Test results: Johnson's blood alcohol level was .072

[03EBZ06]

Associated Press

GILBERT, Ariz. -- Blood tests show former Chicago Bears defensive tackle Tank Johnson's blood alcohol level was below the legal limit when he was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving June 22, police said Monday.

Johnson's blood alcohol level was .072, under the presumptive limit in Arizona of .08 percent, Gilbert police Sgt. Andrew Duncan said. No charges have been filed pending results of a completed investigation, and Duncan declined further comment.

Johnson, whose legal name is Terry Darnell Johnson, was arrested when officers pulled him over at 3:30 a.m. for driving 40 mph in a 25 mph zone. Duncan said an officer placed him under arrest because he believed Johnson was under the influence of alcohol. He was released without being booked or charged after providing a blood sample, and police said he was very cooperative.

Johnson, 25, was released by the Chicago Bears three days after his arrest. The team said it was "upset and embarrassed" by the defensive tackle's legal troubles.

Johnson had already had been suspended for the first eight games of the 2007 NFL season for violating probation on a gun charge. He spent two months in jail and was released in May.

Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2923817

 

[parchy]

Welp... that sucks.

 

[AbeBeta]

So all he was doing wrong was speeding.

How many folks here never did that?

 

[Hostile]

:laugh2:

I probably shouldn't find this funny, but I do.

He still should have known better. For a man that big to register a .072 he still had to drink a lot.

 

[Doomsday101]

Thing is regardless if he did not break the law he is in the NFL abuse program and should not be drinking period. From the Bears stand point and the NFL this does not change anything.

 

[Hostile]

So all he was doing wrong was speeding.

How many folks here never did that?

Better question.

How many of you who are guilty of doing this did so while on probation, or notice from your job that you were on thin ice?

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Curious of the time that elapsed from the time he was pulled over until the blood was taken. Also curious of the time he was on the road before being pulled over.

 

[burmafrd]

While not legally drunk is there any question that he was impaired and therefore a danger to everyone on the road?

 

[AbeBeta]

Better question.

How many of you who are guilty of doing this did so while on probation, or notice from your job that you were on thin ice?

Thin ice sure. But it is speeding - it wasn't like he was racing - it is a traffic ticket -- it doesn't violate his parole nor does it speak to bad behavior.

Me, I'm not ready to call this anything other than bad driving.

And the upside is that he was found with a grand total of ZERO guns in the car.

 

[burmafrd]

What was the timeframe from when he got into the car and when he had the blood test? Some time must have passed- so is there any real doubt that he was legally drunk when he got into the car?

 

[AbeBeta]

While not legally drunk is there any question that he was impaired and therefore a danger to everyone on the road?

.08 is the legal limit -- and a relatively low one at that. If below that is dangerous then the limit should be lower.

Some folks here crack me up with the loosey-goosey legal applications -- a guy has a drug test that comes up for something that doesn't relate to performance (marijuana) and it is all "it is illegal!" but here a guy, by the letter of the law isn't guilty of driving under the influence and it is all "but he was close!"

 

[joseephuss]

Thin ice sure. But it is speeding - it wasn't like he was racing - it is a traffic ticket -- it doesn't violate his parole nor does it speak to bad behavior.

Me, I'm not ready to call this anything other than bad driving.

And the upside is that he was found with a grand total of ZERO guns in the car.

He had a secret compartment installed for those. :laugh2:

Bad driving and poor judgment. You don't have to be legally drunk to be driving impaired. Maybe he will learn something from this.

 

[InmanRoshi]

If you're severely impaired below .08, you're a lightweight. You can drink a couple of glasses of wine with your meal and almost be at .08.

 

[AbeBeta]

If you're severely impaired at .08, you're a lightweight.

Seriously -- some folks here should go to a bar that has one of those machines -- you'd be shocked to see how sober you feel when .08 rolls around.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

So have we signed him yet?

 

[burmafrd]

So what if you feel sober. What matters is ARE YOU IMPAIRED AS A DRIVER.Or are you trying to say you drive better with a couple of bears rather then cold sober?

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Well I don't drink and drive PERIOD.

Rarely even drink anymore but when I did I did not drive.

So if that makes me ignorant about what is considered a low alcohol level with a blood test so be it.

 

[AbeBeta]

So what if you feel sober. What matters is ARE YOU IMPAIRED AS A DRIVER.Or are you trying to say you drive better with a couple of bears rather then cold sober?

and by the letter of the law, he wasn't impaired.

no charges.

case closed.

 

[InmanRoshi]

So what if you feel sober. What matters is ARE YOU IMPAIRED AS A DRIVER.Or are you trying to say you drive better with a couple of bears rather then cold sober?

You're also impaired when you talk on your cellphone while driving. Should we arrest people talking on their cellphone because they're 'impaired'? No, because its not illegal to talk on your cellphone and drive (in most places), and neither is driving at .072. It's simple ... you either break a law or you don't. Unless you believe government and law authorities should make up laws as they go.

 

[AdamJT13]

Perhaps Arizona's law is different, but in some places, you can be charged with driving while impaired (or another similarly worded offense) even if your blood-alcohol level is below the legal limit.