UT-ex Cedric Benson arrested again

[bbgun]

It's the car's fault.

http://io9.com/5013937/futuristic-c...cocktail-bar-++-it-made-perfect-sense-in-1962

 

[Ashwynn]

He doesn't have a drinking problem.

He drinks, he gets drunk, he falls down.

No problem.

sounds like someone has a dwarf.

 

[dargonking999]

So now that he has chronic drinking problem, and of course problem with seeing the police everywhere, does this mean that he's going to suspended and brought back at the lesure of Goodell, or will Goodell, let him loose?

i wonder, i wonder, i wonder

 

[DCBoysfan]

he went from from bad to worst....the NFL stands for Not For Long when you do things like that

 

[poke]

i dont want any of you guys on a jury if i ever go to trial....benson may or
may not be guilty but that doesnt seem to slow anybody down from
deciding he is...........sheesh
and nope i am not a big UT fan or Bears fan.......just someone seriously
concerned about our jury pools.

 

[Ren]

i dont want any of you guys on a jury if i ever go to trial....benson may or
may not be guilty but that doesnt seem to slow anybody down from
deciding he is...........sheesh
and nope i am not a big UT fan or Bears fan.......just someone seriously
concerned about our jury pools.

DUI is pretty straight forward they do breath and blood tests, if they come up positive it's pretty much case closed and if they come up negative they let you go.

If there's any lesson to be learned here it's not that zoners make bad juries but rather don't drink and drive

 

[Bob Sacamano]

i dont want any of you guys on a jury if i ever go to trial....benson may or
may not be guilty but that doesnt seem to slow anybody down from
deciding he is...........sheesh
and nope i am not a big UT fan or Bears fan.......just someone seriously
concerned about our jury pools.

refusing to blow or take a chemical test is a sure sign of guilt

noone's going to believe him, just politically correct wannabe's

 

[peplaw06]

refusing to blow or take a chemical test is a sure sign of guilt

noone's going to believe him, just politically correct wannabe's

That's not exactly true, and it's not admissible as an inference of guilt.

That's like saying refusing to testify, as per your 5th Amendment rights, is a sure sign of guilt.

 

[Everlastingxxx]

That's not exactly true, and it's not admissible as an inference of guilt.

It is after you fail the field test. All of it is video taped so a jury will get to judge for themselves.

 

[peplaw06]

It is after you fail the field test. All of it is video taped so a jury will get to judge for themselves.

The part I quoted was talking about refusal to take the test. It had nothing to do with taking the test and failing it. Obviously it's admissible against you if you take it and fail. That's why they ask you to do it.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

That's not exactly true, and it's not admissible as an inference of guilt.

That's like saying refusing to testify, as per your 5th Amendment rights, is a sure sign of guilt.

belive me

I'm a 2-time offender lol

 

[peplaw06]

belive me

I'm a 2-time offender lol

I know you are.

My advice is to never blow though, unless you're stone cold sober.

 

[Dodger12]

That's not exactly true, and it's not admissible as an inference of guilt.

That's like saying refusing to testify, as per your 5th Amendment rights, is a sure sign of guilt.

Pep, I'm not quite sure that's accurate in all states. Pennsylvania has an implied consent law which basically states that you agree to a chemical test just by being licensed to drive in PA. If the police arrest you for DUI of alcohol or drugs and you refuse to take one or more chemical tests, your driving privilege will be automatically suspended for one year. This suspension is in addition to any suspension imposed for a DUI conviction.

Even if you are found not guilty of DUI, your driving privilege will be suspended for one (1) year for a first-time refusal which would be a far worse punishment then blowing above the legal limit and taking ARD which, in many cases, is a 3 month suspension for a first offense. If you refuse to take a test and you are found guilty of DUI, your license may be suspended for two and a half (2 1/2) years.

And I'm fairly certain that you could use the driver's refusal to take a chemical test in court (at least in PA). I'll bet you that the above holds true in most states....the DUI laws are tough.

Either way, Bob is sh** out of luck.....

 

[peplaw06]

Pep, I'm not quite sure that's accurate in all states. Pennsylvania has an implied consent law which basically states that you agree to a chemical test just by being licensed to drive in PA. If the police arrest you for DUI of alcohol or drugs and you refuse to take one or more chemical tests, your driving privilege will be automatically suspended for one year. This suspension is in addition to any suspension imposed for a DUI conviction.

Even if you are found not guilty of DUI, your driving privilege will be suspended for one (1) year for a first-time refusal which would be a far worse punishment then blowing above the legal limit and taking ARD which, in many cases, is a 3 month suspension for a first offense. If you refuse to take a test and you are found guilty of DUI, your license may be suspended for two and a half (2 1/2) years.

And I'm fairly certain that you could use the driver's refusal to take a chemical test in court (at least in PA). I'll bet you that the above holds true in most states....the DUI laws are tough.

Either way, Bob is sh** out of luck.....

Texas has an implied consent law as well. You refuse to blow, you get your license suspended 90 days. But as you say, that's separate from the legal proceedings for DUI/DWI. If you refuse to blow, it's not supposed to be held against you in court.

Now, practically speaking, a juror may well believe that refusal to blow is an inference of guilt. But it's not a sure sign, and I guarantee you it's better to not blow and not give the cops/prosecution a number that says you were over the legal limit, than it is for there to be no number, and be able to plant doubt as to whether you were actually over the legal limit.

Remember, the State has to prove their case against the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, and in DWI, that means prove that you had a BAC of .08 or higher. If there's no number, it's easier to plant doubt.

 

[DanTanna]

4 time loser.

'Nuff said.

 

[Ren]

I know you are.

My advice is to never blow though, unless you're stone cold sober.

Never drive unless you're stone cold sober

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I know you are.

My advice is to never blow though, unless you're stone cold sober.

and automatically lose my license and look guilty in the judge's eyes?

 

[bbgun]

I know you are.

My advice is to never blow though, unless you're stone cold sober.

If I ever slip and fall on a wet supermarket floor, you're the first guy I call.

 

[peplaw06]

and automatically lose my license and look guilty in the judge's eyes?

What's more likely to get you a conviction?

1) You refuse to blow and risk the "appearance of guilt," or

2) You blow a .12 and there's a number telling the Judge you're guilty.

If you refuse to blow, yes you'll get a license suspension. If you blow over the legal limit, you're getting a suspension when you get your conviction.

 

[peplaw06]

Never drive unless you're stone cold sober

I'm actually a big advocate of driving while you're drunk