DUI and Nevada blood test

[panther10758]

You are either still drunk or dont understand. There is evidecne againist you. Your driving prior to stop your behavior any smell of alcohol etc. All this works againist you an din favor of your being drunk. Had you taken the test and FST and passed you could safely argue your case. Since you refused (why does an innocent man refuse proof of innocence?) your drunk in most jurors eyes!

 

[blove29]

Well we got off topic here my main question had nothing to do of the fact whether I was drinking or not and what the outcome of my criminal trial will be. But the fact that I was nearly choked to death by the same people whose motto which is to "protect and serve"
By being peaceful and respectful with police officers should not give them the right to choke someone. i will try and paint the picture again, I was sitting in a chair, handcuffed and was strangled from the front while sitting in a chair. I was not tackled to the ground or any violence whatsoever. i was just sitting down having conversation with the nurse and it wasnt drunk talk either.

 

[panther10758]

Its on topic really if you were drunk your version of incident is distorted!

 

[ceara19]

CDjawa i found this article in regards to a chokehold today, it is california. But nevada laws and california are about the same.

Yeah, all state's laws are "about the same", except the parts that are different. No matter how similar SOME of California's laws MAY be to Nevada's laws, the California laws do NOT apply to your case.

 

[ceara19]

Well we got off topic here my main question had nothing to do of the fact whether I was drinking or not and what the outcome of my criminal trial will be. But the fact that I was nearly choked to death by the same people whose motto which is to "protect and serve"
By being peaceful and respectful with police officers should not give them the right to choke someone. i will try and paint the picture again, I was sitting in a chair, handcuffed and was strangled from the front while sitting in a chair. I was not tackled to the ground or any violence whatsoever. i was just sitting down having conversation with the nurse and it wasnt drunk talk either.

The thing is, no matter WHAT really happened, you have to PROVE that you were almost "choked to death" by the police. Who side of things do you really think the nurse would end up in? The police that she has to work with day in and day out and that could go out of their way to make HER life hell if they are corrupt, as you are claiming, or some complete stranger that she met ONE TIME because he was arrested for DUI?

 

[blove29]

Its on topic really if you were drunk your version of incident is distorted!

drunk, sober, a little bit of a buzz. Anyone of those and a persons view doesnt automatically make it distorted. A drunk person can still look at reality from a sober point of view.

 

[CdwJava]

There will certainly be a contrary point of view to your own. If there is a tape, your attorney (criminal and civil) can seek the tape in discovery or via subpoena. Your attorney(s) can also subpoena the witnesses (nurse, jail staff, other officers, etc.) who might be able to testify as to your compliant behavior and the alleged assault upon you.

However, without attorneys, short of making a personnel complaint, nothing much is going to happen. The first step would be to successfully defend yourself against the DUI allegation.

- Carl

 

[panther10758]

DA closing remarks:

"Memebers of the jury why would a sober man refuse a test that proves his innocnece? Answer he wouldnt! I say the defendant was intoxicated and knew it! His actions both before and after stop as documented by Police support his being intoxicated. Now with his intoxication now proven who I ask you ladies and gentelmen are you going to believe the ramblings of a drunk or the statements of one of Las Vegas's finest a decorated and well repspected Officer?"

CASE CLOSED YOU LOSE!

 

[blove29]

DA closing remarks:

"Memebers of the jury why would a sober man refuse a test that proves his innocnece? Answer he wouldnt! I say the defendant was intoxicated and knew it! His actions both before and after stop as documented by Police support his being intoxicated. Now with his intoxication now proven who I ask you ladies and gentelmen are you going to believe the ramblings of a drunk or the statements of one of Las Vegas's finest a decorated and well repspected Officer?"

CASE CLOSED YOU LOSE!

HAHa

Nope they do not have anything on tape that would show a drunk person. i told them i would not do the FST and if you are going to put me under arrest for the refusal of that go ahead. "You sir are under arrest" ok " no more questions without my attorney present" any questions after that and the tapes will be shutoff becase they cannot question me without my attorney present. POLICE STATION " will you submit to a blood test", "no I will not" my inncoence does not need to be proven. CHOKEHOLD "oops caught on tape" does not look good, jury questions the police officers unreasonable force and the DA's case goes down from there. " you sir" after the chokehold "need to give us your blood", "ok, but not without my attorney present" Chokehold again, Now if I acted like an ass and was beligerent, it would not look good for me with a jury. But since I was very nice and respectful, the person that choked me in the juries eyes will look like the bad guy.

