Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: chaosagent

The only statement made by the prosecution is the following:

Sharon Henry, chief deputy district attorney for Solano County, said in a statement that her office was “conducting further investigation in this matter.”

“The charge of driving under the influence is not based upon the presence of caffeine in his system,” she added.

So caffeine has nothing to do with this.

The rest of this article is total defense attorney BS/spin.


27 posted on 12/25/2016 12:11:26 AM PST by Neanderthal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: Neanderthal

“driving under influence of caffeine”

I expect to see more of this as illegitimate causes for autonomous vehicles ramp up.


29 posted on 12/25/2016 12:45:49 AM PST by equaviator (There's nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Neanderthal

The only statement made by the prosecution is the following:

Sharon Henry, chief deputy district attorney for Solano County, said in a statement that her office was “conducting further investigation in this matter.”

“The charge of driving under the influence is not based upon the presence of caffeine in his system,” she added.

So caffeine has nothing to do with this.


Then what is he being charged with? And why are they “conducting further investigation in this matter.”

Shouldn’t the ‘investigation’ be all done by now, just weeks before the trail?

He was charged with ‘misdemeanor driving under the influence of a drug.’

According to the article, two toxicology reports showed the only ‘drug’ in his system was caffeine.

So after 18 months the prosecutor still can’t tell the defense attorney what WAS in his system? Why not?

The trial is supposed to start in a little over two weeks. When are they going to tell him what he supposedly had in his system?

Doesn’t this all seem a little ‘hinky’ to you?

Having had a cop for a father, and heard some of the stories he told about DA’s, I think they thought they’d be able to get him on something, else why two toxicology tests.

I suspect the agent was PO’d he ‘cut her off’ and wanted to put him in his place. But after he blew a 0.00 they scrambled to find something that would stick.

And I wouldn’t be surprised if right before trial they drop the charges. Of course still leaving him with thousands (tens of thousands) of dollars of lawyer fees. So they still got him.


30 posted on 12/25/2016 1:17:04 AM PST by chaosagent (Remember, no matter how you slice it, forbidden fruit still tastes the sweetest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Neanderthal
The rest of this article is total defense attorney BS/spin.

How can we evaluate it without the cop BS?

45 posted on 12/25/2016 3:16:45 PM PST by Mr.Unique (The government, by its very nature, cannot give except what it first takes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson