In my experience, they can usually be identified by a combination of factors: <blockquote> 1. Their blood-alcohol level is not just high — it is very high, say .16% to .30% or more. 2. This is probably not the first DUI — and prior incidents are likely to be relatively recent. 3. There is a genetic flag: the individual is likely to have one or two “alcoholic” parents.</blockquote> All right, we’ve identified some markers for who the problem is , but what do we do with them? To begin, let’s understand what we don’t do: we don’t hit them with stiff jail sentences. If we do, we simply remove the person from society for a few days or months — and on the day he gets out, he gets in his car and drives directly to a bar. What has been accomplished? Is society being protected — or are we simply punishing people for drinking too much? Since the punishment model clearly doesn’t work for the problem drinker, we must consider the other criminal justice models: isolation, deterrence and rehabilitation. <blockquote> 1. Isolation. Yes, we can put the problem drinker in jail for a few months or even a few years, and we are safe from him for that period. But can we really afford to house tens of thousands more inmates? For how long? And what happens when they get out? For that matter, given the evidence, aren’t we punishing them for a genetic condition? 2. Deterrence. How do you deter an “alcoholic”? 3. Rehabilitation. Once the favored approach in the criminal justice system, rehabilitation fell into widespread disfavor many years ago. Yet….Yet, this would appear to be the only logical approach with problem drinkers.</blockquote> Ok, but what about the driver who is not a problem drinker but who is simply impaired from drinking too much? Answer: Treat him like any other misdemeanant. Statistically, we know he is unlikely to cause serious injury or death, but there is undeniably some risk there. Can this individual be deterred from such future conduct? Unlike with the “alcoholic”, statistics show he can. Thus, it may be fair and productive to impose a fine on the typical first-offender, perhaps even suspend his driver’s license for a short period; if a high blood-alcohol level is involved, say .15%, the punishment may include a 2-day jail term. But certainly not the punishments so destructive to families and careers that are now being administered to all caught up in the dragnet. While we’re at it, a refreshing approach — and a healthy one for society — would be to reinstate constitutional rights in DUI cases: due process, presumptions of guilt, denial of right to counsel, double jeopardy, the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination, the right to confront witnesses, 4th Amendment roadblock violations, ad nauseum. (See “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/05/09/the-dui-exception-to-the-constitution/">The DUI Exception to the Constitution</a>”.) Does all of this finally solve the drunk driving problem? No: people will always drink and drive. But it will focus on the real threat — the truly dangerous driver — rather than on drinking and driving per se. And, in the process, reinstate the essential fairness and due process that has been slowly removed from the criminal justice system. </div> For the past decade we have seen increasingly severe punishment for misdemeanor drunk driving offenses, often exceeding those imposed for serious felonies.  Spurred on by MADD’s “War on Drunk Driving”, this never-ending flood of politically-popular laws has continued to blindly accept the idea that imposing harsher sentences will reduce DUI-caused traffic fatalities.  With each new law, MADD […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/political_opinion/Of_MADD_DUI_Wars_and_Einstein">Digg This! (1 Digg)</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F11%2Fof-madd-wars-and-einstein%2F&title=Of%20MADD%2C%20Wars%20and%20Einstein">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/11/of-madd-wars-and-einstein/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=Of%20MADD%2C%20Wars%20and%20Einstein&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F11%2Fof-madd-wars-and-einstein%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/11/of-madd-wars-and-einstein/#respond" title="Comment on Of MADD, Wars and Einstein">No Comments »</a> </div> <div class="post" id="post-642"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/08/third-dui-life-in-prison/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Third DUI = Life in Prison">Third DUI = Life in Prison</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on December 8th, 2007 <div class="entry"> So our prisons are bursting at the seams, killers are getting ten-year sentences, rapists are being cut loose after five, and….drunk drivers are getting life in prison?  <blockquote> DUI Case: Life Sentence in Prison or Addiction? <a href="http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071203/OPINION01/712030313/1008/OPINION" class="">Jackson, MS.  Dec. 6</a>  –  The Associated Press reported in a terse handful of paragraphs Friday that the Mississippi Supreme Court on Thursday upheld Mark Allen Debrow’s life sentence for a third drunken driving conviction… Drunks should not be on the road…But life in prison for driving under the influence takes “tough” to a new level. Admittedly, a person is responsible for his or her behavior, and the consequences of behavior while intoxicated.  But alcoholism itself is a disease, and is generally recognized as such. In this case, Debrow should not have been operating a vehicle.  But do three DUIs constitute criminal behavior meriting life in prison? With alcoholics, it’s not a question of behavior alone; it’s addiction. Debrow is apparently guilty of addiction. That, in itself, is a life sentence. The question is how he changes his behavior to counter the addiction (drinking). Otherwise, we are giving a life sentence for a disease. Criminal behavior should be punished, but, with addiction, punishment should be offered with treatment to change behavior. This sentence was inappropriate.</blockquote>  The ladies at MADD must be ecstatic, but at least some of the media finally appears to be getting it.  (For a more realistic approach to dealing with the drunk driving problem, see my previous post “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2006/06/07/time-for-a-change/" class="">Time for a Change</a>”.) </div> So our prisons are bursting at the seams, killers are getting ten-year sentences, rapists are being cut loose after five, and….drunk drivers are getting life in prison?  DUI Case: Life Sentence in Prison or Addiction? Jackson, MS.  Dec. 6  –  The Associated Press reported in a terse handful of paragraphs Friday that the Mississippi Supreme Court on […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F08%2Fthird-dui-life-in-prison%2F&title=Third+DUI+%3D+Life+in+Prison">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F08%2Fthird-dui-life-in-prison%2F&title=Third%20DUI%20%3D%20Life%20in%20Prison">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/08/third-dui-life-in-prison/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=Third%20DUI%20%3D%20Life%20in%20Prison&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F08%2Fthird-dui-life-in-prison%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/08/third-dui-life-in-prison/#respond" title="Comment on Third DUI = Life in Prison">No Comments »</a> </div> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/04/police-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Police Using DUI Roadblocks Illegally">Police Using DUI Roadblocks Illegally</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on December 4th, 2007 <div class="entry"> A few years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court found yet another “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/05/09/the-dui-exception-to-the-constitution/" class="">DUI Exception the Constitution</a>” in permitting police to set up roadblocks — even though they admittedly violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against stopping citizens without probable cause.  See my earlier post <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/17/dui-sobriety-checkpoints-unconstitutional/" class="">DUI Sobriety Checkpoints: Unconstitutional?</a>  The Court, of course, was careful to restrict the use of such roadblocks to apprehension of drunk drivers exclusively. Sure.  I predicted that this pathetic Rehnquist decision would prove yet another tool for police to circumvent the Constitution in non-DUI situations — resulting in a continuing erosion of that great document through a growing list of exceptions and word games.  And this has repeatedly proven to be the case.  From yesterday’s news: <blockquote> Police At DUI Checkpoints Find More Than Drunk Drivers <a href="http://www.wkyt.com/news/headlines/12097881.html" class="">Johnson County, KY</a>   Dec. 3  — Police at DUI checkpoints in one eastern Kentucky county find more than drunk drivers. Police say they found marijuana and prescription pills in three un-related cases.  Five suspects are in jail after sheriff deputies say they caught them red-handed with drugs, but some of the suspects put up a fight and tried to escape. Johnson County Sheriff deputies say they noticed more traffic than usual on Highway 11-07 in Thelma. After complaints from neighbors, deputies set up a DUI checkpoint to find out what was going on… Officers call the checkpoint a success, “Nine bags of marijuana were taken off the streets and that means there’s nine bags of marijuana that won’t go into the hands of children in the Thelma area or Johnson County,” Sgt. Wyatt said </blockquote> “…deputies set up a DUI checkpoint to find out what was going on”.  And the reporter didn’t even notice anything wrong with that. DECEMBER 18, 2007Study Says DUI Checkpoints Ineffective <a href="http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=673539" class="">Phoenix, AZ, Dec. 14  </a>–  Drunken driving checkpoints are costly and do little to prevent DUI-related traffic deaths, according to new data from the American Beverage Institute. “The states that use roving patrols have an average of 7 percent fewer alcohol-related fatalities than those states that use checkpoints,” said Sarah Longwell of the Institute, which compiled the numbers with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. She said some states “really see the value in increasing roving patrols over sobriety checkpoints, while others defend the practice, saying it’s a deterrent mechanism.” Mesa Police have used mostly roving patrols in recent years, but checkpoints aren’t out of the picture, said Detective Steve Berry. “We do use them, we don’t necessarily use them all the time, we just consider them another tool that we have in our bag,” said Berry. “The last one that we did here in Mesa was on Sept. 3 of this year, but prior to that, we had not done one in three to four years.” Longwell said the checkpoints are costly and ineffective and issued a challenge to police looking for drunken drivers.   An interesting law enforcement concept:  If they don’t work, don’t use them…..Unless they <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/05/11/dui-roadblocks-for-fun-and-profit/" class="">raise a lot of money for local government </a>from unrelated license, registration and equipment citations, or are used illegally as<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/03/08/ok-sobriety-checkpoints-are-ineffective-but/" class=""> deterrence </a>or for <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/04/police-using-dui-roadblocks-illegally/" class="">stopping citizens for unauthorized reasons</a>. Gregoire Calls for Sobriety Checkpoints <a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004112930_checkpoints08m.html" class="">Olympia, WA.  Jan. 8</a>  –  Gov. Christine Gregoire wants the state Legislature to authorize police to set up sobriety spot checks, a practice unseen in Washington since the state Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional in 1988… The national and Pacific Northwest MADD organizations are targeting sobriety checkpoints and stricter laws for ignition interlocks as legislative priorities this year. “Sobriety checkpoints work. The Centers for Disease Control says that in states where they have sobriety checkpoints, impaired driving crashes are usually 20 percent less than in states where they don’t,” said Judy Eakin, executive director of MADD’s Northwest region. As I’ve indicated in previous posts (e.g., ”<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/05/04/lies-damned-lies-and-madd-statistics/" class="">Lies, Damned Lies and MADD Statistics</a>”), MADD is very fond of playing games with numbers.  