Fort Worth police won't take 'no' for an answer

Fort Worth Star Telegram ^ | December 29, 2007 | MELODY McDONALD

[Tammy8]

As I understand it, in most states if you refuse a breath test, and or blood test, then you forfeit your driver’s license- just for the refusal, regardless of whether or not you are drunk. I think that is fair, I think this idea of forced blood tests is unconstitutional.

[Eric Blair 2084]

NJ is always about 3 years ahead of Maryland. I went to college in Maryland but the DPRNJ has them beat hands down.

[Eric Blair 2084]

It was a joke. They get your blood but they don’t use a needle, they do it the old fashioned way. They just smash your head into the pavement if you don’t put the cigarette out.

[webstersII]

“Now that you mention it, insurance companies have been doing that.”

I always thought that insurance companies were private companies entering into contracts with individuals.

I had no idea they were part of the gov’t.

</sarcasm>

[NCLaw441]

You posted: Well, normally you are not required to give evidence against your self - right against self incrimination and all that.
***

I am pretty sure the Supreme Court has interpreted the constitution on this and related issues (writing samples, hair samples, voice “prints” etc.) and has determined that the taking of them doesn’t violate the 5th amendment. If we considered this in the context of other crimes such as murder or molestation of a child, there would be a lot less argument about taking blood, or even semen samples. Once you are arrested the state is entitled to its evidence. I disagree with those who have posted to the contrary here.

[Calpernia]

>>>I had no idea they were part of the gov’t.

Yeah, I remember those days too.

http://healthypeople.gov

[Calpernia]

bump

[samtheman]

Will you just go along with it and let them stick you with a HIV tainted needle ?

The time to "just go along with it" is when they ask you to take the breath test. If you take the breath test, you won't get stuck with a needle.

It's not really that difficult to avoid the needle. Here are the rules:

1. Don't drive drunk (I've been driving for decades and never gotten pulled over, not once)
2. If you get pulled over and they ask you to take a breath test, take a breath test.

I know why the police are doing this, because drunk drivers are repeat offenders and they and their lawyers have figured out a way to beat the system by saying no to the breath test. Well screw them. Lock 'em up. And their lawyers.

[samtheman]

It’s “teetotaller”, not “tea totaller”.

[gondramB]

>>You posted: Well, normally you are not required to give evidence against your self - right against self incrimination and all that.
***

I am pretty sure the Supreme Court has interpreted the constitution on this and related issues (writing samples, hair samples, voice “prints” etc.) and has determined that the taking of them doesn’t violate the 5th amendment. If we considered this in the context of other crimes such as murder or molestation of a child, there would be a lot less argument about taking blood, or even semen samples. Once you are arrested the state is entitled to its evidence. I disagree with those who have posted to the contrary here.<<

I would hope that if it is part of your body they want that a court order would be required and the cops would have to show cause. I suspect this PR campaign is to keep people from availing themselves of a right to a hearing.

[Neu Pragmatist]

Post 125 .

[Eric Blair 2084]

Thanks. I’ll make a not of it and change it.

[Eric Blair 2084]

Oh no, not you again. What are you an attorney or something? :-)

You should be a talking head legal analist (not a misspelling) on cable TV.

“Once you are arrested the state is entitled to it’s evidence”

I hope they do a full body cavity search the next time some cop decides he doesn’t like your face and arrests you for jaywalking when you are in a hurry to make it to your next real estate closing.

[NCLaw441]

I didn’t write the law. I didn’t interpret the law. All I did was report what I understand the law to be. I am not sure how having the cops violate me will help with your argument. But if it makes you feel better, enjoy your fantasy.

[NCLaw441]

The cops would have to show probable cause to get a warrant for a blood test or any other search (except a search for weapons or the passenger area of the car). I don’t think the defendant gets to be heard, but I could be wrong. And I don’t think merely refusing the breathalyzer test creates probable cause for the search, but odor of alcohol in the car, or alcohol in the car, of flunking the field sobriety test (I am not sure I could pass all of those tests if I were stone sober) could create probable cause.

[Eric Blair 2084]

I didn’t write the law. I didn’t interpret the law. All I did was report what I understand the law to be

And you billed me $1,120 for that?

[Hardastarboard]

LOL!!! Although, why don’t I think you’re joking this time?

[NCLaw441]

You posted: And you billed me $1,120 for that?
***
You’d have to be my client for me to bill you. Having read many of your irrational and irritating comments on FR, there is no chance you would ever be my client. Not to worry, though, there are many attorneys who share your personality, or lack of same.