Unjust DUI Arrest

What is the name of your state? Kentucky

My husband was involved in an accident. The officer working the wreck decided my husband was undoubtedly DUI. Because he was so convinced that my husband was DUI, he failed to properly investigate the accident. This is a fact proven by the accident report itself. On the report, the officer has wrongly documented the weather conditions, the other vehicle involved, and the actual location. Because of the DUI charge, it was automatically assumed that my husband was at fault. We are not convinced that he was at fault at all. Considering the way the whole thing was handled, something isn't kosher and, we fear we will never know what really happened.

Now, the blood tests are back. There are no alcohol or drugs present. The results are 0.00 amounts for both.

It appears the officer was acting overzealously. My husband, who has never drank alcohol or taken drugs, feels very violated because he was forced to spend a night in jail. I want to know if it is worth our while to pursue legal action against this officer and/or the sheriff's department?

[ptlmejo]

At the very least, I think you should file a complaint with the department regarding this incident. The officer's conduct needs to be evaluated at the minimum.

With a blood test of double zero, it should at least eliminate any possible criminal charges arising from the incident. Furthermore, I would make certain that your insurance company is aware of the results.

[CdwJava]

Only an attorney can evaluate whether you have a case or not.

An arrest is made based upon probable cause. If another officer of similar training and experience would have also made an arrest under the circumstances, then you likely have no case. And us not knowing why the officer thought he might be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs makes it impossible to give a good answer.

As for the accident investigation, well, the collision report is pretty much a meaningless document for the insurance companies anyway. They assign fault on their own criteria and not necessarily based upon the police report. And in civil court, it is my understanding that these reports are rarely used as anything more than some small indicator of what happened.

- Carl

To begin with, the accident happened in a rural county. This particular officer has a reputation of being robo cop. This officer based my husband's arrest on the fact that his eyes looked funny. The officer did not even approach my husband's vehicle to search for evidence of alcohol or drugs.
The officer told my sister-in-law that he was sure that my husband had OD'd on something. When she told the officer that there was no way my husband was drunk or stoned, the officer went on to say that the DOT had even observed my husband driving in an irradic manner. The DOT told us that there was no way one of its officers saw my husband driving in such a manner because they have juridstriction over the entire state, and would have cited him themselves. Durining sobriety field testing, the officer said my husband failed the eye and balance test. The officer insisted that my husband remove his prescription eye glasses before the test. My husband's driver's license states that my husband is restricted to prescription eye glasses. The officer went on to say that my husband's eye condition would not affect the test results. My husband's eye doctor took one look at my husband's records and disagreed. My husband had also taken a major hit on his head during the collision. He had a big knot and a bleeding laceration that was treated on the
scene by a rescue squad worker. The officer failed to even consider that to be why my husband's eyes looked funny or that his balance wasn't good.

The officer didn't test the other driver involved. He spoke with her for a few minutes then let her leave the scene of the accident in another car. We don't know what the officer told this other driver. However, she has retained a TV lawyer and looks to be hoping for lots of money. The wrecker driver even told us that the officer told him that my husband was drunk. I find that appalling because he didn't even offer a breath test. He wrote up the citation for dui drugs, not alcohol. Why was he even telling people anything period???

During my husband's jail stay, I was busy trying to get him released. I spoke with another deputy, the jailer, the county attorney, and a judge. Every single one of their reactions consisted of rolling eyes or knowing looks when they heard who the arresting officer was. That tells me that they all know they have a problem deputy.

When we finally got an accident report, the deputy had his facts wrong. The report stated that the weather conditions were clear. The weather conditions were "pea soup" foggy. He described the other vehicle as a 1994 4-door Beretta. After running the VIN# of the other car, we found that the other car was, infact a 2-door. Apparently, the Beretta was not even produced with 4 doors. The milage location is even listed differently on the citation and the accident report. Seems the officer's credibility should make this whole mess raise the eyebrows of his superiors.

It comes down to this: My husband's only mistake was travling through this rural county and finding himself the victim of an over-zealous officer.

I would'nt complain about the individual officer. It seems with the reputation he has, he should have been gone already. As always, police are permitted unbridled authority to do what ever they please to whomever they please, making up the law as they go along. The states all seem to have protection for these people allowing them complete immunity from consequences for their actions. Going after the cop is a waste of time, the only justifiable punishment for him is death. But he and the department are state reps, and I think you might be able to sue them. You should have harrassment, emotional scarring, libel, slander, and violation of right to privacy act from him giving your husband's info to the wrecker, let alone the false arrest. Though the arrest will fly because they will claim probable cause which translates to "probably cause" the cop felt like it. The only downfall is, going after the state will only cause the innocent tax-payers money, not the police.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by meerkat3232

As always, police are permitted unbridled authority to do what ever they please to whomever they please, making up the law as they go along.

