with all sincerity...

[PeterM]

how do you fight a DUI citation in california. it's not for me but a friend of mine. this guy's a 53 year old senior manager of engineers at motorola and he's an outgoing, friendly and harmless guy in every sense of the word. well, story goes like this...

tonight we went out for dinner and we had a few glasses of sake with dinner at a japanese restaurant. afterwards we went back to his house to hang out for about an hour or two and had about an eighth glass of port while waiting for the rest of our friends to show up so we can all head out to the local watering hole. i had a double gin-soda, hurricane and a pint of fat tire, he had a hurricane and a gin-tonic and that was that, an hour later we went to the next bar, sat around for about 2-3 hours and i had a few drinks while he had only water. we left the bar and he made the u-turn on the way to drop me off at the girlfriend's house and before i could open my mouth to tell him that he's making an illeagal u-turn...it was too late, we saw the blue and red light in the rear view mirror...

they got him out of the car while they told me to stay in the passenger seat, they gave him the sobreity test and he did fine and finally they gave him the breatherlizer test and he blew a .088...

it's just his luck that it was a lady cop who had her daughter doing a ride along so an example had to be set, i tried sweet talking her every way possible but unbeknownst to me, my friend was already on his way to drunk tank while i was standing around waiting for his car to be towed and wasting my breath.

i do realize that because we live in the american society we've inadvertently aggreed to the entailing social contract, namely, the law! but i see this as a battle between qualitative and quantitative analysis. i've met people who couldn't drive after one beer and i've seen people who could drive after drinking everyone under the table and truth of the matter is, i'm not the person to place judgment on who can or cannot drive after whatever amount of drinks they've had but mike was doing fine with driving back to my place(3 blocks away) and crashing there for the night. so in a sense my opinion does not matter as far as he's guilty or not but what i'm asking is...

how do you go about fighting and having a high probablity of beating this citation if money didn't matter in so far that it didn't surpass the actual fine by...lets say more than 30%. i'm thinking the fine is going to run him around $15k + or - 5-6k, so my question is, can you beat this accusation spending around $15-20k in lawyer fees. the money's not too much of an issue but just having the DUI on record is. and if you can, on what basis would you be fighting this citation/accusation on. anything will help

it's rought time for him now because he's going through a divorce(splitting assets) and i'm hoping he has enough battery on his cell to retrieve my number to call me in the morning in case he needs bail.

so aside from criticism, i'm hoping for some good legal advice to resolve this matter as quick as possible because clearly any of us could be in this situation without denial at one point or another in our lives.

 

[RSO 34]

My recommendation would be to have your friend ask his divorce lawyer for a recommendation of someone who has experience with DUIs. It is unlikely he will beat the breathalyzer so he should be looking to get the best plea deal possible.

As an aside, I would also suggest that you don't volunteer to be a witness to his "ability to drive" that evening. Please don't take this as "criticism" but your drinking that night makes you less than a credible witness. I would not want to call you as a witness to say he was driving fine based upon your perceptions after a few sakes, some port, a double gin-soda, hurricane, pint of fat tire and "a few more drinks" in total after a restaurant, house and 2 bars. If I were the prosecutor I would have a field day with cross-examining you since in all likelihood your BAC was higher than your friend.

 

[Tom239]

i do realize that because we live in the american society we've inadvertently aggreed to the entailing social contract, namely, the law! but i see this as a battle between qualitative and quantitative analysis.

Getting a driver's license requires passing a test that includes questions about the DUI laws. Just applying for a license in California requires signing a form that says, among other things, that you consent to be tested for blood alcohol concentration when you drive. You can't agree to these laws inadvertantly without really not paying attention. The California DMV mails out info about current DUI laws along with license renewal notices, in case people forget.

Regarding qualitative versus quantitative analysis: imagine what a mess it would be if we relied on the former. People would face severe penalties based on a subjective evaluation. Using an instrument that measures a number is not a perfect solution, but I think it's the more fair procedure.

 

[DrVolkl]

Assuming 1st time offense, barely over the limit, going thru a divorce, etc etc...with a good lawyer and a compassionate judge, he should be able to get the charge knocked down to something else...pay a fine and some community service.

It'll cost him some $$, but better than the alternative.

