Local LEO getting off with $1000 fine for a DUI!! Still on patrol?

This is how a DUI charge turns into "Failure to use due care".

http://www.georgestein.com/rights/card.html

The game favors those who know the rules. You can't fire this guy because in the eyes of the law, he did not commit a crime beyond failure to use due care.

In this country, we are innocent until proven guilty, and the prosecution failed to prove him guilty of DUI. Since we assume innocence, no reason exists to take away this man's livelihood.

You can be charged with any crime at any time, but the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. You can be taken into custody on a charge of double homicide, and later show that you did not commit that crime. Should you lose your job due to false accusation?

You can say "I think he was drunk" but our legal system operates on fact not innuendo.
 
BHJ said:
The lawyer got a very good plea deal because failure to submit a sample is an automatic 1 year license revocation.
Click to expand...

^^I'm wondering the same thing--I thought the "implied consent" law in GA states that if you refuse the breathalyzer (or whatever else) you automatically lose your license for a year?
 
That would be true if it were you or me, but it seems because it was a police officer he gets to keep his license! Clearly a double standard!!

Captdave77, If you read the article this officer FAILED the physical field sobriety tests he was given by the trooper. The trooper smelled alcohol on him and he admitted to drinking alcohol. The ALCO Sensor was positive for alcohol. He was charged with DUI and refusing to take the state accepted test. Those are the facts. He was given a sweet plea deal because he was a cop!. All of this is more than enough to get "Joe Public" convicted, loss of license for a year, depending on what you do for a living you could also be fired and it would cost "Joe Public" a heck of alot more than $1000.00. The only one that did his job here was the Trooper that actually arrested a fellow officer because the guy was drunk. It will be interesting to see what happens to the next person this SMPD officer arrests for a DUI??

I am thinking the person should stand up point at the officer and tell the judge I want the same deal he got!
 
testdepth said:
That would be true if it were you or me, but it seems because it was a police officer he gets to keep his license! Clearly a double standard!!

Captdave77, If you read the article this officer FAILED the physical field sobriety tests he was given by the trooper. The trooper smelled alcohol on him and he admitted to drinking alcohol. The ALCO Sensor was positive for alcohol. He was charged with DUI and refusing to take the state accepted test. Those are the facts. He was given a sweet plea deal because he was a cop!. All of this is more than enough to get "Joe Public" convicted, loss of license for a year, depending on what you do for a living you could also be fired and it would cost "Joe Public" a heck of alot more than $1000.00. The only one that did his job here was the Trooper that actually arrested a fellow officer because the guy was drunk. It will be interesting to see what happens to the next person this SMPD officer arrests for a DUI??

I am thinking the person should stand up point at the officer and tell the judge I want the same deal he got!
Click to expand...

"Sobriety tests" are designed to fail and are often inadmissible for one reason or another. Neither the arresting officer's nose nor the roadside ALCHO sensor are admissible in court.

Refusal to take a breathalyzer does not make a prima facie case for suspending the accused person's driver's license.

You don't know why he got the deal. The prosecution may not want to go to trial with only a dash video and voice recording if they were even admissible at trial. There is no video of his right eye not tracking with his left and his stumble may not look bad on the tape. If he sounded good, did not stumble all over himself, and without the breathalyzer he may have walked without even paying a fine if the case went to trial.

I have a hard time believing the prosecutor sat in a room and said "ah shucks he's a police officer I'll let him off easy". I find it more likely the prosecutor looked at the admissible evidence and decided to get something rather than an outright acquittal.
 
Anyone who does not act like an ass on the dash video and has $10,000 to spend can avoid a DUI conviction. If you fall out of your truck and puke on the officer's shoes, you may be in trouble, but a good lawyer will plea down the "normal" DUI to a lesser charge. This is why a good defense attorney makes the money he does.
 
captdave77 said:
Refusal to take a breathalyzer does not make a prima facie case for suspending the accused person's driver's license.
Click to expand...

refusal in my case led to automatic (put your ass in handcuffs no ?'s asked, arrested and convicted) and automatic 12 months suspension of DL

I didn't have money for a lawyer,
 
I know of
Several officers that have lost everything over DUIs.
Matter of fact DUIs are considered "no tolerance" even to other officers. MADD has sued individual officers over stuff like this and most if us really like our homes...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Getting offended by something posted on the internet….
Replies
2
Views
95
Trailrider
Trailrider
If You’re Confused and Still Looking for a Sign
Replies
8
Views
342
Scots Irishm'n
Scots Irishm'n
sound off
2
Replies
13
Views
222
Targetmaster
Targetmaster

Featured Listings!

Back
Top Bottom