Let’s take a closer look at the statistics connecting roadblocks to reductions of accidents…. According to <a href="http://www.madd.org/">MADD’s own website</a>, 40 states have checkpoints and 10 do not. Well, it would be interesting to compare the states with the highest percentage of alcohol-related fatalities with the list of states not using checkpoints: If MADD is correct, the states with the highest fatality rates will be the no-roadblock states. Fortunately, <a href="http://www.madd.org/stats/0,1056,8716,00.html">another section</a> of MADD’s website provides such statistics for each of the states. The 5 states with the highest alcohol-related fatality rates: <blockquote> Hawaii Nevada North Dakota Rhode Island South Carolina</blockquote> According to MADD, all 5 states should be non-checkpoint states. In fact, however, 4 of these states use checkpoints; only Rhode Island does not. Well, what about the 5 states with the lowest fatality percentages? They are: <blockquote> Georgia Kentucky Indiana Iowa New York</blockquote> If MADD is correct about the effectiveness of checkpoints, these should all be checkpoint states. But as with the previous list, only 4 of the states permit the use of sobriety checkpoints; Iowa does not. As with the previous list, the percentage is what one would expect from pure random incidence: 20% of the states (10 of 50) do not have checkpoints — and 20% of the states on each list (1 of 5) do not use checkpoints. There appears to be no correlation between fatality rates and the use of checkpoints. Let’s take a look at another set of statistics: the effect of the proliferation of checkpoints on the national rate of alcohol-related fatalities. If checkpoints are effective, we would expect to find that alcohol-related fatalities will have declined since their widespread acceptance in recent years . Again, the statistics do not support this. To use <a href="http://www.madd.org/stats/0,1056,1298,00.html">MADD’s own numbers</a>: Since 1982, the number of fatalities nationwide from alcohol-related crashes has declined every year — until about 1993, when it dropped to 17,908. Perhaps coincidentally, this was the year after the United States Supreme Court ruled that sobriety checkpoints were not unconstitutional. In the 10 years since then, sobriety checkpoints have gained widespead acceptance — but the number of fatalities have levelled off, vacilating between 17,908 and 17,013. Far from supporting MADD’s position, one could even argue that this proves sobriety checkpoints have actually halted the steady decline in alcohol-related deaths. This would probably be incorrect — but indicative of how statistics can be used to serve a desired objective. I’ve railed in the past about the unconstitutionality of DUI roadblacks, aka “sobriety checkpoints”, as well as their ineffectiveness.  Increasingly, they are being used as revenue generators and illegal subterfuges to stop innocent citizens for unrelated matters.   Despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that the interests of the government in ensuring safety on the highways outweighs the […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F09%2Fare-dui-roadblocks-effective-2%2F&title=Are+DUI+Roadblocks+Effective%3F">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F09%2Fare-dui-roadblocks-effective-2%2F&title=Are%20DUI%20Roadblocks%20Effective%3F">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/09/are-dui-roadblocks-effective-2/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=Are%20DUI%20Roadblocks%20Effective%3F&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F09%2Fare-dui-roadblocks-effective-2%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/09/are-dui-roadblocks-effective-2/#respond" title="Comment on Are DUI Roadblocks Effective?">No Comments »</a> <div class="post" id="post-653"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/08/backlash/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Backlash?">Backlash?</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on January 8th, 2008 <div class="entry"> Is the tide finally turning?  For years I’ve expected to see a backlash from the citizens of this country as politicians and judges continue to bow to MADD’s hysterical crusade against drinking (and, secondarily, drunk driving) and whittle away at the Bill of Rights and basic concepts of justice and fairness.  Recently, however, there seems to be an increasing number of isolated voices of reason arising from the wilderness.  In yesterday’s media…. <blockquote> A Better Way to Go After Drunk Drivers <a href="http://www.komotv.com/news/13504612.html" class="">KOMO-TV News, Seattle.  Jan. 7</a>  –   So now the governor wants to get tough on drunk driving… The governor’s idea is to set up sobriety checkpoints so that police can arbitrarily stop anyone out driving on a particular stretch of road at a particular time. In other words, it’s about showmanship over substance. I don’t like sobriety checkpoints.  Not because I have any interest in protecting drunk drivers, but because I’m not too keen on giving up another piece of our constitutional rights. Call me simplistic, but I’m kind of partial to those 4th amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure. So while I’m all for Governor Gregoire getting tough on drunk driving, I’d prefer something more direct, like actually going after drunk drivers while leaving the rest of us sober folks alone.</blockquote> Obviously an unpatriotic, wife-beating, alcohol-abusing radical. <blockquote> Instant Suspension of DUI Suspect Licenses Crosses Line <a href="http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/106083" class="">Phoenix Tribune.  