Wrong. Making a complaint is actually the only way to get rid of a bad officer ... no complaint equals no personnel action, and no action means even less of a chance that a bad cop can be improved or let go.

Plus, the reputation of "robo cop" does not mean he is not doing his job ... that is just one set of people's impressions. If the guy is mucking it up, then it needs to be brought up. If, for no other reason, to set the ground work to demonstrate the agency's failure to take disciplinary actions on a problem employee. (If a problem can be proven here)

The states all seem to have protection for these people allowing them complete immunity from consequences for their actions.

Complete immunity? I wish! That's not true.

Going after the cop is a waste of time, the only justifiable punishment for him is death.

What kind of assinine, immature and irresponsible reply is THAT?

You, sir, are an ass.


- Carl

Wrong.
--I don't remember asking you a godd#$n thing! When I want your opinion I will give it to you. If you spent more time responding to the OP instead of everyone else, you might get someplace.

Making a complaint is actually the only way to get rid of a bad officer ... no complaint equals no personnel action, and no action means even less of a chance that a bad cop can be improved or let go.
--Balls, you know damn well most complaints are swept under the rug, unless a media camera happened to be involved. A bad cop can't be improved. You people walk around with fire arms which you're barely if at all qualified to operate, I expect you to be perfect upon leaving that academy. There is no room for mistakes in your line of work.
Plus, the reputation of "robo cop" does not mean he is not doing his job ... that is just one set of people's impressions.
-- No, that's YOUR impression.

If the guy is mucking it up, then it needs to be brought up. If, for no other reason, to set the ground work to demonstrate the agency's failure to take disciplinary actions on a problem employee. (If a problem can be proven here)
-- If a problem can be proven here? Funny, the minute some civilian posts, you already have him guilty, and think penalties are'nt severe enough. When it's one of you're boys, oh he could'nt possibly do any wrong.

Going after the cop is a waste of time, the only justifiable punishment for him is death.
What kind of assinine, immature and irresponsible reply is THAT?
--The same as many of YOUR buddies comments here. I thought you were the exception, one of the few people with a shred of politeness nd decency and half a brain until this last litle tidbit. People who abuse authority deserve to die due to the intense threat they pose to breaking down the system. You think simple traffic offenses should be dealt with much more harshley, well I think those who abuse authority should be as well.

You, sir, are an ass.
--I'm very disappointed here. You want to discuss things fine, insults, well, just remember, you asked for it. Why don't you meet me outside the desert in Yuma AZ. Come alone, don't bring your side arm it won't help you, I am much more highly trained than you are in weapons and tactics. Come alone and repeat this last line to me, and we'll discuss it there alone in private.
MK

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by meerkat3232

--I don't remember asking you a godd#$n thing! When I want your opinion I will give it to you. If you spent more time responding to the OP instead of everyone else, you might get someplace.

I did respond to the OP. And I don't think I responded to "everyone else" ... well, not until your inane comment about cops deserving death.

--Balls, you know damn well most complaints are swept under the rug, unless a media camera happened to be involved.

I can't speak for where you live, but that isn't true out here. And without a personnel complaint just TRY to fire a cop! Even a bad one. If nobody says anything, how is the admin. supposed to know? Supervisors cannot be everywhere at once.

A bad cop can't be improved.

It depends on the issues. Poor training? Poor attitude? Lack of knowledge? Many things CAN be improved ... some things can't.

You people walk around with fire arms which you're barely if at all qualified to operate, I expect you to be perfect upon leaving that academy.

That's funny ... most states are trying to de-emphasize our 'reliance' on firearms and here you are expecting us to be perfect. I wish you all would make up your minds!

And before you disparage MY qualification to operate MY firearm(s), perhaps you should attend the same competitions I do.

There is no room for mistakes in your line of work.

Sure. But it happens. And some mistakes are not nearly as bad as others. And if you mean for firearms, the public is generally schizo on that.

Let me tell you what goes through a cop's mind when he draws his weapon ... it SHOULD be the effective application of that force if he has to use it ... nope. It's hesitation, second guessing, and, "What will I lose if I am forced to shoot this SOB?" Why? Because the lawyers drill that into us ... the attorneys drill that into us ... and the media drills that into us. Too many cops wait TOO long before they pull the trigger because they are too involved with all the potential civil liabilities going through their brains to think clearly.

One of my officers once let a cleaver-wielding nutcase get within 6 feet of him! SIX FEET! The guy dropped the knife at that point. And the reason he didn't shoot? Because the guy was 16 and he was afraid of getting sued!!

I would have shot him 15' earlier. But that's me.

