I had asked Sheriff Lewis if he'd be so kind as to answer the many questions that had been coming in referencing calling cabs at DUI Checkpoints. This was his response.
"There are times during a routine traffic stop or while working a sobriety checkpoint we encounter drivers who have been drinking-but aren't legally drunk. A preliminary breath test (PBT) shows their blood alcohol content (BAC) to be below or well below the legal limit, however, due to their intolerance to alcohol or their inexperience at drinking, we won't allow them to drive. Although there is insufficient evidence to secure a conviction, common sense tells you they shouldn't be driving. So, yes, we will call a cab. I'm certainly unaware of this happening Saturday night, but, if it did happen, it wouldn't be uncommon. Thanks Joe!"
Sheriff Mike Lewis
Wicomico County Sheriff's Office
401 Naylor Mill Road
Salisbury, MD 21801
(410) 548-4892 ext. 200
Uh, if they are impaired to the point that they are deemed unsafe to operate a vehicle, they should be arrested. That is the very definition of impaired driving. It opens you up to criticism if you don't arrest them. Imagine if your wife/husband was stopped last week and told they were unable to operate a vehicle safely and arrested. Then someone goes through the checkpoint and are told they cannot operate a vehicle safely but provided a cab ride home. If you are unsafe to operate a vehicle, you should be arrested. If that's not the case, they should be allowed to drive away. It's that simple
ReplyDelete3:21 do you have any idea what a DUI arrest entails? obviously not.
ReplyDeleteWell thats why they leave it up to the officer to arrest or not. When you go to school for 23-26 weeks and put in all the extra hours of unwanted overtime and work all kinds of diffrent shifts, spending the time away from your family, putting your life on the line for the safty of others, then I think you can bitch about it!
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous 4:46:
ReplyDeleteWe as citizens have every right to bitch about it. We the citizens pay your salary therefore empower you to enforce the law. If we see an injustice, we the citizens have every right to criticize. If you are that miserable working shifts and overtime, find another job. No one is making you work as an officer. It was your choice so stop whining because it was obviously a poor choice for you. We the citizens will question authority and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. Now go suck your thumb!
If they are above the legal limit, it's illegal. If they're under THE LEGAL LIMIT its WHAT? ALMOST against the law? Kinda like....you were almost speeding? Almost ran a light? What you dont have enough laws to uphold...so you make some of your own? Or is it an intimadation thing? Kinda like abuseing your authority?
ReplyDeletei went through a check point saturday night and i have to say it was very professional the deputy was very polite and did an outstanding job. I dont drink so i had no problem with the check point and im glad to see that some people unable to drive were sent home. Instead of arrestng some of these folks i to agree for once that the sheriffs office does right by just calling them a cab it takes us back to the simple days as to which i wish did not change. I just hope that they dont go out and repeat the ofense.GOOD JOB Wico sheriffs dept.
ReplyDelete4:17 I guess I DON"T have any idea what a DUI arrest entails. Call me a re-tard. That being said, read the article again. It says the people are below the legal limit but because of their intolerance of alcohol they can't drive safely and are provided a cab. Who cares what their BAC is. Are you telling me you have to have a BAC OVER the limit to get a conviction? That is the most ridiculous thing I have EVER heard. From that statement alone, you can articulate that the person was unsafe to operate a vehicle due to their alcohol consumption and should be arrested. You actually CAN arrest someone below the legal limit. Having a BAC OVER the limit just gives you prima facia evidence. It's all how you articulate it in court. Also, if they are below the limit and you see signs of impairment to the point you aren't going to let them drive, did you ever think it may be caused by drug use or a combination of drugs and alcohol? Bottom line, it you determine that they CANNOT operate their vehicle safely, which is what the article says, they should be arrested. Obviously, you deemed them unable to operate a vehicle safely because you didn't allow them to drive away. Therefore, they showed SOME level of impairment. If they performed well on the DUI tests they should have been let go. Regardless of what a PBT says. If they performed poorly enough that you felt they shouldn't or couldn't drive safely, they are impaired and should be arrested.
ReplyDeleteAnon 4:46
ReplyDeleteYou can get a lot further by explaining you position and educating the public than you can by publicly blasting them for exercising their first amendment right.
Anon 3:21
I can understand why it may seem that way but under Maryland law a person can be prosecuted for DUI/DWI with a BAC of .02 provided the evidence convinces a judge/jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The true level of intoxication is measured by the ability to carry out normal activities which require normal reasoning skills, ability to react, etc. The .06 and .08 BAC levels are considered to be "prima fascia evidence" of DUI/DWI respectively.
