Dennard arrested for DUI

[moosekill]

Reno 911 DUI Stop & Sobriety Test - YouTube

Here is the film from the officer's camera.

 

[dales804]

Reno 911 DUI Stop & Sobriety Test - YouTube

Here is the film from the officer's camera.

Are you a dancer?

No, I'm just drunk.

 

[50-yard-line]

Mostly correct, some wrong. Once you're deemed a refusal, you're a refusal. Reason being, it takes out the question: "What if the cop messed with the machine to try to get blood from him instead?" So when you're a refusal. or refuse, there is no more testing.

And it is ONE-LEGGED stand.

Another test that I see most of the guys use is the Romberg Blance Test. You have them place their arms away from their body, palms up. You have them close their eyes and put their head back. They have to do this for 30 seconds, with 6 seconds give or take on each side. Really drunk people are going 48 to 55 seconds. Good test with not a lot of movement.

There, fixed it for you, technically. And it's "let's," not "lets."

Sorry, I'm a professional writer, and this is what professional editors call "paying it forward,"

 

[robbomango]

Reno 911 DUI Stop & Sobriety Test - YouTube

Here is the film from the officer's camera.

Didn't know they really asked people to recite the alphabet backwards, I Thought it was an urban myth...

EDIT: Didn't know it was a comedy show...:doh:

 

[ravensgamer]

There, fixed it for you, technically. And it's "let's," not "lets."

Sorry, I'm a professional writer, and this is what professional editors call "paying it forward,"

You forgot the period, and your quoting is all wrong.

 

[moosekill]

Define irony.

"Define Irony: A bunch of idiots dancing on a plane to a song made famous by a band that died in a plane crash."

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Reminds me of a joke.

Cop pulls a guy over for driving drunk. “Ok, buddy, I have to give you a breathalyzer test.” Guy says, “uhh, no, I can’t do it. I have asthma and if you get me huffing and puffing, I’ll have an episode.” Cop says, “ok, we’ll do it the hard way, I’m going to do a blood test.” Guy says, “yeah, no can do. I’m a hemophiliac. You start poking me, I’m gonna bleed out and you’ll have a real mess.” Cop says, “ok, fine, get out of the car and walk a straight line.” Guy says, “yeah, no, I can’t walk a straight line.” Cop says, “Can’t walk a straight line? Why not?” Guy says, “because I’m freaking drunk, you idiot.”

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I've never done a breathalyzer and my terminology might be off here but have a couple friends who were slapped with a DUI years ago. The friend I was closer to said his boy blew into the device, got a negative reading but the officer told him he didn't blow hard enough to get a reliable reading. He blew harder and it became positive. So I wouldn't excuse Dennard just yet either, maybe the cop was taking necessary steps to get that reliable reading and unless Dennard is asthmatic or something like that blowing again isn't really asking a ton.

 

[Brady6]

http://m.brookstone.com/breathalyzer-digital-alcohol-detector-bactrack

 

[VJCPatriot]

Ughhhhh.....

Former Husker Alfonzo Dennard Arrested for DUI

OMG first Ahern and now Dennard. The hits just keep coming!! We just lost two starters because they wanted to be felons/idiots instead of multi-millionaires living up the life as paid professionals in the NFL.

God please make it stop!!

 

[QuantumMechanic]

These facts are irrelevant and a refusal of a DUI field test is, in effect, a totally conclusive fact of guilt? That's interesting though seemingly a bit odd. I'm not saying you're wrong (I assume you're right)

I wouldn't assume he's right. There's a reason DUI defense attorneys tell you not to take the breathalyzer test.

Anyhow, refusing to take the test isn't a crime. However, since the privilege of having a valid driver's license requires that you consent to such tests, your license will be administratively suspended (i.e. no need for any court proceedings) for the refusal. But that's not even close to the same thing as a crime.

 

[50-yard-line]

You forgot the period, and your quoting is all wrong.

No, I had a typo by hitting a comma key instead of the period key, and I'm too old to catch tiny typos! And it is perfectly acceptable to put the quotes outside the punctuation (and it looks better).

 

[Nunchucks]

Period goes inside quotes

 

[supafly]

I wouldn't assume he's right. There's a reason DUI defense attorneys tell you not to take the breathalyzer test.

Anyhow, refusing to take the test isn't a crime. However, since the privilege of having a valid driver's license requires that you consent to such tests, your license will be administratively suspended (i.e. no need for any court proceedings) for the refusal. But that's not even close to the same thing as a crime.

The thought of implied consent being a "crime" is not necessarily correct, so that may have been poor wording, but you're right that the penalty is increased and that in many cases you lose your license immediately.