Hail a cab next time!

 

[sahtt]

You've got to be very careful. God forbit your friend get involved in an accident while intoxicated above the legal limit.

I agree on getting an experienced lawyer and accepting anything they give you as an alternative. You listed way too much alcohol in your thread to make us feel sorry for the guy, not that that was your intention. Just don't drink and drive, it doesn't necessarily suggest your friend couldn't drive, it's that it's simply not worth the risk.

 

[flaminio]

First, get a lawyer. Do not attempt to "fight" this on your own.

Second, give your friend a smackdown. With all the various booze you were drinking that night, he had no business getting in a car. At all. He should thank whatever deity he subscribes to for sparing his life and the lives of others that night.

That said...

they got him out of the car while they told me to stay in the passenger seat, they gave him the sobreity test and he did fine and finally they gave him the breatherlizer test and he blew a .088...

I was on a jury for a DUI case, and one of the tactics the defense attorney used to try to introduce reasonable doubt was something called a "partition ratio" (I think). Basically, it's a number that you use to multiply the breathalyzer results to determine blood alcohol content. Thing is, the machine only uses one number, while actual humans might be in an entire range of multipliers. 0.088 is rather low, and it's entirely possible that your friend's partition ratio is lower than the standard, and therefore was actually below 0.08 at the time of the test. An attorney familiar with DUI cases should have no trouble digging up an expert witness to testify to this.

In the case that I was on, this was a major point of contention in the jury room, until we took the absolute most favorable to the defendent ratio and did the math, and the guy was still over 0.08. We convicted him.

But do remember that smackdown. It's important.

 

[PeterM]

First, get a lawyer. Do not attempt to "fight" this on your own.

Second, give your friend a smackdown. With all the various booze you were drinking that night, he had no business getting in a car. At all. He should thank whatever deity he subscribes to for sparing his life and the lives of others that night.

That said...



I was on a jury for a DUI case, and one of the tactics the defense attorney used to try to introduce reasonable doubt was something called a "partition ratio" (I think). Basically, it's a number that you use to multiply the breathalyzer results to determine blood alcohol content. Thing is, the machine only uses one number, while actual humans might be in an entire range of multipliers. 0.088 is rather low, and it's entirely possible that your friend's partition ratio is lower than the standard, and therefore was actually below 0.08 at the time of the test. An attorney familiar with DUI cases should have no trouble digging up an expert witness to testify to this.

In the case that I was on, this was a major point of contention in the jury room, until we took the absolute most favorable to the defendent ratio and did the math, and the guy was still over 0.08. We convicted him.

But do remember that smackdown. It's important.

i have been giving him shit for this considering that i was trying to get a cab home that night but because he hasn't been drinking for the last hour and a half or so before we left but still. the bar was across the street from de anza college and i lived on the corner of hollenbeck and homestead and that was just a few blocks away. i guess it's partially my fault also, i should've pushed harder to get a cab. anywho, i will relay what you've said to him to help him out a bit. thanks.

peter

 

[steveny]

Get a lawyer, a good one. I my self have never received a DWI or a DUI. I have this crazy paranoia about driving anywhere if I have been drinking. I feel like if I want to drink away from my house the police will be out there looking for drunk people, because that is what they do. I don't really drink anymore anyways. It makes me feel like crap for days after wards. When I was younger I loved to drink, not just drink but to get slam basted. I have always been a very happy drunk too.

If it is his first offense he should be OK. Just get a good lawyer.

BTW.. a old friend of mine has received 7 DWI tickets and has never spent a day in jail. His parents are fairly well off and get a really good lawyer every time. I think he should be in jail. His new trick...he keeps a fifth of JD under the seat of the car. When he gets pulled over, yes he still has a license, he gets out of the car and slams the fifth right in front of the cop. Then he says...first drink of the night officer. this usually gets him an ass kicking, open container, and other assorted tickets, but he says no DWI's yet.

He really shouldn't be on the road.

I will never understand the whole cab vs. driving thing. Cabs are so cheap.

 

[NSXGMS]

Get a lawyer, a good one.

Things are a little different in CA. We have some of the most aggressive DUI laws on the books. The problem is that the penalties are all minimums and the jury/judge has absolutely no leeway.

