Notice that the article doesn't say anything about the police obtaining a warrant and drawing blood without her consent. She failed a *roadside* breathalyzer test, but that isn't admissible in court. The police can obtain a warrant and draw blood without consent given PC, which might include a failed roadside breathalyzer test. Again, though, no mention of that in this article.
Standard procedure for the WSP, do you think? Or perhaps if an ordinary serf had the wherewithal to refuse a blood/urine/breath test the police might have been more diligent in gathering evidence? And what do you think this Democrat AG would have had her attack dogs say to the judge in court about a citizen who acted as she has?