Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMaxwell
Can two drinks over the course of spending 5 hours somewhere really cause a .013? I'm not believing it ... They SHOULD have to prove I am guilty. I am going to have more evidence than THEY will, at this rate.
|
Did they take a blood sample?
If no, then fighting it may be worth it - BUT you'll need an experienced, dedicated (as in not public defender) attorney to argue the breathalyzer machine's results aren't accurate - ie. not calibrated, not operated correctly, faulty design, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMaxwell
The implied consent thing always bothered me, as well. It is very clear that in DUI cases the constitution doesn't seem to apply. It's more of a prove you're innocent than prove I'm guilty type of thing. Plus, implied consent when you're a licensed driver means you agreed to all sorts of shit you never knew about.
|
Most rights people presume they have are a legal fiction. Much of what one was taught in school is wrong / lies - the comedian George Carlin was spot on. Not the fault of teachers per se - they often mean well, but too have been hoodwinked into believe the system is for the average, working person - not so at all, but I digress.
As for using a public defender - it's not necessarily "free" - there can be income requirements for getting a public defender / avoid getting billed ... likely not an issue unless your income is well into the high-5 figure or more range, but something to keep in mind.