The only reason to give any money to a lawayer in a CA DUI case is if the circumstances are very questionable, such as a BAL of less than .08 and the traffic stop was due to something unrelated like a taillight or expired tags--IOW there is no other evidence to suggest one is under the influence. You've also got to pass all the field sobriety tests or that becomes evidence of your intoxication. Unfortunately, an illegal U-turn by iteslf could suggest he was under the influence.

Personally, in this case, a .088 is beyond argument, especially coupled with a moving violation. Remember, you can still get a DUI even if your BAL is <.08 depending on the "evidence" from the arresting officer such as failing the field sobriety tests or the reason(s) why he pulled you over. If it was for anything other than a taillight being out he's going to suggest the reason for the stop was related to being under the influence (any moving violation will be used against you). Anyways, if you blow a .080+ your goose is basically cooked.

Blowing a .088 but passing the field sobriety tests might be close enough to get a lawyer involved but they will be mighty expensive--$3,000-5,000--and you still will probably lose. The fines in CA are also around $3,000-5,000. You lose your license for at least a year and get probation for 3 years and are required to do something like 40 hrs DUI education classes, 100 hrs community service and a 3-month counseling session. Oh, and one-day minimum in the pokey. It really sucks. I got a DUI in FL and it was a cakewalk compared to CA and it still sucked.

BAL is hard to argue with. The state doesn't see it as qualitative vs. quantitative. A 300 lb man needs more drinks to get to .08 than a 115 lb woman, therefore the level of intoxication is the same.

My sympathies--a DUI is no fun. But somehow I just can't feel right saying that to anyone who decided to get on the road with a BAL even close to .08. No one should ever get on the road after any drinks. The risks are just too great.

 

[steveny]

Things are a little different in CA. We have some of the most aggressive DUI laws on the books. The problem is that the penalties are all minimums and the jury/judge has absolutely no leeway.

The only reason to give any money to a lawayer in a CA DUI case is if the circumstances are very questionable, such as a BAL of less than .08 and the traffic stop was due to something unrelated like a taillight or expired tags--IOW there is no other evidence to suggest one is under the influence. You've also got to pass all the field sobriety tests or that becomes evidence of your intoxication. Unfortunately, an illegal U-turn by iteslf could suggest he was under the influence.

Personally, in this case, a .088 is beyond argument, especially coupled with a moving violation. Remember, you can still get a DUI even if your BAL is <.08 depending on the "evidence" from the arresting officer such as failing the field sobriety tests or the reason(s) why he pulled you over. If it was for anything other than a taillight being out he's going to suggest the reason for the stop was related to being under the influence (any moving violation will be used against you). Anyways, if you blow a .080+ your goose is basically cooked.

Blowing a .088 but passing the field sobriety tests might be close enough to get a lawyer involved but they will be mighty expensive--$3,000-5,000--and you still will probably lose. The fines in CA are also around $3,000-5,000. You lose your license for at least a year and get probation for 3 years and are required to do something like 40 hrs DUI education classes, 100 hrs community service and a 3-month counseling session. Oh, and one-day minimum in the pokey. It really sucks. I got a DUI in FL and it was a cakewalk compared to CA and it still sucked.

BAL is hard to argue with. The state doesn't see it as qualitative vs. quantitative. A 300 lb man needs more drinks to get to .08 than a 115 lb woman, therefore the level of intoxication is the same.

My sympathies--a DUI is no fun. But somehow I just can't feel right saying that to anyone who decided to get on the road with a BAL even close to .08. No one should ever get on the road after any drinks. The risks are just too great.

Not to mention the cost of insurance going through the roof. I just talked to someone yesterday who got a DWI in NY. He said in NY now the police write 4tickets when you are over .08, two of them are DWI and DUI. I have to agree I think it is wrong to drink and drive. I have even had a family member killed by a drunk driver. But, in most cases it's just like speeding, a big money grab. I know people who can function perfectly with a BAC of 2.0. The guy who I spoke about in my last post in this thread blew a 2.9 and was still walking, talking, seemed fine. He is an alcoholic though.

