But the article says blood is only drawn if the Breathalyzer is refused and only after there is just cause for arrest.
Wouldn’t someone take the Breathalyzer to keep from being arrested?
What if you haven’t been drinking , but don’t want to take the damn breathalyzer ?
Are you D.A.-ing me ?
No, because being arrested is a whole lot different than being convicted (which will happen after you blow into a rigged breathalyzer.)
The article said no such thing. It said:
Fort Worth Police Chief Ralph Mendoza. "Basically, we are going to get our evidence one way or the other."
I read it as, "If we think you might be drunk, we will pull you over, and worthiness of our initial determination be damned, we will take your blood."
I see you have never been stopped for anything serious by a cop...Arrest is purely at the officer’s discretion. If you piss him off by insisting your rights be respected or declining to answer questions they can and do go ballistic. It will be his word against yours unless you or your car is wired. There is a kid in the St Louis area who has clearly demonstrated that. Another good example is to legitimately refuse a search of your vehicle. Drives them nuts. BTDT.
To the issue in question, most people do not realize that breathalyzers are not always accurate and are not subject to independent testing or analysis (trade secrets). Also some depts have taken to billing people for jail stays and blood tests. It can be fought if you are innocent...but its not worth the time
Always insist on the best test available, which is a blood test. It also means you can have sample tested independently at a later date if necessary. Its also takes resources off of the street and lessens the ability of the crooked depts to conduct such scams.
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.