And then a good defense attorney puts the police officer on the stand and picks his brain until he has confessed to this or catches him in so many lies that he is not credible.

Case closed

 

[panther10758]

Pat attention

HAHa

Nope they do not have anything on tape that would show a drunk person.They have the officers statements of your driving before stop and actions after thats evidence! i told them i would not do the FST and if you are going to put me under arrest for the refusal of that go ahead.Which legally he could you were under arrest for suspcion of driving under the influence "You sir are under arrest" ok " no more questions without my attorney present" any questions after that and the tapes will be shutoff becase they cannot question me without my attorney present.Your version which you cannot prove and again I say your intoxicated state does not support your having accurate recall of event POLICE STATION " will you submit to a blood test", "no I will not" my inncoence does not need to be proven.No it doesnt but you do need to discredit the evidence againist you which you have not CHOKEHOLD "oops caught on tape"If it happened as you say and if it was on tape! does not look good, jury questions the police officers unreasonable force and the DA's case goes down from there. " you sir" after the chokeholdOfficers testify all the time if your right and I dont believe you are he will not crack on stand then it becomes the word of a decorated officer vs a drunk! "need to give us your blood", "ok, but not without my attorney present"I donot believe an attorney need be present for this test show me code that says that? Chokehold again,Again the ramblings of drunk Now if I acted like an ass and was beligerent, it would not look good for me with a jury.Does Police report show you as uncooperative? If so your dead again But since I was very nice and respectful, the person that choked me in the juries eyes will look like the bad guy.Thats your side but not the actual story posssibly

And then a good defense attorney puts the police officer on the stand and picks his brain until he has confessed to this or catches him in so many lies that he is not credible.

Case closed

Maybe in your dreams or on TV! Listen go after this but only one getting ahead on this will be the Attorney you pay thousands to.

 

[ceara19]

HAHa

Nope they do not have anything on tape that would show a drunk person. i told them i would not do the FST and if you are going to put me under arrest for the refusal of that go ahead. "You sir are under arrest" ok " no more questions without my attorney present" any questions after that and the tapes will be shutoff becase they cannot question me without my attorney present. POLICE STATION " will you submit to a blood test", "no I will not" my inncoence does not need to be proven. CHOKEHOLD "oops caught on tape" does not look good, jury questions the police officers unreasonable force and the DA's case goes down from there. " you sir" after the chokehold "need to give us your blood", "ok, but not without my attorney present" Chokehold again, Now if I acted like an ass and was beligerent, it would not look good for me with a jury. But since I was very nice and respectful, the person that choked me in the juries eyes will look like the bad guy.

And then a good defense attorney puts the police officer on the stand and picks his brain until he has confessed to this or catches him in so many lies that he is not credible.

Case closed

If you think this is the way it works inside of a courtroom, you've been watching way too much Law & Order. The average citizen (as in the ones that will be on the jury) have no sympathy for drunk drivers. In court it is going to pretty much be your word against that of the police officer. The fact that you REFUSED to allow a BAL test DOES make you look guilty.

 

[SillyPuddy]

"The average citizen (as in the ones that will be on the jury) have no sympathy for drunk drivers."


** That's wrong. The average citizen has drank and drove. However, jurys cannot make decisions based on sympathy.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

"The average citizen (as in the ones that will be on the jury) have no sympathy for drunk drivers."


** That's wrong. The average citizen has drank and drove. However, jurys cannot make decisions based on sympathy.

Want to bet?

 

[CdwJava]

"The average citizen (as in the ones that will be on the jury) have no sympathy for drunk drivers."


** That's wrong. The average citizen has drank and drove. However, jurys cannot make decisions based on sympathy.

And they KNOW it's wrong. Juries tend to side with the state as long as there is some evidence to support the DUI allegation. Out here a refusal CAN be used against you to demonstrate likely consciousness of guilt. It seems to work.

- Carl

 

[blove29]

Juries make decisions all the time based on sympathy, I hope this tape exists so the jury can see someone nearly choked to death by the same people that are suppose to protect us. I really thought i was living in a third world country. I recall saying something like " Jeez am I in a third world country right now" after I was choked.

I will just have to wait and see what happens, a person that is respectful to police officers and not abusive and then gets strangled will not look good for a officer of the law. On the flip side to that if I acted like an ass the police officer would look good.