 

[Deltron Zero]

His new trick...he keeps a fifth of JD under the seat of the car. When he gets pulled over, yes he still has a license, he gets out of the car and slams the fifth right in front of the cop. Then he says...first drink of the night officer. this usually gets him an ass kicking, open container, and other assorted tickets, but he says no DWI's yet.

Wow! Amazing! I've got to try that next time. :wink:

 

[matteni]

His new trick...he keeps a fifth of JD under the seat of the car. When he gets pulled over, yes he still has a license, he gets out of the car and slams the fifth right in front of the cop. Then he says...first drink of the night officer. this usually gets him an ass kicking, open container, and other assorted tickets, but he says no DWI's yet.

I am confused as to how this trick helps him get out of a DWI?

Is it because he can't blow with a broken jaw or they can't test you if you are unconscious?

 

[Deltron Zero]

I am confused as to how this trick helps him get out of a DWI?

Is it because he can't blow with a broken jaw or they can't test you if you are unconscious?

I'm guessing because they can't prove that you weren't under the legal limit before you decided to chug a fifth of Jack.

 

[flaminio]

Personally, in this case, a .088 is beyond argument

It's not beyond argument. I did a little more research on the partition ratio, and breathalyzers use a partition ratio of 2100:1 in determining BAC from breath. However, humans can vary from 1300:1 to 3100:1 in the actual ratio. Unless the State is able to prove that the dude was a certain ratio that night (which they can't), he could have been as low as 1300:1, and multiplied out that would bring his BAC below 0.08, and therefore legal. He also passed the field sobriety test (as the OP mentioned), and so he could skate on that.

As for the moving violation, most all of us on this forum have received one while not under the influence, so that's hardly evidence of intoxication.

Don't get me wrong -- I still think the driver was an idiot for getting in a car that night. But given the circumstances as stated by the OP, I think it's entirely likely that he is not guilty of DUI. I'm not for coddling drunks at all -- a dear girl at my daughter's gymnastics class was recently killed by a drunk, and I hope they hang him when his case is up -- but I am in favor of a fair trial, and of the innocent going free, and I think in this case the evidence (as sparse as we've been given) does not support a conviction.

 

[steveny]

I'm guessing because they can't prove that you weren't under the legal limit before you decided to chug a fifth of Jack.

You and the teo posters above are correct. They can't prove what he had to drink before he slamms the fifth. He has had both his nose and jaw broken from doing this. I do a lot of kidding around but I am not joking about this. He has done it and it has worked.

 

[steveny]

I am confused as to how this trick helps him get out of a DWI?

Is it because he can't blow with a broken jaw or they can't test you if you are unconscious?

I have personally watched him drink a 750ml bottle of Black Velvet and continue to function for the rest of the evening, a little tipsy but would appear drunk to anyone who did not know him. The guy has been an alcoholic since he was 12. really sad IMO. He will die soon from ruining his body. No joke, he drinks EVERY day, amazing amounts of alcohol. He drives all the time and has never had an accident, except hitting deer that run out in front of him at the last second. I went to high school with him but hardly see him anymore, maybe once or twice every few years. After he started smoking crack I told him to stay the phuck away from me and my home.

 

[RSO 34]

You and the teo posters above are correct. They can't prove what he had to drink before he slamms the fifth.

I think this story is more of an urban myth. You certainly can tell the BAC level at various times of the evening prior to the arrest. A forensic analysis can calculate the BAC/BAL and then work backwards to come up with a fairly accurate estimate of the numbers at the time of the accident/traffic stop. An average person would eliminate .5 ounces of alcohol per hour (approximately 5 % by the kidneys through urine, another 5% by the lungs through exhaling and the remaining oxidized by the liver). Generally the BAC rises significantly within 20 minutes after having a drink.

The officer who would pull over your buddy would have a reading at the time of the stop and regardless of when your buddy says he "had his first drink" it would still be possible to calculate the BAC. Moreover, I find it difficult to believe that the officer would not perform the arrest and let your buddy try to sell that defense in court since the breathalyzer/sobriety test is enough to give grounds to effect the arrest.

 

[exNSXer]

If money is not an issue....it should be relatively easy to find or locate a competent DUI attorney to handle the case and take it to trial or plea out.