Jan. 7</a>  –  Sen. Jim Waring, R-Phoenix, has decided to continue a reckless vendetta against drunken driving and he seems willing to sacrifice our civil liberties and every bit of common sense in his rush to save just one more life. A set of new DUI laws recognized as among the toughest in the country, including the mandated use of ignition interlock devices for a year on a person’s first misdemeanor conviction, has been in effect for less than three months. We have no idea if more jail time, higher fines and a physical barrier to driving after drinking will be wildly successful, an abject failure or fall somewhere in between… State law already requires police to physically take away the driver’s license of DUI suspects. But they receive a temporary permit in return, giving the motorists an opportunity to challenge a license suspension at a state administrative hearing. As driving is considered a privilege, not a right, the standard in such cases is lower than “beyond a reasonable doubt.” DUI suspects can lose their driver’s license for 90 days even if they eventually defeat the criminal charges. But at least a truly innocent person has a chance to appeal to an authority not beholden to the police before they lose access to a daily part of most people’s lives that often is critical to keeping a job and caring for a family. Waring’s bill would deny even this minimal version of the due process of law. A DUI suspect anywhere in the state instantly would be powerless to drive, even if the police don’t yet have any physical evidence of intoxication (such as breath or blood test results)… SB1008 completely disregards the American notion of “innocent until proven guilty” and would push Arizona much closer toward a police state in which judges and other independent arbiters of justice are irrelevant relics. </blockquote> Obviously another rabble-rousing, child-molesting, communist pervert. </div> Is the tide finally turning?  For years I’ve expected to see a backlash from the citizens of this country as politicians and judges continue to bow to MADD’s hysterical crusade against drinking (and, secondarily, drunk driving) and whittle away at the Bill of Rights and basic concepts of justice and fairness.  Recently, however, there seems to […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F08%2Fbacklash%2F&title=Backlash%3F">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F08%2Fbacklash%2F&title=Backlash%3F">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/08/backlash/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=Backlash%3F&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F08%2Fbacklash%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/08/backlash/#respond" title="Comment on Backlash?">No Comments »</a> </div> <div class="post" id="post-652"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/05/what-does-a-dui-cost/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to What Does a DUI Cost?">What Does a DUI Cost?</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on January 5th, 2008 <div class="entry"> Did you ever wonder how much it could cost you today if you’re arrested for drunk driving?  Not necessarily guilty of drunk driving, just suspected of it?  Maybe $500?  Or $1000?… <blockquote> Drunk Driving Could Cost $20,000 <a href="http://www.bankrate.com/cnbc/news/pf/20071214_drunk_driving_cost_a1.asp" class="">CNBC News.  Dec. 14</a>  –  Twenty thousand dollars sounds like a lot to pay for a drink at a holiday party, but if that last cocktail puts you over the legal limit, that “one for the road” could easily cost you that or more. One drink too many puts you at risk for not only an arrest, but also for fees, fines and costs that can run you thousands of dollars. While a DUI or DWI may be a misdemeanor charge in a number of jurisdictions, it’s a matter that most judges and district attorneys take very seriously. The financial toll of a conviction will play out for years to come, and in many states that can add up to $20,000 before everything is over. This includes bail, fines, legal fees, increased auto insurance premiums, loss of work income, court-ordered alcohol education programs and more. Of course, if you get fired from your job as a result of the arrest, that dollar figure would skyrocket… The Texas Department of Transportation says a June 2006 survey in that state showed the total costs of a DWI arrest and conviction — for a first time offender with no accident involved — would range from $9,000 to $24,000. </blockquote> In many states today, you’re better off committing a felony burglary, for example, than a misdemeanor DUI.  The difference between .07% and .08% alcohol in your blood could be the difference between a brief detention and a nightmare in the legal system with a $20,000 price tag.  ‘Ever wonder why? </div> Did you ever wonder how much it could cost you today if you’re arrested for drunk driving?  Not necessarily guilty of drunk driving, just suspected of it?  Maybe $500?  Or $1000?… Drunk Driving Could Cost $20,000 CNBC News.  Dec. 14  –  Twenty thousand dollars sounds like a lot to pay for a drink at a holiday party, but […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F05%2Fwhat-does-a-dui-cost%2F&title=What+Does+a+DUI+Cost%3F">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F05%2Fwhat-does-a-dui-cost%2F&title=What%20Does%20a%20DUI%20Cost%3F">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/05/what-does-a-dui-cost/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=What%20Does%20a%20DUI%20Cost%3F&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F05%2Fwhat-does-a-dui-cost%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/05/what-does-a-dui-cost/#respond" title="Comment on What Does a DUI Cost?">No Comments »</a> </div> <div class="post" id="post-651"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/02/tvs-dui-supercops-in-action/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to TV’s DUI SuperCops in Action">TV’s DUI SuperCops in Action</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on January 2nd, 2008 <div class="entry"> I’ve commented in the past about the emerging phenomenon of “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/02/17/dui-supercops/" class="">DUI SuperCops</a>”, and a few days ago about <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/22/new-reality-tv-show-dui-cops/" class="">a new TV series </a>starring the heroic DUI warriors of the Fresno Police Department.  Let’s look in on our new media stars…. <blockquote> Dozens Arrested In Fresno DUI Crackdown <a href="http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=5862583" class="">Fresno, CA.  