Please tell me this SHOULDN'T happen with Police in the USA!
- Thread starter berryblondeboys
- Start date
well to try to keep things in perspective here, the law is not wrong. death by drunk driver has gotten so bad that zero tolerance seems to be the only way to discourage people from getting behind the wheel period. What happened to your DH IS the cost of these strict laws. But at the same time, it is worth it for the good of the majority of the public in the laws eyes and groups like MADD understand that. Please don't say we need to loosen the laws back up again because so much progress has been made at the cost of actual lives. And remember, a BAC of .02 can still impair some people. Its not cut and dry situation - there are variables. The breathalyzer cannot say who can tolerate more or less alcohol. It is just a guideline. Someone may be so allergic to alcohol that even one drink can impair them. A cop cannot judge just by simple tests so they would rather just clear the whole damn road of anyone who has had anything to drink.
It's not about loosening the laws back up . . . the law currently says .08, if you're under that and blow a 0.00, then that point is moot. There's a reason the threshhold was set at .08 and it sounds like what you're suggesting (wiping the roades of anyone who's had alcohol) is not what the general public would ever agree to. And maybe a BAC of .02 can impair some people (although I'd like to see data on that), just as a BAC of higher than .08 might come from someone who is still more alert than most. The first person should not be arrested, just as the second shouldn't be let go.
If the "guideline" was followed in this case, the OPs husband would have been let go.
I didn't suggest to clear the roads of everyone who has had alcohol. please do not quote me out of context. I said thats what might be in the cops minds and they will let the courts and lawyers settle it. and yes a person can be impaired if they are allergic no matter how little they have consumed. (I know this cause I have gone through 3 of my husbands rehabs and know first hand all the things alcohol can do). The cops are not the judges. They are law enforcers. I don't like it either but thats the way it is. They do let people go. Its on a case by case basis. I was not there and don't know what was said to this particular cop so everything I state is clearly non specific.
Off topic....
does anyone own a breathalizer, are the results accurate? it would be a handy thing to keep around...imo.
especially at the holidays, make people use it before giving their keys.
does anyone own a breathalizer, are the results accurate? it would be a handy thing to keep around...imo.
especially at the holidays, make people use it before giving their keys.
We don't, but we looked them up and they appear to be pretty accurate. I know with the one DH used at the police station that they wanted him to rinse his mouth with water first to be sure there was no alcohol still in his mouth to taint the test. Though, he was to rinse, not swallow.
However, we read that field tested breathalyzers can't be used for evidence in prosecuting for some reason which is why some places don't use portable ones, but even still getting an IDEA of what your alcohol level is is a good idea.
However, we read that field tested breathalyzers can't be used for evidence in prosecuting for some reason which is why some places don't use portable ones, but even still getting an IDEA of what your alcohol level is is a good idea.
I believe there is a plus or minus factor of 2. I was on a jury for a DUI case and we learned alot about the breathalyzers both field and the ones at the station. There are so many things that can affect the result but for the most part, its the best test they have.
in other words, they are not infallible. but if you have alcohol on your breathe or admit to drinking, thats all they really need. what the law is trying to get through to people is this: if you drink do not drive, period. and that means even one drink.
UPDATE!!!!!
Well, my DH had his court date yesterday. We had to pay $2000 for a lawyer "just in case" because the prosecutors don't get the cases until the morning of, so you don't know if your case will be taken up or not until it's NOW.
He had to be there by 8:30 am. His lawyer tried to see the prosecutors to see what they were doing with the case. The prosecutors didn't even have his case folder. So, they waited for 4 hours (read Lawyer clock ticking) one of EIGHTY cases that day in this one courtroom) just to be told the case was dropped.
Now, he has to get his arrest sealed/off the record and the lawyer does think there's reason to sue in this case.
