This time it is a CHP or California Highway Patrol Officer, arrested on felony DUI charges following a car accident that she caused, resisting arrest, assaulting fellow officers, and using profanity towards her brothers attempting to effectuate the arrest on her lame ass.
I really don't get this, not at all. I tell clients and or people at large, not to get into it with the police, it is a losing proposition on the street. Besides, they are just doing their job, most of them. On the street, in the cloak of darkness, the police win, you lose! If there are any issues to be determined, you do that in court, NOT on the street. This situation, however, is insane because it is a police officer that is driving at a BAC over twice the legal limit, number one, causing a big accident, number two, and then assaulting officers, number three. That is the best way to get your ass kicked if you're not a cop and maybe even if you are a cop.
Being that this lady is a decorated officer of the law, she knows better than to do any of the foregoing. It is truly hard to explain, other then being a complete idiot. Anyway, my guess is that this officer is probably an alcoholic because she was functioning, albeit poorly, with a BAC of .20 and once you get that first drink or two down, the drinks just keep coming, then things spiral out of control quickly to the point of acting like a complete lunatic.
My position, as an experienced DUI attorney, is that the drinking and driving limit should be a shocking .00. Why you ask? Why so restrictive and untenable? Easy, the .08 legal limit is a fallacy. If you blow a .08 you get arrested right? But the dirty truth that they don't tell you is that if you blow a .07, .06., .05 you STILL get arrested and charged! Officer's complete discretion. And seeing how the officers get overtime for coming to court to prosecute the case and seeing as how the officers get browny points for maintaining quotas/arrests, the driver is going to be arrested in every case. However, have no fear, despite it being the right thing to do, the restaurant lobby would never permit it to happen as they would lean heavily on our lawmakers and our lawmakers would never succumb to such lunacy as doing something that makes sense, clarifies the law and helps the community at large.
If you have more then ONE drink, you are susceptible to being arrested if stopped and chances are more likely than not that you will be arrested, even way below the golden .08. Secondly, when people are laboring under the mistaken impression they can have maybe 3 drinks before getting to .08, they tend to loosen up and lose their discipline and go beyond that; which is what happened in this case. Assumably as a decorated officer, this person knew not to drink the volume that she consumed, but after the first 2-3 drinks, she lost control and kept right on going, resulting in the arrest and the stupid behavior.
Therefore, if the actual BAC limit is more like half of .08, closer to .04 which is one to two drinks, wouldn't it be much easier to say no tolerance, zero limit? If you intend on driving, DO NOT drink at all. It then becomes clear for all parties without confusion and we get to avoid idiots like this who clearly know better, but cannot control themselves. But then again, if we took this tough, clear stance, where would the government make the loss of income that it makes from these cases? Where would the police make up their loss of income from the overtime? What would the court personnel be left to do in the absence of all the DUI cases? What would all the defense counsel do with all their extra time? What would all the court's DUI probation staff do in the absence of these cases?
I suppose the safety of the motoring public throughout this country just doesn't rank high enough when factored against these overpowering elements and the likes of the pesky restaurant lobby.