AuthorTopic: The DUI Shuffle  (Read 176 times)

Online Eddie

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 13599
    • View Profile
The DUI Shuffle
« on: April 14, 2018, 07:36:49 AM »
This is news in Chicago. In Texas, it's been like this for a while. There are two or three things I think people should be aware of, which the article touches on.

One is the concept of "implied consent". By driving on a state owned road, you automatically consent to whatever (like taking a breathalyzer). This is bullshit, in my opinion, and was a legal opinion that never held water until MADD was able to bring huge pressure to bear on the judiciary. It's only one small step from there to implied consent for searches, imho.

Another is the way they've figured out how to punish you for refusing the breathalyzer and/or a "field sobriety test". You CAN refuse, but if you do (here anyway) then they stick it to you by having a license revocation hearing and taking your license. The burden of proof for this is quite low. A judge decides, based on the arrest video and the arresting officers testimony. This hearing takes place long before the actual DUI case goes to court, and even before the results of a court-ordered blood test comes back.

So that's how you get punished for not being  a compliant sheeple. Here, 93% of the people charged with DUI lose their license at the first hearing, and so it's quite possible to pass your blood test and still have your license revoked. They don't unrevoke it either.....and possibly the worst part is that if you get stopped again and refuse to blow, you are looking at a 2nd offense on the license revocation and a higher penalty (here it is a 2 year revocation as opposed to the initial 6 months.)

I recommend NEVER submitting to a field sobriety test. It's nothing but a dog and pony show. Never take a breathalyzer  unless you haven't consumed ANY alcohol. That's my opinion. In the universe of reality, as opposed to the legal system, neither breathalyzers nor blood tests are reliably accurate.


New DUI policy: Refuse breath test, cop will seek instant warrant for blood test
 
Carol Stream Officer Dan Stafie conducts a traffic stop Dec. 7, 2017. (Antonio Perez / Chicago Tribune)
Robert McCoppinContact Reporter
Chicago Tribune
Police in McHenry County will be out for blood with drivers who refuse to take breath tests for suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

And the practice of officers immediately seeking blood draws from those who won’t submit to a breath screen appears to be spreading, with Lake County also planning to adopt a similar policy.

The strategy in many departments takes advantage of technology that allows police to generate an “e-warrant” that can be sent electronically to a judge for review right from a curbside traffic stop.

Law enforcement authorities say their main targets are repeat offenders who not only are the biggest public hazards but also know how to game the system by refusing to take breath tests, making it harder for them to be successfully prosecuted.

“These repeat offenders are some of the most dangerous people out there,” Lake County State’s Attorney Michael Nerheim said. “It’s a recipe for disaster.”

Critics counter that such tactics infringe upon constitutional rights or, at best, could be overly burdensome to emergency room staffs who might have to handle the blood draws.

“It’s just another way for prosecutors and police to use fear and intimidation on ordinary citizens,” said well-known DUI defense attorney Don Ramsell.

Many police departments in the Chicago area already will seek blood draws from those who decline breath tests. Before online e-warrants, some counties had a rotation of on-call judges who would review search warrants at night or on weekends, often at home.

But generally, and in counties including DuPage, the practice is limited to more serious cases, where there’s been an accident with injuries or death or a suspect appears to be a repeat offender.

Kane County also was something of a pioneer in establishing targeted campaigns known as “no-refusal” weekends, sometimes geared around events like St. Patrick’s Day or the Super Bowl, about a decade ago.

But McHenry County’s shift marks a significant expansion of the policy, which will go into effect Sunday, in Algonquin, Cary, Harvard, Huntley, Johnsburg, Lake in the Hills, McHenry, Spring Grove and Woodstock.

The legal system already uses civil penalties as deterrents for refusing a breath test — namely, the automatic suspension of a driver’s license. But police generally can’t force a suspect to submit to a blood test without a warrant, and many motorists accept the trade-off of a license suspension if it lessens the chance they will be convicted of DUI.

McHenry County State’s Attorney Patrick Kenneally said in a news release that refusal is an increasingly common tactic of repeat offenders, one of the reasons he endorsed the expansion of no-refusal.

E-warrant systems now allow the process to proceed much more quickly — before the traces of drugs or alcohol dissipate — with officers able to communicate with a judge through teleconference and a judge providing an electronic signature if the probable cause is proved.