However, if money is an issue...you may want to re-think whether you want to seek counsel. As other have mentioned, blowing a .08 or above creates a presumption that one is legally intoxicated in CA. So unless there are some serious mitigating factors missing from your story (ie. lack of probable cause...which in this case will most likely not work since your friend made an illegal U turn and provided the arresting officer with PC for a traffic stop), your friend is most likely doomed. In most cases, attorneys are not cheap and DUI attorneys are no exceptions to the rule. Fees generally range from $3-8 thousand up to trial. Once trial begins, apply the going hourly rate for the attorney (usually 2-4 hundred dollars per hour) multiplied by the number of hours the attorney is at court....expensive to say the least. On top of those fees, include costs for expert witnesses/testimonies and document/filing fees, copying fees, etc. Things can get real expensive in a hurry and nothing is guaranteed.

So if anything, I would reccomend that you and your friend do a little more research to determine whether he should seek counsel.

 

[PeterM]

If money is not an issue....it should be relatively easy to find or locate a competent DUI attorney to handle the case and take it to trial or plea out.

However, if money is an issue...you may want to re-think whether you want to seek counsel. As other have mentioned, blowing a .08 or above creates a presumption that one is legally intoxicated in CA. So unless there are some serious mitigating factors missing from your story (ie. lack of probable cause...which in this case will most likely not work since your friend made an illegal U turn and provided the arresting officer with PC for a traffic stop), your friend is most likely doomed. In most cases, attorneys are not cheap and DUI attorneys are no exceptions to the rule. Fees generally range from $3-8 thousand up to trial. Once trial begins, apply the going hourly rate for the attorney (usually 2-4 hundred dollars per hour) multiplied by the number of hours the attorney is at court....expensive to say the least. On top of those fees, include costs for expert witnesses/testimonies and document/filing fees, copying fees, etc. Things can get real expensive in a hurry and nothing is guaranteed.

So if anything, I would reccomend that you and your friend do a little more research to determine whether he should seek counsel.

there seems to be a fair amount of inquiry as to what lead to the sobreity and breathelizer test. it's a bit hard to describe the illegal u-turn without pictures but i'll try my best...

we were in the far left lane making the u-turn while the patrol car was at the light head on with us from the opposite direction but was stuck at the light due to our green for the left turn. so basically i feel like it was definitely a trap. so basically, we made a right turn out of the parking lot, got far left, made the u-turn and got pulled over all within 50 ft of the bar.

it's just our luck that night that we got a lady cop with her daughter or niece doing a ride a long...

i'm not too fond of the daughter/niece for she was laughing at us, one grown and one twice as grown men while the lady cop was making smart remarks towards us. i really don't like my intelligence questioned like that. some of the best ideas, philosophically and scientifically comes out of me after a glass or two of wine.

for the most part i'm indifferent to police officers because i never do anything wrong and therefore i have no reason to fear or dislike them but i feel that a police officer's job should not entail demoralizing or treating people as if their intelligence is that of a potato.

peter

 

[RSO 34]

there seems to be a fair amount of inquiry as to what lead to the sobreity and breathelizer test. it's a bit hard to describe the illegal u-turn without pictures but i'll try my best...

we were in the far left lane making the u-turn while the patrol car was at the light head on with us from the opposite direction but was stuck at the light due to our green for the left turn. so basically i feel like it was definitely a trap. so basically, we made a right turn out of the parking lot, got far left, made the u-turn and got pulled over all within 50 ft of the bar.

it's just our luck that night that we got a lady cop with her daughter or niece doing a ride a long...

i'm not too fond of the daughter/niece for she was laughing at us, one grown and one twice as grown men while the lady cop was making smart remarks towards us. i really don't like my intelligence questioned like that. some of the best ideas, philosophically and scientifically comes out of me after a glass or two of wine.

for the most part i'm indifferent to police officers because i never do anything wrong and therefore i have no reason to fear or dislike them but i feel that a police officer's job should not entail demoralizing or treating people as if their intelligence is that of a potato.

peter

Okay, so now I have to go from giving advice to offering criticism. It has become obvious by this last post that you simply don't get it so let us look at real cause of your friend's problem.

1. You both had way too much to drink.

2. Your buddy makes a U-turn in front of a cop and you claim that is a trap. The officer is waiting at a red light, as she needs to unless responding to an emergency, and your alcohol influenced buddy decides that is the perfect time to make an illegal U-turn. Boy, that sneaky cop is good.

