blank'/> Liberally Lean From The Land Of Dairy Queen: Random Prosecutorial Watch

3.25.2008

Random Prosecutorial Watch


Just noticed that some prosecutor over on the State message board is concerned about his DWI case where the defendant blew a 0.00.

It's a crazy world out there people.

9 comments:

funnyeyes said...

I have an uncontrolled nystagmus and do not have naccolepsy. I remember I used to get pulled over by the cops when I was a teenager and was accused of intoxication every time. By the time I graduated I could do the field sobriety test in my sleep.

wordkyle said...

That defendant blew a 0.00 and a prosecutor is still going after him....you had a client recently who blew a .083 (if I remember correctly) and was found not guilty.

Are breathalizer tests worth anything at all?

Anonymous said...

The Williamson County way is to try and convict everyone that the police charge with any crime, regardless of the evidence. They say that God will sort it out later!

Anonymous said...

Why did you put a picture of the book? Is it just for the title?

Anonymous said...

Actually it is the "Intoxilyzer" now, not the "Breathalyzer". The former using Infrared Spectroscopy, and the latter using Gas Chromatography (I can't believe I'm revealing my geekism, here). What I'm saying is, it's not just a name change, but totally different types of tests. The "Breathalyzer" was way more subject to reference sample error, while the "Intoxilyzer" isn't. The "Intoxilyzer" IS pretty foolproof and works on some pretty established science, but you can still question some of the assumptions it is set up to make during its operation. In any event, recent cases have greatly curtailed its usefulness, because these cases don't let you extrapolate an "Intoxilyzer" reading back to when the driver was driving (unless you have a set of circumstances that most cases will never see). Therefore, at the trial, all the expert can say is that the driver BAC was "such and such" when tested, but out on the road they "could have been higher or lower". And if asked "how much higher or lower", they usually can't say. So to answer 12:45 PM's question, "Intoxilyzer" results are strangely not very helpful in court for the prosecution.

Anonymous said...

BY THE WAY, I READ THAT BOOK, IT WAS AWESOME!!! I WOULD RECOMMEND IT TO EVERYONE! :)

Anonymous said...

i too read that book and it is great! very sad though that his life was ruined..once you start reading it you cannot put it down! read it barry and let us know what you think.

Anon4obviousreasons said...

A Decatur PO asked me that question once,without a pause I said,"Ha! do people really answer that question?" He gave me a cold look and all but decided to forego the Mag-Light to outer knee technique. This made me think though, there's obviously a report somwhere that says to the effect,"Subject replies: Ha! Do people really answer that?" At this time this officer decided to forego Mag-Light to knee and transported for blood draw.
I beat the time but did not beat the ride.
The End

Anonymous said...

Strange, I also have necrophilia, but my eyes bounce very little if at all-puzzling is all I can say.