Sobriety Checkpoint leads to Forcible Extraction

[rjstew317]

OWI doesn't apply when you ride a magical unicorn.

 

[Denny347]

Blood Alcohol Content Calculator - The Police Notebook

 

[Benny]

Blood Alcohol Content Calculator - The Police Notebook

Stupid calculator stops at 240.

 

[Denny347]

Good call. Nothing more objective than a field sobriety test.

What do you know about SFST's, how they are to be administered, and their objectivity? If you have solid facts to dispute NHTSA approved SFST"s please share them. I have been through 2 NHTSA SFST schools where I actually perform SFST's on intoxicated control participants who were at a known BAC. You have to be able to tell their BAC via the SFST's results. I can tell you that I do not need a BAC test to know what your BAC level is. I can gather that just through SFST's unless there are drugs involved.

 

[steveh_131]

You should change them then.

That generally starts by presenting an opposing viewpoint, which I have done. Obviously no cops agree with me, but I have at least planted the seed with people who are capable of thinking for themselves.

What do you know about SFST's, how they are to be administered, and their objectivity?

Here you go:

FST SFST accuracy sensitivity specificity predictive value

I'm sorry if I don't have as much faith in your abilities as you do. Certainly not enough faith that I think someone should be imprisoned based on how well you thought they were able to stand on one foot.

 

[Kutnupe14]

That generally starts by presenting an opposing viewpoint, which I have done. Obviously no cops agree with me, but I have at least planted the seed with people who are capable of thinking for themselves.



Here you go:

FST SFST accuracy sensitivity specificity predictive value

I got a better idea... let's have a pow wow, get together, and show exactly how SFST is conducted. I'll stay sober, chip in on booze, and even take ppl (in the Indy metro area) home. Who's game?

 

[UncleMike]

That generally starts by presenting an opposing viewpoint, which I have done. Obviously no cops agree with me, but I have at least planted the seed with people who are capable of thinking for themselves.



Here you go:

FST SFST accuracy sensitivity specificity predictive value

I'm sorry if I don't have as much faith in your abilities as you do. Certainly not enough faith that I think someone should be imprisoned based on how well you thought they were able to stand on one foot.

The first line of the web page states,

"This web site gives the opinions of Dr. Greg Kane. Everything you read here is expressed only as my personal opinion."

The good Doctors personal opinion doesn't agree with the factual experiences of a veteran Police Officer.
But.
It's up to you whether you believe an opinion or the facts. ​

 

[UncleMike]

I got a better idea... let's have a pow wow, get together, and show exactly how SFST is conducted. I'll stay sober, chip in on booze, and even take ppl (in the Indy metro area) home. Who's game?

Sounds like a trap to me.

 

[steveh_131]

The first line of the web page states,

"This web site gives the opinions of Dr. Greg Kane. Everything you read here is expressed only as my personal opinion."

The good Doctors personal opinion doesn't agree with the factual experiences of a veteran Police Officer.
But.
It's up to you whether you believe an opinion or the facts. ​

LOL. This isn't the first time you've clearly misunderstood the definition of the word "fact".

I'm certain it won't be the last.

 

[INGunGuy]

The first line of the web page states,

"This web site gives the opinions of Dr. Greg Kane. Everything you read here is expressed only as my personal opinion."

The good Doctors personal opinion doesn't agree with the factual experiences of a veteran Police Officer.
But.
It's up to you whether you believe an opinion or the facts. ​

Yea and we ALL know just how PERFECT all LEO are when it comes to ANYTHING! By Gawd NEVER question their authority...

INGunGuy

 

[UncleMike]

LOL. This isn't the first time you've clearly misunderstood the definition of the word "fact".

I'm certain it won't be the last.

Well..........
Since the following is posted at the very top of the page,

"This web site gives the opinions of Dr. Greg Kane. Everything you read here is expressed only as my personal opinion."
a logical person could draw the conclusion that the Doctor was stating his OPINION in the article and not the FACTS.​

If you're having a problem with English you might consult someone who uses it as their native language.

 

[grimor]

OWI doesn't apply when you ride a magical unicorn.