Jan. 1</a>  –  Fresno police say despite heavy publicity about their crackdown on drinking and driving, more than 2 dozen arrests were made by police and CHP officers this New Year’s holiday… Eric Eide, Fresno Police Department, says “The 16 DUI’s that we did arrest, people were snockered. They were passed out drunk in front of their cars; they were combative when we were taking blood from some of them. Lots of them were banged up from fighting with other people.” </blockquote> Forgive the cynicism born of many years in this business, but permit me to interpret this summary from TV’s new DUI SuperCops: <blockquote> 1.  “They were passed out drunk in front of their cars.”  News flash for SuperCops: The crime of drunk driving requires driving — not sleeping it off to avoid drunk driving. 2.  “They were combative when we were taking blood from some of them.”  What would you be if you were pinned to the ground by two cops while needles were jammed into you, digging around painfully for a vein? 3.  “Lots of them were banged up from fighting with other people.”  Official explanation for “lots of” arrestees’ cuts. bruises and assorted injuries.  </blockquote> Look for announcements of MADD awards to Fresno P.D. in the very near future. </div> I’ve commented in the past about the emerging phenomenon of “DUI SuperCops”, and a few days ago about a new TV series starring the heroic DUI warriors of the Fresno Police Department.  Let’s look in on our new media stars…. Dozens Arrested In Fresno DUI Crackdown Fresno, CA.  Jan. 1  –  Fresno police say despite heavy publicity about their […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F02%2Ftvs-dui-supercops-in-action%2F&title=TV%E2%80%99s+DUI+SuperCops+in+Action">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F02%2Ftvs-dui-supercops-in-action%2F&title=TV%E2%80%99s%20DUI%20SuperCops%20in%20Action">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/02/tvs-dui-supercops-in-action/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=TV%E2%80%99s%20DUI%20SuperCops%20in%20Action&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F02%2Ftvs-dui-supercops-in-action%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/02/tvs-dui-supercops-in-action/#respond" title="Comment on TV’s DUI SuperCops in Action">No Comments »</a> </div> <div class="post" id="post-650"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/31/the-next-step-arrest-the-passengers/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to The Next Step: Arrest the Passengers">The Next Step: Arrest the Passengers</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on December 31st, 2007 <div class="entry"> As I’ve pointed out in previous posts, the harsh penalties, convoluted laws and unconstitutional procedures have not lowered the <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/05/27/latest-figures-in-madds-war-on-drunk-driving/" class="">alcohol-related fatality rate</a>.  And MADD is unwilling to consider <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/11/of-madd-wars-and-einstein/" class="">rational solutions</a> to the problem.  So where does it go from here? <blockquote> Roadshow: Where DUI Enforcement is Tougher <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_7848242?nclick_check=1" class="">San Jose Mercury News, Dec. 31 </a>–  The drunken-driving laws just changed in Japan. Now, if there is a drunken-driving incident, all passengers in the car are liable because they should be sharing the responsibility for having a sober driver. The first fine is $5,000, three years in jail and demerit points on one’s license that pretty much make you lose the license for two years or more. The arrest rate is now down 43 percent as a result… Now that is a tough, but needed, law – here. California’s alcohol-involved traffic death toll rose from 1,072 deaths in 1998 to nearly 1,600 last year, an increase of nearly 50 percent during a period when the state’s population grew about 12 percent.  </blockquote> Let’s hope MADD doesn’t hear about this “solution”.  (Note: the arrest rate is down in Japan; interestingly, there is no mention of the fatality rate.  Could it be that Japanese police are reluctant to arrest innocent passengers?  And how could there be meaningful statistics if the “drunken driving laws in Japan just changed”?  It takes the feds here over a year to accumulate the numbers.) </div> As I’ve pointed out in previous posts, the harsh penalties, convoluted laws and unconstitutional procedures have not lowered the alcohol-related fatality rate.  And MADD is unwilling to consider rational solutions to the problem.  So where does it go from here? Roadshow: Where DUI Enforcement is Tougher San Jose Mercury News, Dec. 31 –  The drunken-driving laws just changed […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/autos/The_Next_Step_in_DUI_Enforcement_Arrest_the_Passengers_2">Digg This! (3 Diggs)</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F31%2Fthe-next-step-arrest-the-passengers%2F&title=The%20Next%20Step%3A%20%20Arrest%20the%20Passengers">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/31/the-next-step-arrest-the-passengers/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=The%20Next%20Step%3A%20%20Arrest%20the%20Passengers&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2007%2F12%2F31%2Fthe-next-step-arrest-the-passengers%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/31/the-next-step-arrest-the-passengers/#comments" title="Comment on The Next Step: Arrest the Passengers">2 Comments »</a> </div> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/12/26/forced-blood-draws-by-cops-spreading/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Forced Blood Draws by Cops Spreading">Forced Blood Draws by Cops Spreading</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on December 26th, 2007 <div class="entry"> I’ve commented repeatedly in the recent past about the increasing use of forced blood draws — and particularly on the practice of having the cops themselves acting as “nurse” while pinning the suspect down and drawing the blood.  See <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/07/15/taking-blood-by-force-2/" class="">Taking Blood by Force</a>, <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/03/03/forceful-blood-draws-by-cops-constitutional/" class="">Forced Blood Draws by Cops: Constitutional?</a>, <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/02/01/would-you-want-a-cop-taking-blood-from-you/" class="">Would You Want a Cop Taking Blood from You?