This JUST HAS TO STOP. Not everyone has $2000 - $5000 to throw around plus being arrested, car towed, night in jail, court date, hiring a lawyer, etc just because a police officer suspects you might have been drinking.... NONE of this should come to pass without a breathalyzer test reading. FIRST prove a person has been drinking, then charge them.... Charging them and then saying "oops" with the 0.00 breathalyzer... never apologizing and making a person go through the whole process as if they are guilty is so wrong, so very wrong.... and if we DIDN'T have the money/means to get this off his record? then a poor person would have for LIFE that he was arrested for an OWI which can affect employment. DC law/procedure NEEDS to change.
Well, my DH had his court date yesterday. We had to pay $2000 for a lawyer "just in case" because the prosecutors don't get the cases until the morning of, so you don't know if your case will be taken up or not until it's NOW.
He had to be there by 8:30 am. His lawyer tried to see the prosecutors to see what they were doing with the case. The prosecutors didn't even have his case folder. So, they waited for 4 hours (read Lawyer clock ticking) one of EIGHTY cases that day in this one courtroom) just to be told the case was dropped.
Now, he has to get his arrest sealed/off the record and the lawyer does think there's reason to sue in this case.
This JUST HAS TO STOP. Not everyone has $2000 - $5000 to throw around plus being arrested, car towed, night in jail, court date, hiring a lawyer, etc just because a police officer suspects you might have been drinking.... NONE of this should come to pass without a breathalyzer test reading. FIRST prove a person has been drinking, then charge them.... Charging them and then saying "oops" with the 0.00 breathalyzer... never apologizing and making a person go through the whole process as if they are guilty is so wrong, so very wrong.... and if we DIDN'T have the money/means to get this off his record? then a poor person would have for LIFE that he was arrested for an OWI which can affect employment. DC law/procedure NEEDS to change.
I agree, you need to get it off his record. What a mess. And you should sue to get yiour $$ back.
A teacher in our state would lose their job if they got arrested OR got a DWI, and definitely for both. A mistake could cost them their job and their life. In you case alone your car insurance will go up 10-fold if your husband can still get insured.
I'm very sorry this happened to both of you - it is very scary.
My father is from the former yugoslavia also and so is my moms parents. Actualy your right if you do show them money over there they will let you go
which is not good. What they did to your husband is wrong and if I were you I would get a lawyer..Good luck
It's definitely shocking. My husband is an officer and works very hard to make sure drunks are not on our streets. I cannot imagine his office handling a case like this - besides the fact that there are ACTUAL drunks out there who need to be caught and kept off the streets - there was nothing to hold your husband on.
It surprises me that they didn't have a portable breathalyser. Hubby carries one at all times in his patrol car.
I am so sorry you had to go through this. Our system isn't perfect and can only get better if people participate. Maybe he should run for office.
Contact the local news services. Try to get them to do some sort of story.
It surprises me that they didn't have a portable breathalyser. Hubby carries one at all times in his patrol car.
I am so sorry you had to go through this. Our system isn't perfect and can only get better if people participate. Maybe he should run for office.
Contact the local news services. Try to get them to do some sort of story.
It's definitely shocking. My husband is an officer and works very hard to make sure drunks are not on our streets. I cannot imagine his office handling a case like this - besides the fact that there are ACTUAL drunks out there who need to be caught and kept off the streets - there was nothing to hold your husband on.
It surprises me that they didn't have a portable breathalyser. Hubby carries one at all times in his patrol car.
I am so sorry you had to go through this. Our system isn't perfect and can only get better if people participate. Maybe he should run for office.
I'm wondering if this got super bungled because it was two different groups handling the "case". First, the arresting officer is a Parks Services Police Officer. His "beat" are the national monuments, etc. So, he is employed by the fed. gov't. Really, how often would a federal parks services guy pick up a drunk driver? And that's probably why they don't carry portable breathalyzers (at least that's the only reason that makes ANY sense to me).
Second, when the parks services station's fingerprinting machine was broken, they took him to the city of DC police station for fingerprinting, so that transferred him to city police and not federal police, but that doesn't explain the rest of it.
Believe me, we are looking into this to see that this stops FOREVER. A lot of people said to just "drop" it here on the forum, but that means something like this can keep happening to other people. It's almost our duty to make sure this doesn't happen again.