 

[steveh_131]

Well..........
Since the following is posted at the very top of the page,

"This web site gives the opinions of Dr. Greg Kane. Everything you read here is expressed only as my personal opinion."
a logical person could draw the conclusion that the Doctor was stating his OPINION in the article and not the FACTS.​

If you're having a problem with English you might consult someone who uses it as their native language.

And you think an officer's subjective analysis of a field sobriety test qualifies as "fact"?

It's all opinion. That's why I'd rather not imprison people based on it.

 

[UncleMike]

And you think an officer's subjective analysis of a field sobriety test qualifies as "fact"?

It's all opinion. That's why I'd rather not imprison people based on it.

Damn, you're a hoot!!

OK.
The Doctor states that he is giving his OPINION ONLY.
The Officer has testified in Court as an EXPERT witness and his testimony was accepted by the Court as factual.

You fail!

 

[jsharmon7]

That generally starts by presenting an opposing viewpoint, which I have done. Obviously no cops agree with me, but I have at least planted the seed with people who are capable of thinking for themselves.

That's it? That's your solution? I think you'll get a lot further by contacting your legislators. What better way to influence laws than by speaking directly to those who make and amend the laws? In fact, I think you should email your legislators with all the ideas you've presented here and then post their responses. I'd be very interested to see what those in power think about your suggestions.

Please be sure to post their responses here though. That way all the people capable of thinking for themselves can see what they had to say as well.

 

[NYFelon]

Stupid calculator stops at 240.

weight or BAC???

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Being confrontational is certainly not grounds for a search. However, at that point, officer safety does become an issue. Having a strangers vehicle stopped on the side of the road, late at night, with vehicles whizzing by, trying to hold a conversation with a person who voice is muffled by a window and oncoming traffic, and a glare of a flashing making it difficult to see in the vehicle, is certainly a safety issue...
All that considered, and the person still won't roll down their window? Fine, they should then step out without issue, if asked.

But you originally didn't state officer safety, you said that it is one of the devices used by people who had been drinking to keep from getting caught, and that you would ask them to get out of the car to observe them better(paraphrasing). IMO what you are doing is no different than telling them to open the glove box so you can do a plain view search. After all people keep weapons in a glove box, so wouldn't that be an officer safety matter also? The courts in IN seem to think so. Heck even if the person is outside the vehicle in handcuffs and the officer has backup and the glove box is locked.

and again I say, if you are impairing your own judgment by ingesting alcohol, how can you judge if you're safe to drive. if people had the ability to do this effectively, we wouldn't have these laws in the first place. it has been determined, through research and testing, that .08 is the threshold for the majority of people, therefore the law was made to fit the majority. sorry if you don't like, buy a small island somewhere and create your own set of rules.

Have you ever driven tired? Studies have shown that that can be worse than driving at a .08 or even .10. If your impaired through lack of sleep, how can you judge if your safe to drive or not? Or even some OTC medications such as benadryl?

And do you have any cites to those studies? From what I've read/heard and understand. They just pretty much picked an arbitrary number. And then a few years later lowered it due to pressure from lobbying groups such as MADD. Also if .08 is the threshold for the majority of people, why do CDL holders have a .04 even in their own personal vehicle? I could understand it in a semi or such. It could be stated that it takes less impairment to cause a problem in them. And it would probably be true. But it doesn't change no matter what they are in.

And that is where YOU are wrong.........in order to be arrested in Indiana you must show impairment of THOUGHT and ACTION. Thats what the field sobriety tests are for...........and the PBT is the last test so failures are not based on that.

When did they change the law? I know of 2 people who passed the SFST and were given the PBT afterward and arrested. One had a .07 at the scene but he had just left the bar, so the officer took him to the station and 45 minutes later he blew a .081. He was stopped less than 3 minutes from his house. The other person actually passed the SFST with a BAC around .40. Yes .40.

What do you know about SFST's, how they are to be administered, and their objectivity? If you have solid facts to dispute NHTSA approved SFST"s please share them. I have been through 2 NHTSA SFST schools where I actually perform SFST's on intoxicated control participants who were at a known BAC.

Just a question. Do you check/ask if the person is wearing contacts? And if so do you make them remove them for the HGN?

