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

[tunahelper]

Lets get him signed.

ASAP!

 

[stealth]

God I need a beer.

 

[03EBZ06]

He's just a target now.

There is a simple solution, don't put himself in a situation where he can be 'targeted' but he does have to put some effort to do so.

 

[Verdict]

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.

I am not saying you are wrong, but I have never heard of such a thing. I know that if you refuse a test (and were actually under the legal limit) you could be found guilty based on circumstantial evidence, but if there is no test result, you generally wont see the prosecution take such a case to trial.

 

[theogt]

Of course, for most folks you aren't going to get a lawyer b/c it is going to be a total open and shut case where you are going to lose your license anyway.

Not necessarily. Those DUI lawyers can do amazing things.

 

[zeromaster]

Two beers? Lightweight. I knock out a 6-pack with my Cheerios.

A litle vodka with grapefruit juice is rather tasty some mornings

::ducks::

On another note, where are the lawyers lining up to sue the team/NFL?

 

[Verdict]

The Bears have already spoken. Let us see what the commish and the other owners say, shall we? This whole thing has cost him millions.

Your point is well taken, but what if he doesn't commit any further offenses. Would you look at this arrest in a different light five years from now.

The guy does have some talent. He will probably be picked up by someone.

 

[Verdict]

Of course, for most folks you aren't going to get a lawyer b/c it is going to be a total open and shut case where you are going to lose your license anyway.

My clients would beg to differ, Sir. :laugh2:

 

[03EBZ06]

In light of this result, I think Tank is more desirable and more teams are probably looking to see how he could be signed. Had he been charged with DUI, I think most of the team would stay away from him for some time.

 

[AbeBeta]

I am not saying you are wrong, but I have never heard of such a thing. I know that if you refuse a test (and were actually under the legal limit) you could be found guilty based on circumstantial evidence, but if there is no test result, you generally wont see the prosecution take such a case to trial.

That's a law in CA too

 

[AbeBeta]

My clients would beg to differ, Sir. :laugh2:

let me ask though, from a purely economical standpoint, what costs more? your services or the fines, etc. the person gets if guilty?

 

[03EBZ06]

I am not saying you are wrong, but I have never heard of such a thing. I know that if you refuse a test (and were actually under the legal limit) you could be found guilty based on circumstantial evidence, but if there is no test result, you generally wont see the prosecution take such a case to trial.

What about on-road test like straight line walking, touching nose and reciting alphabets in reverse order, can you refuse them as well?

If not, can that be used against you at the court to convict you?

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Hum....do I smell a lawsuit?

 

[Hoofbite]

Hum....do I smell a lawsuit?

based on what?

 

[BrassCowboy]

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?

exactly....

 

[03EBZ06]

Hum....do I smell a lawsuit?

Against Bears? I don't see how. Teams have an option to release players for various reasons.

 

[Vintage]

He was below the legal limit. Good for him.

He should have been, or he shouldn't have been driving (though, I am being a bit hypocritical on that).

Guilty of speeding...

God, who hasn't done that?

 

[AbeBeta]

What about on-road test like straight line walking, touching nose and reciting alphabets in reverse order, can you refuse them as well?

If not, can that be used against you at the court to convict you?

Before you get any bright ideas, most states have laws about refusing that pretty much eliminate these options.

 

[03EBZ06]

He was below the legal limit. Good for him.

He should have been, or he shouldn't have been driving (though, I am being a bit hypocritical on that).

Guilty of speeding...

God, who hasn't done that?

If I was told to be on a good behavior for certain period, otherwise, I'd be jeopardizing my career and millions of dollars, I won't take a chance of driving near impaired nor break speed limit. I would be on best behavior for that period of time, but that's just me.

 

[03EBZ06]

Before you get any bright ideas, most states have laws about refusing that pretty much eliminate these options.

I don't drink and drive, never have and never will. I was just wondering about refusing sobriety tests conducted on-road since other person stated that a person can refuse BAT.