Plus, the reputation of "robo cop" does not mean he is not doing his job ... that is just one set of people's impressions.
-- No, that's YOUR impression.

Anyone can call anyone else a name. It means absolutely nothing.

-- If a problem can be proven here? Funny, the minute some civilian posts, you already have him guilty, and think penalties are'nt severe enough. When it's one of you're boys, oh he could'nt possibly do any wrong.

Oh, hogwash. I don't know if he did anything wrong and you don't either. It sounds like he did, but I know from personal experience that there is always another side to the tale. It looks bad - and probably is. But, the truth be told, the bad performance and acts would still have to be 'proven'. The mere word of the complainant would not be entirely enough.

Going after the cop is a waste of time, the only justifiable punishment for him is death.
What kind of assinine, immature and irresponsible reply is THAT?
--The same as many of YOUR buddies comments here.

I am not "buddies" with anyone here. I have had pleasant side communications with two or three. And I am responsible ONLY for MY posts - not anyone else's. I am not their parent nor their keeper.

You still didn't answer the question, however. What kind of assinine response was that?

I thought you were the exception, one of the few people with a shred of politeness nd decency and half a brain until this last litle tidbit.

Yeah ... golly gee ... how unreasonable of me to get irked by a comment suggesting that a cop should be killed. What an unreasonable response by me.

People who abuse authority deserve to die due to the intense threat they pose to breaking down the system.

Oh, bull. They deserve jail or termination - as permissable by law. I seriously doubt you would consider a statement by me or anyone else claiming that breaking the law deserves death - so why should you be given a pass for yours?

You think simple traffic offenses should be dealt with much more harshley, well I think those who abuse authority should be as well.

I never said that "simple traffic offenses" should be dealt with more harshly. So I don't know where you get that idea. If you refer to DUI, then you are NOT refering to a "simple traffic offense".

--I'm very disappointed here. You want to discuss things fine, insults, well, just remember, you asked for it.

You're the one that started in with the assinine comment ... or do you really think that the death of a cop - or anyone - is an acceptable response or action?

Why don't you meet me outside the desert in Yuma AZ. Come alone, don't bring your side arm it won't help you, I am much more highly trained than you are in weapons and tactics.

Oh ... okay. You don't one thing about me and you make THAT assumption. And you think that by making a "challenge" that you KNOW would not be accepted somehow makes you more of a man?

Do you feel better now?

Come alone and repeat this last line to me, and we'll discuss it there alone in private.

I don't like the desert. Maybe you should come to the Redwoods.

How about I rephrase ... Your comment, sir, was assinine.

Better?


- Carl

I thought I would appreciate the point of views I would get by posting my husband's situation on this forum. I must admit I am having second thoughts, after seeing what has transpired.

There is no doubt that the officer in question is way over the line. One group of people is not the case at all. Every one of those that I came in contact with during my husband's detainment were this officer's own peers. I question the "complaint" issue because of the following: The law enforcement in this rural county consists of many of this officer's family members. The officer, county attorney, and judge are all related by blood. One could not miss the fact that every one of them had the same reaction. You could tell that they know this officer has a reputation for stepping over the line, because they are the ones forced to clean up his messes. And clean them up they do.

Had the situation been different, I might have let it all go. However, this is not a situation where the officer just made a mistake...whoops. This officer went to great lengths to justify what he did. He flat out lied about a number of things and got caught up in that vicious cycle of having to tell more lies to cover up the first ones. His actions have marred my husband's reputation. My husband has never, and I repeat never, drank alcohol or taken drugs. He never even experimented when he was a teenager. In this day and age, my husband is a prime example of what I call "a mamma's dream". He doesn't drink, smoke, cuss, drag race, or do drugs.

I do not advocate killing police officers. That comment was ridiculous. However, I do believe there are many citizens that feel that way because of the overzealous officers that give law enforcement a bad reputation.

Sorry to hear about your huband's situation. Unfortunately he's not alone. Here are just two examples of people being wrongly accused of DUI.

As of two months ago, this guy was still trying to clear his name of any charges:
[url]http://www.abcactionnews.com/stories/2004/02/040219dui.shtml[/url]

This will open to a page to view the news reel:
[url]http://kcnc.dayport.com/viewer/viewerpage.php?Art_ID=2409&NoAds=true&tf=investigatesviewer.tpl[/url]

As for taking legal action against the department, I wish I had an answer for you. Most cops won't even comment or apologize for their mistakes (see the above stories).

I would try your local media. Contact the newspapers and news channels to let them know of your husband's story. The one thing departments hate is media coverage of a botched-up job. If this isn't the first time this cop has done this, this could possibly give others that experience the same thing motivation to come forward.

Good luck.