|
I'm not saying anything written above is right or wrong, just stating some expriences of my friends. Another friend is an attorney so he had provided the advice prior to these occurrences.
1. Guy was definitely drunk based on the legal limit, but nowhere close to being "sloppy drunk" and if you didn't know the guy previously you would probably of have a hard time even knowing he had been drinking. Got pulled over, refused FST, car impounded, arrested, etc... Went to court and a lawyer got the case threw out quickly. The cost of the lawyer was well worth it to him versus having a DUI on his record.
2. Guy pulled over for suspicion of drunk driving. He had maybe 2 drinks so he was most likely under the legal limit, however he had an as-yet undiagnosed medical condition which exaggerated the symptons (acted drunk, but really wasn't). Again, refused the FST, blah, blah, blah... case did not even make it to court before it was thrown out (before the medical condition was even used).
Now don't get me wrong, I am completely against people driving drunk (and when I say drunk, I mean drunk, not necessarily just because they are .081). I'm also very careful to not have more than a drink or two if I have to drive afterwards. My only point is that I don't think refusing a FST is quite as bad as described by Sarge. And as for the lawyer just wanting $$$, that wasn't the case because he provided his services for free because they were good friends.
|