Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ozzymandus
He should get a DUI regardless.

I agree, but unfortunately there's no physical proof of intoxication.

16 posted on 05/06/2006 1:22:03 AM PDT by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: Cementjungle

He admitted being under the influence of drugs. DUI doesn't mean only alcohol.


18 posted on 05/06/2006 1:26:34 AM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

No physical proof of intoxication? Swerving eratically, nearly hitting a police cruiser and smashing into a concrete security barricade aint exactly sober acts are they?


46 posted on 05/06/2006 4:08:39 AM PDT by Rock N Jones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle
"I agree, but unfortunately there's no physical proof of intoxication"

And why isn't there physical proof?

The "impaired" box was checked off on the occurrance report yet no breathalyzer was administered.

Imagine that happening in your town to you or your friends.

Imagine anyone in your town giving the appearance of being impaired as he climbs out of an accident vehicle in the presence of a constable and having a police NCO sending the constable on about his other duties and giving the subject of the investigation a ride home in a police vehicle, without administering a breathalyzer.

85 posted on 05/06/2006 11:20:52 AM PDT by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson