Help!!

[Arvin]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Illinois. I was recently charged with a DUI. The officer also issued several other tickets most of which are bogus. I have a problem with the loud music ticket in particular as I was on a cell phone call at the time of the stop. My bill reflects this. It shows me on a call up to within 2 minutes of the time he recorded on the tickets. Will this help in my defense since its difficult to be on a call during loud music????

[cyjeff]

Originally Posted by Arvin

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Illinois. I was recently charged with a DUI. The officer also issued several other tickets most of which are bogus. I have a problem with the loud music ticket in particular as I was on a cell phone call at the time of the stop. My bill reflects this. It shows me on a call up to within 2 minutes of the time he recorded on the tickets. Will this help in my defense since its difficult to be on a call during loud music????

You think telling a judge that you were not only drunk when you were pulled over but also on the cell phone will HELP your case?

Maybe. I wouldn't do it...

[Arvin]

Will fight the DUI. I drive a 2006 Range Rover. Because it has built in bluetooth, the radio doesn't work during a call. It also means it's hands-free calling (not illegal cell phone use while driving).

[BigMistakeFl]

I also use hands-free speaker phone, so I know what you mean. The phone is connected and the music stops. But did you have loud music on that the cop heard before you took the call? Why do you think the cop gave you additional tickets? Were you fully cooperative throughout the entire process?

Mostly the DUI case will not be affected by the other tickets or pretty much anything other than the evidence of DUI. What is that evidence?

[Arvin]

Thanks for the fast replys guys. I was fully cooperative until I was placed under arrest and even afterwards. I simply chose to remain silent once hand-cuffed. I was using my cellular from my initial departure through the officer's request to pull over. I'm not one to pull the race card but I suspect my youth and my race may have played a roll.

[Arvin]

The “Finger-to-Nose Test” – having its origin somewhere in the 1950's, this test seeks to have a person touch the tip of his nose with the tip of his finger, while tilting his head back as far as possible and keeping his eyes closed. The officer then calls out each hand, left, right, left, right, and then right left in an attempt to confused the subject. Besides a lack of validation, this exercise does not use standardized clues or scoring in order to establish what is a “pass” or “fail." This officer says I didn't "touch my nose all the way" so I was drunk. This test is not a NHTSA standardized test.

[BigMistakeFl]

How about blood alcohol content..... were you tested? Breath, blood, on-site or at the station or hospital?

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Arvin

The “Finger-to-Nose Test” – having its origin somewhere in the 1950's, this test seeks to have a person touch the tip of his nose with the tip of his finger, while tilting his head back as far as possible and keeping his eyes closed. The officer then calls out each hand, left, right, left, right, and then right left in an attempt to confused the subject. Besides a lack of validation, this exercise does not use standardized clues or scoring in order to establish what is a “pass” or “fail." This officer says I didn't "touch my nose all the way" so I was drunk. This test is not a NHTSA standardized test.

So, you are saying that you were charged with DUI based on one, and only one, of the tests?
What was your BAC?

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Arvin

Will fight the DUI. I drive a 2006 Range Rover. Because it has built in bluetooth, the radio doesn't work during a call. It also means it's hands-free calling (not illegal cell phone use while driving).

Earlier you said that it's difficult to make a call with loud music. Now you say it's impossible. Which is it?

[Arvin]

This is what he said I did incorrectly. I refused to blow as I no longer was able to trust my arresting officer. This is why I chose to excercise my miranda rights. Now I'm not sure what he actually put in his report, but this is what he told me. I know I shouldn't have been brought in based on this. I'm relying on the loud music ticket because proof that he lied about it may/should damage his credibility.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Arvin

This is what he said I did incorrectly. I refused to blow as I no longer was able to trust my arresting officer. This is why I chose to excercise my 1st amendment rights. Now I'm not sure what he actually put in his report, but this is what he told me. I know I shouldn't have been brought in based on this. I'm relying on the loud music ticket because proof that he lied about it may/should damage his credibility.

You refused to blow because you had something to hide. That can be a separate charge in and of itself.
Did they take blood or perform any other sort of chemical test?

[Arvin]

Well that night I was using the hands-free which makes it impossible. I figure a smart prosecuter will argue that there's no proof that I was using it the night in question. At the very least you have to admit that music blaring out of the windows would make it very difficult to use the phone. I was also issued a seat belt ticket. If I had a phone to my ear, you'd think an officer tailing me in a squad car (capable of seeing rather I'm wearing a seat belt) would surely notice the cell to my ear & issue a ticket for this also. No cell ticket indicates I was most likely using my hands free.

[Arvin]

No other test were performed. Nothing to hide, but lets just say there is for the sake of arguing. If any civilian is caught telling a lie in court their entire testimony is null & void as credibility is shot at that point. Does this not apply to a police officer???? I'm confident a jury would at least have reasonable doubt about the loud music ticket. Anyway, thanks to all. I value your opinions as my own may be a little bias. Any additional input would be greatly appreciated.

[BigMistakeFl]

You can refuse to take the FST's, but you do have to take the BAC test. You offered evidence for the prosecution by taking the FST's and denied your defense the evidence of possibly low BAC. You must have been pretty sure your content would be over the limit.

It is possible for anyone to lie under oath in court. Picture the jury and whom they would be most likely to believe, and take it from there. I'd speak with a DUI defense attorney about this further.

[cyjeff]

Originally Posted by Arvin

Well that night I was using the hands-free which makes it impossible. I figure a smart prosecuter will argue that there's no proof that I was using it the night in question. At the very least you have to admit that music blaring out of the windows would make it very difficult to use the phone. I was also issued a seat belt ticket. If I had a phone to my ear, you'd think an officer tailing me in a squad car (capable of seeing rather I'm wearing a seat belt) would surely notice the cell to my ear & issue a ticket for this also. No cell ticket indicates I was most likely using my hands free.

You are operating under the assumption that the court cares.

They don't.

If you go into court acting like Denny Crane, you are going to not like the outcome.