If the warrant is granted by a judge, the suspect will be taken to a nearby emergency room, where blood will be drawn and tested for alcohol and drugs. In Lake County, Nerheim hopes to work with the sheriff to have the jail medical staff perform the blood draws.

But critics see a system that could be overly burdensome and potentially unfair.

Defense attorney Robert Hanaford said court rulings have generally allowed blood draws if there is probable cause for a search warrant, like a driver weaving in traffic, having glassy eyes or slurred speech or failing a field sobriety test.

But Hanaford anticipates possible problems with overtaxed health care workers having to take so many blood draws so often for police. He envisions police taking suspects to crowded emergency rooms on weekend nights, and drivers who may be hostile or physically resisting needle draws.

Another concern is that police are increasingly dealing with drivers who may be using prescription drugs or, with an aging population, may be in the early stages of dementia.

“From a constitutional standpoint, they can probably get away with this, but from a practical standpoint they’re going to run into some difficulties,” he said. “I applaud the effort to get impaired drivers off the road, but I think it’s going to be burdensome. They’re putting medical professionals in the line of performing law enforcement duties.”

Ramsell said drivers should still have a right to refuse a blood draw and that police shouldn’t use force or intimidation to get them to cooperate.

Police could surround drivers and threaten other charges, or use physical force to secure a blood sample, as he said has occurred in documented cases.

“Is that what you want?” he asked. “I don’t think the Hannibal Lecter approach will reduce commission of the offense.”

Complicating the matter, more health professionals are refusing to become agents of the police. In Utah, a nurse was handcuffed after refusing to allow police to draw blood without stated consent from an unconscious driver. The nurse was later paid $500,000 to settle the dispute over her arrest, and the officer was fired.

Ramsell said he would challenge the legality of any forced blood draws. “Good luck,” he said of the tactic. “I’ll see you in court.”

Some states have passed laws making it a crime to refuse a blood test. In Lake County, Nerheim said those who refuse to cooperate would be charged with obstruction of justice.

The county has a pilot program using electronic warrants. So far it’s used only by Waukegan police, the Lake County sheriff’s department and a special gang unit, so Nerheim hopes to expand that countywide.

Under Illinois law, by driving a motor vehicle, motorists are legally considered to give “implied consent” for a breath or blood test. Even a person who is dead or unconscious is deemed to have given consent.

Refusal can result in automatic suspension of the person’s driver’s license, but defense attorneys generally say it’s easier to get driving privileges back with such a suspension than with a license that’s revoked for a DUI conviction.

rmccoppin@chicagotribune.com

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-dui-no-refusal-20180412-story.html

« Last Edit: April 14, 2018, 08:42:47 AM by Eddie »
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Online RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 31582
    • View Profile
Re: The DUI Shuffle
« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2018, 09:12:36 AM »
This is news in Chicago. In Texas, it's been like this for a while. There are two or three things I think people should be aware of, which the article touches on.

One is the concept of "implied consent". By driving on a state owned road, you automatically consent to whatever (like taking a breathalyzer). This is bullshit, in my opinion, and was a legal opinion that never held water until MADD was able to bring huge pressure to bear on the judiciary. It's only one small step from there to implied consent for searches, imho.

Another is the way they've figured out how to punish you for refusing the breathalyzer and/or a "field sobriety test". You CAN refuse, but if you do (here anyway) then they stick it to you by having a license revocation hearing and taking your license. The burden of proof for this is quite low. A judge decides, based on the arrest video and the arresting officers testimony. This hearing takes place long before the actual DUI case goes to court, and even before the results of a court-ordered blood test comes back.

So that's how you get punished for not being  a compliant sheeple. Here, 93% of the people charged with DUI lose their license at the first hearing, and so it's quite possible to pass your blood test and still have your license revoked. They don't unrevoke it either.....and possibly the worst part is that if you get stopped again and refuse to blow, you are looking at a 2nd offense on the license revocation and a higher penalty (here it is a 2 year revocation as opposed to the initial 6 months.)

I recommend NEVER submitting to a field sobriety test. It's nothing but a dog and pony show. Never take a breathalyzer  unless you haven't consumed ANY alcohol. That's my opinion. In the universe of reality, as opposed to the legal system, neither breathalyzers nor blood tests are reliably accurate.