3. You repeatedly and condescendingly refer to the officer as "that lady cop". Apparently you seem to have a problem with women in authority. If she were a male cop would that have made driving over the legal limit easier to defend?

4. The "lady cop" has a young girl in her car as a ride along. That young girl is laughing at a couple of drunks trying to talk their way out of a ticket. I would imagine that given your demeanor and own state of inebriation she had a good reason to laugh.

5. But the best line you had is that "some of the best ideas, philosophically and scientifically comes out of me after a glass or two of wine." By your own admission, you had at least 9-11 drinks that evening (9 if you meant "a few" as two and at least 11 if "a few" is at least 3 drinks). Apparently you think best when you are drunk and become quite an orator so I can only imagine the gems you were slurring that evening.

6. The officer arrested a drunk driver too impaired and/or stupid to understand the potential ramifications of (a) driving drunk and (b) making an illegal u-turn directly in front of a police car. I would suggest that your distaste for an arresting police officer "treating people as if their intelligence is that of a potato" is misplaced because you and your buddy deserve the Mr. Potato Head award for this little caper.

 

[Deltron Zero]

He has had both his nose and jaw broken from doing this.

Wow. Did the police beat his ass while he was chugging?

 

[steveny]

I think this story is more of an urban myth. You certainly can tell the BAC level at various times of the evening prior to the arrest. A forensic analysis can calculate the BAC/BAL and then work backwards to come up with a fairly accurate estimate of the numbers at the time of the accident/traffic stop. An average person would eliminate .5 ounces of alcohol per hour (approximately 5 % by the kidneys through urine, another 5% by the lungs through exhaling and the remaining oxidized by the liver). Generally the BAC rises significantly within 20 minutes after having a drink.

The officer who would pull over your buddy would have a reading at the time of the stop and regardless of when your buddy says he "had his first drink" it would still be possible to calculate the BAC. Moreover, I find it difficult to believe that the officer would not perform the arrest and let your buddy try to sell that defense in court since the breathalyzer/sobriety test is enough to give grounds to effect the arrest.

You are most likely right. I know the time he jumped a fence and ran for 2 hours before they caught him it worked. He has told me it worked before when he didn't run.

 

[steveny]

If money is not an issue....it should be relatively easy to find or locate a competent DUI attorney to handle the case and take it to trial or plea out.

However, if money is an issue...you may want to re-think whether you want to seek counsel. As other have mentioned, blowing a .08 or above creates a presumption that one is legally intoxicated in CA. So unless there are some serious mitigating factors missing from your story (ie. lack of probable cause...which in this case will most likely not work since your friend made an illegal U turn and provided the arresting officer with PC for a traffic stop), your friend is most likely doomed. In most cases, attorneys are not cheap and DUI attorneys are no exceptions to the rule. Fees generally range from $3-8 thousand up to trial. Once trial begins, apply the going hourly rate for the attorney (usually 2-4 hundred dollars per hour) multiplied by the number of hours the attorney is at court....expensive to say the least. On top of those fees, include costs for expert witnesses/testimonies and document/filing fees, copying fees, etc. Things can get real expensive in a hurry and nothing is guaranteed.

So if anything, I would reccomend that you and your friend do a little more research to determine whether he should seek counsel.

The person I have been talking about in this thread spent 45k on his last DWI and he walked with no time in jail and still has his license. It was his seventh DWI.

 

[steveny]

Okay, so now I have to go from giving advice to offering criticism. It has become obvious by this last post that you simply don't get it so let us look at real cause of your friend's problem.

1. You both had way too much to drink.

2. Your buddy makes a U-turn in front of a cop and you claim that is a trap. The officer is waiting at a red light, as she needs to unless responding to an emergency, and your alcohol influenced buddy decides that is the perfect time to make an illegal U-turn. Boy, that sneaky cop is good.

3. You repeatedly and condescendingly refer to the officer as "that lady cop". Apparently you seem to have a problem with women in authority. If she were a male cop would that have made driving over the legal limit easier to defend?

