Son railroaded

[Dad is my job]

What is the name of your state? PA
My son (17) was with a friend at his house for a sleepover. The friend brought out a bottle of vodka and started to drink. My son acted like he was drinking because of peer pressure but didn't consume enough to even get a buzz. This was 11pm.
The friend continued to drink but my son declined.
Around approx 5 am they decided to get into my son's car and meet some girls.
On the way, they missed a turn and attempted to turn around in an empty lot. My son's car became stuck in the mud. A passerby called the police to get a tow for them.
When the police came, they smelled alcohol on the two. The friend tested on the handheld at over .08. The officer tested my son but wouldn't show him his result, saying that it didn't matter anyway.
They arrested my son and took him to the station. The officer put him on the breathalyzer four times, flicked the switch on and of during the test and yelled at him to blow harder over and over.
They towed and impounded the vehicle BTW.
When I arrived, the officer said he kept getting invalid samples and that he wouldn't do the test anymore. He claimed that my son was trying to beat the machine. He said I could just refuse the blood test and go home, or that he would take him to the hospital if I really wanted to go that far.
I assessed my sons condition and believed him to be completely sober, so I asked to have the blood test. The officer looked perturbed when I said "let's do the blood test".
I fully expect a complete zero on the results. I feel that the officer (rookie BTW) judged my son by his friends condition and was trying to put a feather in his cap with the new hardline police chief in our town. When he got no results on the breath test he tried to trick me into refusing the blood test,, so he would win the case by default.
Do I have any recourse or damages claim against the officer?
Is this a case of police misconduct?
BTW.. I have taken the car away from my son just out of principal. He should have never exposed himself or me to these risks. I don't however, think the police should act innapropriately. They are expected to hold a high standard of professionalism and not try to railroad an innocent kid. Truth is truth.
I need to add that the police found no alcohol, no empty containers or any drugs or contraband whatsoever in the car. My son is a pain in the rear sometimes, but he's a clean kid.

[msiron]

Worry about the popo after the blood test results come back.

[Eekamouse]

Or maybe he's just a really accomplished liar with an extremely gullible parent. I mean, come on!
"Oh Daddy, I only had a sip or two, you know, just so my friend wouldn't think I was a scaredy-cat or a baby but I didn't really, really drink it."

And there you are: "No, no! Not-a my son! He's a momma's good boy! It was those older boys that did the underaged drinking that night. They got my boy in all this trouble" (Please remember to use a good italian momma accent like the one that momma buzzard used in the Bugs Bunny episode featuring that bashful, dorky buzzard).

Unless you are either vampires or the earliest birds that ever lived, going out at around 5a.m. after being up all night to go hook up with some chicks is not what a sober kid would think is a good idea. A sober kid would be yawning and wondering if there were any cartoons on to fall asleep to. Perhaps some vintage Bugs Bunny.....

[justalayman]

wait for the blood BAC and then make a decision as to what you want to do.

[Dad is my job]

Hey, looking for legal opinion based on the facts presented.
Assume he is not lying. If he is lying, none of this will matter.
I did the BAC calculator and it would have taken 5 full shots to even show a result in that timeframe.
Why did the officer refuse to show him the portable test result? He showed the other kid his, and was even quite proud to.
Why did they keep running him through the breathalyzer over and over, yelling for him to blow harder and harder (classic for a desperate attempt at a positive reading)?
Why did the cop try to get me to refuse the blood test?
Why was he perturbed at my wanting the blood test?
Is he not interested in the facts?
I'm not dillusional, I know what kids do. But on occasion, they are actually innocent.
Is the law not founded on the premise that one is innocent until proven guilty?
Serious law opines welcome.

[Dad is my job]

Originally Posted by Eekamouse

A sober kid would be yawning and wondering if there were any cartoons on to fall asleep to. Perhaps some vintage Bugs Bunny.....

Yea, sure..cartoons.
He's gonna be old enough in 8 months to defend the country that permits you to run your trap on forums like this.
I'm not sure you know what a kid is.
Kids won your freedom.

[Dad is my job]

Originally Posted by msiron

Worry about the popo after the blood test results come back.

Umm...what's a popo?

[Happy Trails]

You may be absolutely correct, but you really need to wait until the test results come back.

Being your son is too young to drink, if the results show .02%, he can be charged with DUI.

[las365]

The "popo" is the police.

A good strategy on this forum is to decline to engage in debates over whether or not your kid is a good kid, etc., and take the advice that is pertinent to your situation. In this case, waiting for the results of the BAC, as suggested, is a good idea.

It sounds as if the officer had decided your son had to be drunk and was frustrated at not being able to obtain evidence. He may have been overzealous, but whether he violated your son's rights is questionable.

Other posters who know a lot about these matters will likely be along to comment (look for Carl). Overall, this is probably a valuable lesson for your son and would not warrant the time, expense, and trouble of trying to bring an action against the officer.

[Dad is my job]

Oh, believe me I'm using this to the max to punish the little SOB.
His car is parked...keys confiscated by me indefinitely.
He is back to being driven by Mommy or Daddy.
He has a good job though, so he gets to drive to work and back home and must report to me on arrival and departure. That's it.
His paychecks are going into his legal fund. He get's none of the money for now.
As far as debating good kid/ bad kid: I don't believe I asked for opinions on that.
Thanks for your good post Las365!

[Curt581]

Originally Posted by Dad is my job

My son (17) was with a friend at his house for a sleepover. The friend brought out a bottle of vodka and started to drink. My son acted like he was drinking because of peer pressure but didn't consume enough to even get a buzz.

It's not necessary to "consume enough to get a buzz" to be illegal.