This has been a sore spot with Libertarians for quite some time.

Basically, you can only drive at all by the grace of the state.  That is what a "Driver's License" is all about.  Back in the daze before carz, you didn't need a "Horse Rider's" license or a "Buggy Driver's" licence either.  You are not free to drive a car at your will, you only can do so by the permission of the state.

It's right and it's wrong at the same time.  The state does in fact provide the roads for you to drive on, and the state is also responsible for the safety of all it's citizens.  But at the same time, since generally speaking you HAVE to drive to work within the state system, taking away your right to drive amounts to depriving you of your livelihood, in many cases.  Also, forcing you to take a breathalyzer is tantamount to unreasonable search and seizure.

I am fortunate to never have had a DUI in my life.  My license has been continuously valid since I received it in NYC at the age of 17.  In the time period since, I have received 2 speeding tickets (both before age 20), once for "rolling through" a stop sign, and once missed a weigh station while driving my Freightliner.  That's it for driving violations over more than 40 years.

RE
SAVE AS MANY AS YOU CAN

Online Eddie

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 13599
    • View Profile
Re: The DUI Shuffle
« Reply #2 on: April 14, 2018, 09:24:14 AM »
I made it to age 62. You have not yet matched my record.LOL. And I got my MC license on my 15th birthday.

It's getting much easier to get nailed. It's a huge scam. All kinds of associated conduit schemes.

Drug and alchohol assessment. A whole dept. at the county level.

Court ordered mandatory classes. Private conduit scheme.

Court ordered mandatory victim impact panel, income to county.

License re-instatement fees, income to the state.

Legal fees. One fee for the DUI. An additional fee for expungement, even if you don't get convicted.

For me, a second attorney to represent me before my state dental board.

Actual court costs, income to the county.

It's an industry now.





What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Online Eddie

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 13599
    • View Profile
Re: The DUI Shuffle
« Reply #3 on: April 14, 2018, 09:32:39 AM »
The classes vary, depending on what info you gave at your county assessment. Honesty leads to more classes and higher costs.

You take a standardized "alcoholic/drug addict" test. To get off light, you need to make it sound like the night you got stopped was the only time you ever took a drink in your life, and it's good to tell the county drone (CADAC counselor, a Jr. College ticket) that it was a real wake-up call and you'll probably never touch another drop. Be sincere. If you can fake that, you've got it made.

I did something good that I didn't realize I was doing. It asked religion, and I checked Christian. Instant brownie points with my counselor. He mentioned it right away.

If you're a regular drinker and you admit that, you'll get more classes. Kaching! Take recreational drugs? More classes. Kaching.

What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Online RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 31582
    • View Profile
Re: The DUI Shuffle
« Reply #4 on: April 14, 2018, 09:43:39 AM »
I made it to age 62. You have not yet matched my record.LOL. And I got my MC license on my 15th birthday.

Well, you are older than me by a year or two, and TX hands out licenses at a younger age than NY.  I actually had my provisional license at 16 by taking the Driver's Ed classes at Stuyvesant, which only cost $100 at the time as I recall and Dad the Pigman paid for them.  I actually took my first Driver's Road Test in Manhattan just above Wall Street on the lower east side.  Around Stuyvesant Town, the complex that went into BK during the Financial Crisis.

I have to renew my license in August by my birthday.  I worry about my vision test.  I think I can pass wearing reading glasses.  According to what I have read, these are better to use than prescription glasses when looking into those little machines.

RE
SAVE AS MANY AS YOU CAN

Offline azozeo

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 5706
    • View Profile
Re: The DUI Shuffle
« Reply #5 on: April 14, 2018, 02:07:31 PM »
And what's gonna' happen when we have to operate one of these  :icon_sunny:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/F2fBCc21Fh8&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/F2fBCc21Fh8&fs=1</a>
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Online RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 31582
    • View Profile
Re: The DUI Shuffle
« Reply #6 on: April 14, 2018, 05:14:20 PM »
And what's gonna' happen when we have to operate one of these  :icon_sunny:

Don't hold your breath.  Elon Musk will get to Mars first.

RE
SAVE AS MANY AS YOU CAN

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
527 Views
Last post October 23, 2014, 05:42:05 AM
by RE