+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 20 of 20
  1. #16
    paguy88 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by BigMistakeFl View Post
    As an example, I wonder how many people out there still assume that they have to be read Miranda Rights for a DUI.
    99% of them if you ask me. It's the TV effect.
  2. #17
    paguy88 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by BigMistakeFl View Post
    I'm not popular for saying this, but you would be surprised how the "burden of proof" has changed for DUI prosecution.
    please explain what you mean

    thanks
  3. #18
    BigMistakeFl is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Florida
    Posts
    1,618
    It's only my opinion.

    I think that if you have had anything to drink and you are pulled over legally for suspicion of DUI, you don't have a chance of getting off. I think the laws have been written so that you are saddled with the burden of trying to prove innocence against prosecution with the deck stacked in its favor.

    Most people think they should get Miranda rights. Most people think they should have the right to speak to an attorney before submitting to any tests. Neither are true. The proof has already been gathered and handed to the prosecutor, and there's almost nothing you can do to fight it.

    I recommend getting an attorney only because no one should go into court unrepresented, not because I think the person has a snowball's chance in hell of getting the charge reduced or thrown out.
  4. #19
    lenny71 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by BigMistakeFl View Post
    I recommend getting an attorney only because no one should go into court unrepresented, not because I think the person has a snowball's chance in hell of getting the charge reduced or thrown out.
    If you are pulled over for a reasonable cause, are found to have a bac above .08 at the station (blood or breath) then you have a snowballs chance in hell. Because you are guilty. Pay for an attorney to hold your hand and maybe get you a slightly better deal (rare though).


    If you are not pulled over for a reasoble cause and/or have a BAC less then .08 then get an attorney since you may have a chance of winning in court.
  5. #20
    cyjeff is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8,560
    Let's review for a second... and know that I am not saying whether it is correct or incorrect.

    You woke up approximately 3:30. Decided to go for coffee and cigarettes.

    So far, so good.

    Swerved to miss a deer. BING... your honor, we have our first problem. I have the statistics around here somewhere, but single person DUI accidents blamed on swerving to avoid a mysterious Deer/Dog/Cat/Cow/Pedestrian/Space Alien are so numerous that the judge will instantly discount it.

    Unless, of course, you have the deer carcass to show the court...No, hmmm.

    Let's keep going....

    You walked home. It is now approximately 4:30. You decide that your blood sugar is low and drink a coke...

    Fine.

    Haven't called the police yet, though, to report your accident.

    Hmmm.

    then you shotgun six shots of straight vodka. BING... Your honor, we have our second problem.

    You drank more vodka in one sitting than most drink in a weekend... and in the small hours of the morning, right after a single car accident....

    Oh, and diabetic. I guess you didn't read the "alcohol is sugar" pamphlet.

    A judge is going to laugh at this... perhaps, literally.

    Saying, "I drank AFTER I wrecked my car in a mysterious single car accident but BEFORE you got here even though I realize drinking that much vodka at one sitting could put me in a coma" is another in the list of "most heard and never believed excuses for a DUI".

    All you have left to add is that you have recently found Jesus and/or that a mysterious passenger that you cannot remember the name of was actually driving to have the whole list.

    I am not saying it isn't the truth. I am just saying that the court has heard it so many times in the past that your chances of being believed without some kind of proof is remote.
    Last edited by cyjeff; 07-25-2009 at 11:43 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Lunch forced to take as first or last hour of 8 hour shift,
    By Jgoostree in forum Fringe Benefits
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-20-2010, 12:29 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-03-2010, 06:49 PM
  3. 24 hour rule in tanning salons?
    By tbud333 in forum Starting and Operating a Business
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-09-2009, 06:02 PM
  4. 48 hour rule
    By DanteMarx in forum Landlord / Tenant Issues
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-18-2005, 07:13 PM
  5. Can I be forced onto FMLA if not even eligible under the 1250 hour rule?
    By Philip N. Beam in forum Hiring, Firing & Wrongful Termination
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-25-2000, 11:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

© 1995-2012 Advice Company, All Rights Reserved

FreeAdvice® has been providing millions of consumers with outstanding advice, free, since 1995. While not a substitute for personal advice from a licensed professional, it is available AS IS, subject to our Disclaimer and Terms & Conditions Of Use.