4. The "lady cop" has a young girl in her car as a ride along. That young girl is laughing at a couple of drunks trying to talk their way out of a ticket. I would imagine that given your demeanor and own state of inebriation she had a good reason to laugh.

5. But the best line you had is that "some of the best ideas, philosophically and scientifically comes out of me after a glass or two of wine." By your own admission, you had at least 9-11 drinks that evening (9 if you meant "a few" as two and at least 11 if "a few" is at least 3 drinks). Apparently you think best when you are drunk and become quite an orator so I can only imagine the gems you were slurring that evening.

6. The officer arrested a drunk driver too impaired and/or stupid to understand the potential ramifications of (a) driving drunk and (b) making an illegal u-turn directly in front of a police car. I would suggest that your distaste for an arresting police officer "treating people as if their intelligence is that of a potato" is misplaced because you and your buddy deserve the Mr. Potato Head award for this little caper.

I bet she saw them pull out of the bar too.

For everyone that drinks and drives try this...
Park your car at a family members house give them the keys. For 6 months don't use your car and try and get rides from friends and cabs. this is what it would be like if you lose your license for a DWI. I have never had one, I rarely drink if at all, but I know people who have lost their license and it sucked for them and me. I was the one who gave rides to the ass hat.

 

[H-carWizKid]

The problem here is one of perspective- the persective of the OP, vs. reality.

OP- let me just start by saying, I am sure you and your friend are both very decent fellows. Many of us (including myself at least) have had experiences similar to yours where we felt the application of the law was unjust. I feel sorry that you and your friend felt humiliated in your situation.

In the past few years I have gained some perspective regarding the law, so I would like to pass it on.

Police set a trap to bust regular people for the minor offense of drinking and driving

This one tends to go along with the idea that police should be chasing real criminals instead of busting so-and-so for his minor indescretion.

Here is the reality-

Police officers are not to blame for doing their job. Even if the officer in question had "set a trap" to catch drivers under the influence- that is EXACTLY what they did. They got one! Your friend was driving under the influence.
When one is looking for criminals- does it not make sense to look in places where crimes might be commited?

It isn't like they grabbed him off the street- force fed him some booze and then busted him- he was impaired beyond the legal limits. He had broken the law.

Bummer.

So, your friend got a DUI- Does that make him a "bad person"? Not really, since from your description he wasn't "that drunk", and no one died. The DUI doesn't make him a "bad person" it makes him a person who exercised poor judgement. He was driving under the influence. and that behavior is criminal.

Can't see the tag "criminal" attached to your friend? I understand. It is a shitty way to refer to an otherwise decent fellow.

Here is the reason it applies though-

Driving under the influence is against the law.

Things that are against the law are also called "crimes"

People who commit crimes are "criminals"

Police are here to protect us from criminals.

That is what the police did on the night of your incident.

You have to make that leap in understanding to understand why so many here lack sympathy.

Law broken + got caught = punishment due.

Sorry homie- fact of life.

Lots of really nice people get into trouble because they have created a seperation between themselves, and "real criminals" from whom the laws are made to protect us. They have fabricated a definition in their mind in which they cannot possibly see themselves.

Think about it- can you see yourself as a criminal? When you sit back, and picture in your minds eye a "drunk driver" what do you see?

In my minds eye I saw a guy in his mid 40's, wearing a desheveled looking suit, loose tie, poorly shaved, with mussed up hair- he is getting out of a late 80's 4 door sedan (a Ford LTD) and he is staggering obviously. I think I got the image from a movie I once saw.

What I never saw was a picture of myself- why?

I know that I have been guilty of the crime on occasions in the past. I have been stupid, I have made bad judgements. I just didn't get caught.

Fortunately for me I learned my lesson when a friend of mine got busted.

DUI = a lot of lost $$$ (or worse).

I like my $$$, and my freedom so I no longer take that gamble.

The perspective changes. Now that I can see that DUI is a crime, I am less likely to break the law because I can also see myself facing the consequences.

I hope you take this advice as helpful rather than condescending (as advice so often seems to be).

You just need to understand that you weren't a "victim" in this incident, you guys just ended up on the wrong side of the law. Happens to decent folks all the time. Learn from it, and don't do it again.

I wish your friend luck in minimizing the repercussions of his actions.

P