Officers often make decisions on the scene on whether or not to arrest. The coordination exhibited by the driver may be indicative of mild impairment. There may be enough evidence to arrest but not enough to convict. It's better for the officer to exercise the discretion to refuse to let the operator to continue to drive and call them a cab than to let them proceed and take the chance of the operator becoming involved in a fatal traffic accident. The driver then has two options. Take the cab or get locked up. Hmmmmm not that difficult of a decision to me.
Did anybody think to ask the States Attorney's advice on this issue?
ReplyDeleteIt's called Officer discretion. If you don't like it, you become a cop and then you can spend every waking minute of your career following the letter of the law and in front of the computer at the Central Booking Center. Idiot.
ReplyDeleteNow, go let us do our job and you go do yours.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the matter, couldn't you make it through the academy? Sounds to me like you couldn't
ReplyDeleteThis whole issued started by someone saying that cabs were called to the checkpoint. Did the person who stated that go and find out just why the cab was called. Doesn't sound like they did. That's speculation.
ReplyDeleteI will point out that I am a police officer. I have made many DUI arrests.
Now, let’s look at this. I make a stop. Field tests are not so good. I administer a PBT and the readings are above the legal limit. I read the form asking the driver if they want to take a breath test. (Keep in mind that a PBT is NOT admissible in court, and the only scientific evidence allowed is the breath test) The driver refuses the breath test. Now the only evidence I have in court is some not so good field tests. That’s great for the driver and they will more than likely be found not guilty. But I know I did the right thing by not letting them drive home.
Ok, now the tests are done so what am I gonna do with this guy/girl. They have been polite and cooperative. I don’t want to take them to jail so I issue the tickets on the roadside and call them a ride. Maybe a family member, maybe a CAB.
Can we move past this?? You are speculating that the cab called to the checkpoint took someone home that wasn’t arrested. We don’t know if this is true. Maybe they were charged and the officer called them a ride.
May I also remind you that most police agencies around the country allow citizens to ride with police while on patrol. For those of you who have questions about why police do the things they do, I suggest that you go on a ride-a-long it will be something you never forget.
To Anonymous 5:16
ReplyDeleteI am Not a police officer, I am a citizen just like you, and I help pay their salary, And I trust them to do their job. Yes there are a few bad apples but there are bad in the business world as well, so I choose not to bitch about somthing as small as that.
"due to their intolerance to alcohol or their inexperience at drinking, we won't allow them to drive. Although there is insufficient evidence"
ReplyDeleteSo all of a sudden, threw a road block you can look into your crystal ball and dictate someones inexperiance and intolerance? Balonie! I'm exactly like the poster 11:55am, except this is no small thing. To even set up a road block is a violation of freedom and liberty, I know the law says you can, but there are many laws now that teeter on the line of communisum. I could see using road blocks for certain things {none felons using this rd at this time,ect}You violate many innocence peoples right just to catch {or scare}a few people that MIGHT be close to "prima facia evidence". It's just wrong. And dont even start with that "might save a life BS"... well the world might come to an end tommorrow...so dont bother to go to work. We citisens pushed for this law, it wasnt made to take advantage of by wringing any and all possible guilt out of...or intolerance....or lack of experience or treading on everyone else to get the job done.
Why do we allow the executive branch of our government to tell us what we can and can not do? They affix a numerical limit to the percentage of alcohol in our blood and then arrest us or "give us a pass" because we slid in under the magical limit. Why do we permit these wrantless searches? Aren't we THE PEOPLE? Doesn't the government work for us? What happened to common law?
ReplyDeleteWhen will you start lining people up outside the eating and drinking establishments, make them all piss in cups? It would be more effiecent and you could catch alotta bad guys then?
ReplyDeleteNow 3:46...use your brain!! If the police officers sat outside of the drinking establishments they might be required to arrest some of the good ole boys and gals they do not want to arrest...you must understand how this works.If they want you..they follow you until you accidently touch the YELLOW line in the middle of the road or they get in front of you and slow down so that they can stop you for following tooooo close...then they smell an odor that they learned in their training that could be those ther illegal cigarettes...so then they decide to tear your vehicle to shreads and they don't find any of those drugs they thought you were carrying around to sell...but they do find a plastic sandwich baggy from you sandwich that you took to work for lunch..they then decide to charge you for reckless driving,disorderly conduct,paraphernalia, as well as speeding, because you were doing 35 mph in a 30 mph. Now you don't worry... because when you go to court Davis will be there to throw you in jail for 30 days because you cursed at the police officer who ripped up your car seats. The judge does not believe you because cops do not lie...he knows this because they said they wouldn,t while they were training RIGHT? I have never had a DUI,DWI, or arrested for any crime...just thought you might wonder. Most of law enforcement are proffesional,however we have those Barny's out there who need to be replaced with proffessionals.
ReplyDelete