The friend tested on the handheld at over .08. The officer tested my son but wouldn't show him his result, saying that it didn't matter anyway.

The officer is correct, it doesn't matter. A PBT result is not evidentiary, it's used for probable cause only. No, the officer doesn't have to show him the result, any more than an officer having to show someone a radar unit during a stop for speeding.

They arrested my son and took him to the station. The officer put him on the breathalyzer four times, flicked the switch on and of during the test and yelled at him to blow harder over and over.

An evidentiary breath test requires two samples. Both samples must be of sufficient pressure and volume to test. Both must correllate within a certain amount, usually .02. If he blows good on one sample, but doesn't blow enough on the next, he'll be asked to blow again. If the samples don't corellate, a second cycle of two samples is required.

If the samples don't corellate again, this happens:

When I arrived, the officer said he kept getting invalid samples and that he wouldn't do the test anymore. He claimed that my son was trying to beat the machine. He said I could just refuse the blood test and go home, or that he would take him to the hospital if I really wanted to go that far.

Drunk drivers trying to fool the machine is very common. They plug the mouthpiece with their tongue, they allow air to escape out the sides of their mouth, they push spit into it, they do all sorts of dumb things trying to beat the machine.

In most states, a secondary test must be offered, by law.

I assessed my sons condition and believed him to be completely sober, so I asked to have the blood test. The officer looked perturbed when I said "let's do the blood test".
I fully expect a complete zero on the results. I feel that the officer (rookie BTW) judged my son by his friends condition and was trying to put a feather in his cap with the new hardline police chief in our town. When he got no results on the breath test he tried to trick me into refusing the blood test,, so he would win the case by default.

Pure speculation. Offering a blood test which legally MUST be offered can hardly be construed as trying to "trick you" into refusing it. If he was annoyed at your acceptance, it was probably because traveling to a hospital and getting a blood sample drawn is time consuming and tedious, especially with an irate parent in-tow who thinks his little fair-haired boy is being "railroaded".

Do I have any recourse or damages claim against the officer?

Depends. What are your damages?

Is this a case of police misconduct?

Based on what you wrote, no. It sounds more like a case of the officer doing his job, which is taking people suspected of drinking and driving off the road.

I don't however, think the police should act innapropriately. They are expected to hold a high standard of professionalism and not try to railroad an innocent kid.

What "innocent"? By your own admission, your son HAD been drinking. Something he isn't supposed to be doing AT ALL. He drove after drinking, and drove off the roadway. He's hardly being "railroaded".

I need to add that the police found no alcohol, no empty containers or any drugs or contraband whatsoever in the car.

Not relevant.

As for your other comment about him being within eight months of being old enough to defend his country... eight months means he's NOT old enough, so why does this mean anything? He's not old enough to vote, either. He's also not old enough to drink, so what's your point?

Depending on the laws of your state, it might be legal for him to drop out of school right now. In eight months, it would be legal for him to move in with a 40 year old meth addict or shave his head and join the Hari Krishnas. Are you saying you wouldn't have a problem if he decided to do those things, since they'd be prefectly legal?

[Dad is my job]

As for your other comment about him being within eight months of being old enough to defend his country... eight months means he's NOT old enough, so why does this mean anything? He's not old enough to vote, either. He's also not old enough to drink, so what's your point?

My point was in reference to the comment that he should have been in his pajamas watching Bugs Bunny. We're not talking about an 8 year old and this was totally irrelevant.
The new chief in our town is a hard liner, former state patrol commander. All the cops hate him. He has told the officers that if they don't write tickets enough, they will be reprimanded and made to attend police classes. I have a couple friends on the force. I know this for a fact. The residents of this town are getting fed up with being harrassed at every stop sign by officers that are competing against each other to write tickets on a daily basis.
He did not drive off the road. He pulled into a lot to turn around. There was absolutely no damage to the car, just a little mud on the right front tire. It is a compact car with low ground clearance. It gets stuck on dry pavement.
I was not irate in any way. I was totally cooperative with the officer. I even shook his hand after all was said and done.

[Curt581]

Originally Posted by Dad is my job

The new chief in our town is a hard liner, former state patrol commander. All the cops hate him. He has told the officers that if they don't write tickets enough, they will be reprimanded and made to attend police classes. I have a couple friends on the force. I know this for a fact. The residents of this town are getting fed up with being harrassed at every stop sign by officers that are competing against each other to write tickets on a daily basis.

If the majority of residents are truly as "fed up" as you claim, they'll do something about it through the town's council or Mayor. Sounds to me like the people in charge knew exactly what they were getting when they hired him.

Whatever... not relevant to the issues at hand. This will come down to what the blood test results are. Bear in mind that a blood test result tends to be a percentage point or two higher than a breath result taken at the same time, because they're testing directly 'from the source'. Any test above .02 will be bad. A test between .00 and .02 could go either way, it won't be an automatic exoneration.

He did not drive off the road. He pulled into a lot to turn around. There was absolutely no damage to the car, just a little mud on the right front tire. It is a compact car with low ground clearance. It gets stuck on dry pavement.

You stated that it got stuck in the mud. To me, enough mud for a car to get stuck means there's a pretty thick blanket of mud ON the pavement, or it drove off the pavement. A car low enough to "get stuck on dry pavement" is a car that doesn't belong being driven on public thoroughfares.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Dad is my job

My son acted like he was drinking because of peer pressure but didn't consume enough to even get a buzz.

If he ACTED like he was drinking, then he wouldn't have consumed ANY.
(The third sentence was enough to tell me where this thread was going)

[Silverplum]

Originally Posted by Zigner

(The third sentence was enough to tell me where this thread was going)

Not me, nuh-uh. *I* was born yesterday!