</a>,  <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2007/10/18/forced-blood-draws-by-cops-in-back-seat/" class="">Forced Blood Draws by Cops in Back Seat</a>.   The following is a recent example of what is happening in the Great State of Texas: <blockquote> Texas: Forced DUI Blood Draws Expand More Texas jurisdictions are turning to forced blood draws to convict those suspected of DUI <a href="http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/21/2141.asp" class="">TheNewspaper.com.  Dec. 26  </a>–  Jurisdictions within Texas are expanding programs where police use force to draw blood from motorists accused of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). Last week, El Paso announced it had joined Harris and Wilson Counties in a “no refusal” program specifically designed to streamline the blood drawing process. It works as follows. An accused motorist is arrested and taken downtown. While being videotaped, he will be asked to submit to a breathalyzer test with officers specifically avoiding any mention that blood will be taken by force if the often <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/11/20/why-breathalyzers-don-t-measure-alcohol/">inaccurate</a> breathalyzer test is refused. During key holiday weekends, a pre-assigned judge who agreed to wait by the phone will approve search warrants created from pre-written templates — often within just thirty minutes. With warrant in hand, a nurse whose salary is often paid by Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) will draw blood while police officers exert the required level of force. In some cases, this <a href="http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/20/2035.asp">use of force</a> can cause permanent damage. Montague, Archer and Clay counties have similar programs except that these departments do away with the nurse and have police officers perform the blood draw themselves, despite a state law banning the practice. <div class="post" id="post-658"> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/26/breathalyzers-dont-measure-alcohol/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Breathalyzers Don’t Measure Alcohol">Breathalyzers Don’t Measure Alcohol</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on January 26th, 2008 <div class="entry"> That’s right.  What these machines actually detect and measure is any chemical compund that contains the methyl group in its molecular structure. There are thousands of such compounds — including quite a few which can be found on the human breath. And this machine that determines a person’s guilt or innocence will “see” all of those chemicals as alcohol — and report a falsely high “blood-alcohol” concentration (BAC). Most breath machines used by law enforcement in DUI cases today employ a technology called infrared spectroscopy. The DUI suspect breathes through a tube connected to the machine and a breath sample is captured in a small sample chamber inside the machine. Then beams of infrared light are shot through the captured breath sample. If there are any compounds containing the methyl group, they will absorb some of this light; the more of the chemical compound in the breath sample, the more light is absorbed. The more light that is absorbed, the less that reaches sensors at the other end of the sample chamber. And the less light that is detected by the sensors, the higher the supposed “blood-alcohol” reading. Problem: the machines are, scientifically speaking, fairly unsophisticated. They are, as scientists say, non-specific — that is, they are not capable of detecting and measuring a specific compound.  More important for government work, they are relatively cheap.  Rather than use more expensive filters and/or multiple filters, for example, most breathalyzers use only one or three less-costly filters.  Result:  these machines can only detect and measure a broad range of compounds containing the methyl group — and they then simply assume that the unknown compound within this group is ethyl alcohol. If a person has any of these other compounds on his breath, called interferents by the scientists, he will get a falsely high breath alcohol test result. And if there are two or three such compounds on his breath, the machine will read a cumulative result: it will add them up and falsely report the total as the breath-alcohol level. So what kinds of compounds may be on a person’s breath that can cause false BAC readings in a DUI case? In one study of eight men, 69 different compounds containing the methyl group were discovered.  “Trace Composition of Human Respiratory Gas”, 30 Archives of Environmental Health 290.  In another study invoviing 28 subjects, researchers found that the “combined expired air comprises at least 102 various organic compounds of endogenous and exogenous origin”.  “Characterization of Human Expired Air”, 15 Journal of Chromatographic Sciences 240.  And Canadian scientists have discovered over 200 such compounds.  “The Diagnostic Potential of Breath Analysis”, 21(1) Clinical Chemistry 5. What are these compounds?  Are there any on my breath?  Well, for starters, diabetics with low blood sugar can have high levels of acetone — which is “seen” as alcohol by breathalyzers. And scientific studies have found that people on diets can have reduced blood-sugar levels, causing acetone hundreds of times higher than found in normal individuals. Frank and Flores, “The Likelihood of Acetone Interference in Breath Alcohol Measurements”, 3 Alcohol, Drugs and Driving 1. And there are many other so-called “interferents”. See, for example, “Excretion of Low-Molecular Weight Volatile Substances in Human Breath: Focus on Endogenous Ethanol”, 9 Journal of Analytical Toxicology 246. If you are a smoker, your breathalyzer result is likely to be higher than expected. The compound acetaldehyde — reported by the breathalyzer as “alcohol” — is produced in the human body as a by-product in metabolizing consumed alcohol, and eventually passes into the lungs and breath. Researchers have discovered that levels of acetaldehyde in the lungs can be 30 times higher in smokers than in non-smokers. Result: higher BAC readings on the machine. And then there are the industrial compounds: paint, glue, gasoline, thinners, and other compounds contain the