As far as who is "right" or not, all I can say is that there are other things that often get you convicted, so I would not necessarily follow the ambulance chaser DUI attorneys, but you are free to do whatever you choose, just let me know how that turns out for you. They are the following:

--a sworn officer's testimony

--the video of your road infraction (aka "swerving" etc)

--the fact that there was an odor of alcohol

--the video of the field sobriety test for the judge/jury to witness + again...the sworn officer's testimony of what they saw in this test

--the fact that you refused to submit to a test, which is automatically a DUI charge in all 50 states (most people who aren't drunk don't refuse the test)



In other words, many DUI attorneys' hands are tied after they see the video evidence. They no longer can receive a plea deal in many cases due to the damning evidence that is presented. On the other hand, if you blow a .09 or a .10 or something that isn't considered "too bad" there are a lot of times when your attorney can plea down to a reckless driving charge instead based on other forms of punishment such a fines/classes etc.

You won't get that opportunity too many times if you refuse to blow or submit to blood. If anyone could get off of a DUI by refusing to give a test then why wouldn't everyone do it? The answer is because they don't need that as proof nearly as often as you may think.

 

[Oswlek]

If his camp is providing honest and accurate information I see no reason why he'd be cut, or have his probation violated.

Report: Alfonzo Dennard’s Camp Claims He Didn’t Fail Sobriety Tests, Cops Arrested Him for Inadequate Breathalyzer | New England Patriots | NESN.com

Agreed. You might be right that he is getting the shaft.

 

[Dingleberry]

You guys are pretty lousy grammar police. You're both extremely wrong.

That said, the original guy (50 yd line) shouldn't have even said anything and started this.

Period inside quotes.

They were both correct.

 

[supafly]

Perfect. Now he can't drive to where trouble awaits and this should keep him good for the whole season.

So refusal to submit to a 'DUI test' is an automatic guilty on DUI (among other things)? Interesting. What if 20 minutes prior to being pulled over, you can prove that you were at a location -- providing multiple witnesses -- that did not have alcohol, no one saw alcohol, no one witnessed him drinking or acting as if under the influence, and this was over several hours? These facts are irrelevant and a refusal of a DUI field test is, in effect, a totally conclusive fact of guilt? That's interesting though seemingly a bit odd. I'm not saying you're wrong (I assume you're right), just odd that one can be convicted of something solely based on a refusal to cooperate. Within the larger context, how does this mesh with the right to not self incriminate? I can see being convicted of failure to obey an officer or whatever law that applies to failing to obey in these circumstances......just odd that they also convict you of actually being under the influence when it is seemingly far from proven.

Refusing to submit to a test isn't an "automatic" DUI conviction, it's an automatic DUI charge. If I somewhere said that I sincerely apologize, because I NEVER would have meant to give that impression (even if I were drunk ).

That said, there are many things that the officer and prosecutor present such as video evidence and sworn testimony so they really don't need the submission if they detect alcohol on your breath and witness you drifting/swerving etc.

A professional NFL athlete could certainly have managed to breathe hard enough into the test had he chosen to, no?

The only other side of things would be the old conspiracy theory where he pissed off the Lincoln, Nebraska cops for his past mistakes. I suppose we'll eventually find out what happened (maybe).

 

[supafly]

Period inside quotes.

They were both correct.

Yes of course the period always goes inside quotes. That's something we all learned in 3rd grade. I edited my post and misunderstood what he was saying. Thanks for the clarification. You saved me some embarassment since that I was scanning the posts and misread it.

I'll stay out of the grammar police game....but damn whoever started it in this forum today

 

[supafly]

I think you misread his post. Nebraska is an "implied consent" state. If you refuse a breathalyzer, you lose your license for 6 months and there may be other penalties as well. This is regardless of the outcome of your DUI case.

On the DUI, a breathalyzer test isn't required for conviction. They might have dashboard cam video showing the driver weaving around while driving or doing poorly on field sobriety tests. It would also be argued in court that the driver refused a breathalyzer because they knew what the results would be.

Thank you, Demo. Yes, I'd hope that he misread the post, because I certainly didn't mean to give that impression.

Of course who knows what the hell I'm saying at 3:30 in the morning, so I quite possibly may have worded it incorrectly. Thanks for clearing it up though.

 

[Brady6]

Agreed. You might be right that he is getting the shaft.

I have a cousin around my age, in our teens he was constantly getting himself in trouble. He stupidly threw a big bolder size rock through the window of the police station. He was 16 at the time and that being just a malicious destruction of property charge it only resulted in minimal probation, however the cops followed him, questioned him for every possible thing that they could, I remember once he was giving me a ride home from work going 30 mph in a 35 mph speed zone, it took 5 cruisers and an appearance from the chief of police in my city to write him a 75 dollar speeding ticket. Needless to say by 18 years old he was serving a 2.5 year sentence, when he got out his parents had moved from Mass to NH so he never came back to our hometown and also has never been arrested since. It's been 9+ years. I learned if the cops get a hard on for you eventually they will get you for something it's only a matter of time.