methyl group. No, you don’t have to drink the stuff: simply absorbing it through your skin or inhaling the fumes can result in significant levels of the chemical in your body for hours or even days, depending upon the half-life of the compound. So if you’ve painted a room or been around gasoline in the last day or two, don’t breath into a breathalyzer. Some law enforcement officials say that this is not a problem, claiming that levels of the compound would have to be at toxic levels to raise a breath test result to .08% or higher. These officials are displaying their ignorance of the science involved — specifically, of the partition ratio. This is the ratio of the compound found in the breath to that found in the blood. With ethyl alcohol, the ratio is 2100-to-1, which means that, on average, there will be 2100 units of alcohol in the blood for every unit found in the breath. These officials are using this ratio for all compounds, but every compound has its own ratio. Toluene (found in paint, glue, thinners, cleaning solvents. etc.), for example, has a partition ratio of only 7-to-1; a far greater amount of toluene in the blood will pass into the breath, and so a much smaller amount in the body will have a far greater impact on the breath machine. </div> That’s right.  What these machines actually detect and measure is any chemical compund that contains the methyl group in its molecular structure. There are thousands of such compounds — including quite a few which can be found on the human breath. And this machine that determines a person’s guilt or innocence will “see” all of those […] "> <img border="none" src="http://digg.com/img/badges/80x15-digg-badge-2.png" width="80" height="15" alt="Digg!" /> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DuiBlog" class="first">Subscribe to this feed</a> • <a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F26%2Fbreathalyzers-dont-measure-alcohol%2F&title=Breathalyzers+Don%E2%80%99t+Measure+Alcohol">Digg This!</a> • <a href="http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=fb&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F26%2Fbreathalyzers-dont-measure-alcohol%2F&title=Breathalyzers%20Don%E2%80%99t%20Measure%20Alcohol">Add to del.icio.us</a> • <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/26/breathalyzers-dont-measure-alcohol/">Add a comment</a> • <a href="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailFlare?itemTitle=Breathalyzers%20Don%E2%80%99t%20Measure%20Alcohol&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.duiblog.com%2F2008%2F01%2F26%2Fbreathalyzers-dont-measure-alcohol%2F">Email this</a> <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/26/breathalyzers-dont-measure-alcohol/#respond" title="Comment on Breathalyzers Don’t Measure Alcohol">No Comments »</a> </div> <h2><a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2008/01/24/breathalyzer-results-depend-on-body-temperature/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Breathalyzer Results Depend on Body Temperature">Breathalyzer Results Depend on Body Temperature</a></h2> Posted by <a href="http://www.duicentral.com/" title="California DUI Attorney">Lawrence Taylor</a> on January 24th, 2008 As I have said in earlier posts, law enforcement investigation techniques depend largely upon the fictitious premise that all humans are physiologically identical (see “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/11/11/convicting-the-average-dui-suspect/">Convicting the Average DUI Suspect</a>”). Without that presumption, field sobriety and breath alcohol tests would not be possible. I have previously discussed many examples of physiological differences — from person to person and within one person from moment to moment — which will directly alter breath or blood alcohol testing (see, for example, “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/18/diabetes-and-the-counterfeit-dui/">Diabetes and the Counterfeit DUI</a>”, “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/29/gerd-acid-reflux-and-false-breathalyzer-results/">GERD, Acid Reflux and False Breathalyzer Results</a>” and “<a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2005/02/25/the-effect-of-anemia-on-breath-tests/">The Effect of Anemia on Breath Tests</a>”). Yet another example of variability is body temperature. Put simply, an individual’s body temperature will have a direct effect on the results of a breath test. The effects of changes in body temeprature from the norm of 98.6 degrees on breath testing has been discussed in an article entitled “Body Temperature and the Breathalyzer Boobytrap”, 721 Michigan Bar Journal (September 1982). If because of illness, for example, the body temperature is elevated by only 1 degree Centrigrade (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit), the 1:2100 breath-to-blood <a href="http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/17/breathalyzers-and-why-they-dont-work/">partition ratio</a> will be affected so as to produce a 7 percent higher test result. Higher body temperatures will, of course, result in greater errors. <a href="http://www.mphlastala.com/">Dr. Michael Hlastala</a>, Professor of Physiology, Biophysics and Medicine at the University of Washington, confirms this effect. In an article entitled “Physiological Errors Associated with Alcohol Breath Testing”, 9(6) The Champion 18 (1985), he comments that even the average body temperature of a normal, healthy person “may vary by as much as 1 degree Centigrade above or below the normal mean value of 37 degrees Centigrade — or 1.8 degrees from the mean value of 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit”. Not only can the normal mean body temperature of an individual vary from that of other persons, but the “temperature of any individual may vary from time to time during the day by as much as 1 degree Centigrade”. Result? The partition ratio for alcohol in blood is altered — meaning, according to Professor Hlastala, a 6.3 percent error for every 1 degree Centigrade increase or decrease from the presumed normal body temperature. Yet another example of how breathalyzers are not actually testing you, but rather an “average” person who does not exist. <div align="center"> <h2>The DUI Exception to the Consitution <img src="http://www.duicentral.com/art/title_underline.gif" alt="" border="0" height="5" width="563" /></h2> </div> Over the years I have expressed my belief that organizations such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (<a href="http://www.madd.org/" title="MADD" target="_blank">MADD</a>) are well-intentioned "true believers" — but believers who, like most zealots, have a rigid and narrow focus and who are ignorant of the harm they cause to others. A few years ago, I was invited to give a lecture to a "think tank" of government, corporate and academic types expanding upon this view. In the years since then that I have given versions of the lecture to other groups, the legal and political situation has only grown worse. Perhaps the lecture itself might better explain why I consider the activities of such organizations to be a continuing threat to our institutions and constitutional safeguards... <img src="http://www.duicentral.com/art/spacer.gif" alt="" border="0" height="20" width="10" /> I hope to convince you in the next hour, some of you, that the greatest single threat to our freedoms, the freedoms set forth in the Bill of Rights, is not from Iraq or Iran. I don’t think it’s from North Korea. I don’t think it’s from the extremists of the Muslim world. The threat, as it has always been throughout history, is internal: It is from within. But I do not think it is terrorists or extremists on the right. I hope to convince a few of you that the greatest single threat to our freedoms today comes from a group consisting largely of American housewives. They call themselves the Mothers Against Drunk Driving. MADD. I am fully aware that some of you belong to MADD. And I am certainly not here to make fun of them. Others of you here do not belong to MADD, but you have contributed to MADD and many more of you here, perhaps most of you here, are in complete sympathy with their goals and their activities. Many of you have had tragic losses at the hands of drunk drivers. But I hope to convince you in the next hour that you might want to reassess your view of that particular organization. And I do not take them lightly in terms of their intentions. But we know that throughout history it is the well-intentioned zealots — those who believe strongly in the rightness of their cause — that are most willing to impose those ideas upon others. I do not, by the way, for a moment suggest that we should legalize drunk driving. I'm going to make that clear at the outset. But it is the true believer who is the greatest threat. And I should at the outset acknowledge my tremendous debt to Mr. Eric Hoffer who wrote the book, The True Believer. He was a longshoreman when I was going to school at Berkeley in the 60’s. He did not have a high school education, but was teaching philosophy at the University of California at Berkeley and wrote this little jewel of a book that has been terribly influential in my own thinking. I would like you to imagine for a moment that you’ve gone to a friend’s house for dinner. In the course of a very good dinner you’ve had a couple of glasses of a good Merlot and it is now time to drive home. I would like you to imagine that you are on your way home — and, I will tell you, by the way, that two glasses of wine will not, in any state, put you under the influence of alcohol or over the legal limit of .08. As you are driving along the highway, you see ahead of you some flashing lights and barricades and police cars cordoned across the highway, with flashing lights directing you into an increasingly small channel. And, as you go in, you are stopped and two police officers approach you and stick a flashlight in your face and say, "Breath on me. Have you been drinking tonight? Please step out of the car." Some of you say, "Well, that can’t happen in the United States. We have the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which says police officers have to have probable cause to stop you. They have to have a reason to believe you’ve done something criminal before they can stop and detain you.'" And so said the Michigan Supreme Court in 1990 in the case of Sitz v. Michigan. The Court said, "The Fourth Amendment does not permit these types of roadblocks" — and reversed the DUI conviction. The case went up to the United States Supreme Court, unfortunately, and that august body decided that somewhere in the Constitution there is something called a "DUI Exception". And in a 5 to 4 vote sent it back to Michigan saying there is no violation here. What’s interesting is that the Michigan Supreme Court — bless them, for there are fewer and fewer of them -- said, "Well, if you will not protect our citizens in the state of Michigan from this kind of police conduct, we will. And we again reverse the conviction and this time we rely upon our own state constitution." The state of Washington and three other states have followed suit. In 44 states today, however, it is legal to stop you for absolutely no reason other than the fact that you are driving a car. The only purpose is to check you out for drunk driving. You have been stopped, you have been taken out of the car and you have been handcuffed. You are placed in a police vehicle and you are on your way back to the police station. About this time you’re probably wondering: I’ve seen this TV show somewhere — they’re supposed to read me something aren’t they? Something called Miranda? Aren’t I supposed to have a right  to an attorney? Don’t I have the right to remain silent? That becomes an issue because, as you’re being driven to jail, the officer's asking you all kinds of questions. Like, "Where have you been?" "Where are you coming from?" "How much have you had to drink?" "How long ago was it?" "When was the last drink?" "Do you feel the effects?" "Where are you now?" "What time of day is it?" Well, again, a state Supreme Court said, "Hey, this person’s handcuffed and under arrest, you’ve got to advise him of his constitutional rights under Miranda." And again, it went to the United States Supreme Court. In 1984 in Berkemer v. McCarty, the United States Supreme Court fooled around for about 20 or 30 pages of opinion and finally concluded that there was apparently a DUI exception to the constitution. And that, "Well, we really can’t tell you when you’re supposed to give Miranda in a DUI case. We do know that it is later than in other types of criminal