I got a better idea... let's have a pow wow, get together, and show exactly how SFST is conducted. I'll stay sober, chip in on booze, and even take ppl (in the Indy metro area) home. Who's game?

Tempting but I'm about 2hrs from Indy and I don't think my wife would agree to driving me home.

But to make it fair and unbiased, if you get any takers. Step out of the room and have some of them do a shot and some of them just swish their mouth out with the booze. Have them make it random, where you won't know which ones did what at any point. Then whenever you feel one of them has failed the SFST give them a PBT to check.

OK.
The Doctor states that he is giving his OPINION ONLY.
The Officer has testified in Court as an EXPERT witness and his testimony was accepted by the Court as factual.

The court, in State v. Witte, 251 Kan. 313, 326, 836 P.2d 1110, 1119 (1992) said:
Nystagmus can be caused by problems in an individual's inner ear labyrinth. In fact, irrigating the ears with warm water or cold water...is a source of error. Physiological problems such as certain kinds of diseases may also result in gaze nystagmus. Influenza, streptococcus infections, vertigo, measles, syphilis, arteriosclerosis, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis, Korsakoff's Syndrome, brain hemorrhage, epilepsy, and other psychogenic disorders all have been shown to cause nystagmus. Furthermore, conditions such as hypertension, motion sickness, sunstroke, eyestrain, eye muscle fatigue, glaucoma, and changes in atmospheric pressure may result in gaze nystagmus. The consumption of common substances such as caffeine, nicotine, or aspirin also lead to nystagmus almost identical to that caused by alcohol consumption. (Quoting Pangman, Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus: Voodoo Science, 2 DWI J. 1, 3-4 [1987])

Lots of things including caffeine, nicotine and aspirin can cause HGN almost identical to that caused by alcohol. I'm usually on at least 2 of those at all times. Not to mention there is at least one thing for me that should cause an officer to at least take the results of a HGN test with a grain of salt. My one eye will not track if something crosses out of the line of sight of it on the other side. Yes my one eye will continue to track, the other will either return to straight forward or go in the opposite direction. It will even sometimes do it with something on the same side, it can make it a pain in the behind to put in contacts at times.
Forensic-Evidence: Biological Evidence - H.G.N. (Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus)
Attacking horizontal gaze nystagmus evidence. - UNDERDOG - Criminal Defense Lawyer in Virginia & Maryland

I don't agree with a set BAC for OWI, I know one person, she is literally trashed after one wine cooler. I know others that would be safe to drive at a BAC of .12, and some that yes are intoxicated at .08.

 

[Kutnupe14]

But you originally didn't state officer safety, you said that it is one of the devices used by people who had been drinking to keep from getting caught, and that you would ask them to get out of the car to observe them better(paraphrasing). IMO what you are doing is no different than telling them to open the glove box so you can do a plain view search. After all people keep weapons in a glove box, so wouldn't that be an officer safety matter also? The courts in IN seem to think so. Heck even if the person is outside the vehicle in handcuffs and the officer has backup and the glove box is locked.

Oh no, I didn't bring up the issue of officer safety, you did. I was relating it to the Mimms case in which the USSC cited officer safety as an excuse to have a person exit a vehicle, when a reason "not related to the stop" doesn't exist (T.Marshall-Dissenting). The USSC has held that "objective observable facts" that may be believed to be "unusual or suspicious." A closed glove box in neither unusual nor suspicious. It is common for drivers to keep a clove box closed while interacting with a police officer, or in a number of other common instances. Observing a closed glove box is hardly enough reasonable suspicion to believe something "odd" is going on. Conversely, lowering a window to a small degree after being stopped is quite "unusual and suspicious." If an officer encounters such an instance, it isn't hard to believe how one would think this odd. During the course of interactions with persons from a car window, it it typically lowered well below three inches. In speaking to friends from the driver's seat, interacting at a fast food window, paying a toll, or asking directions from another driver, all these instances are typically recieved with a fully lowered window. So it begs the question of why an individual would fail to extend the courtesy to a member of law enforcement, when the vast majority of the citizens do not subscribe to that action? It could certainly be an expression of rights, a very minor expression, given the littany of other issues people have concerning "rights" and traffic stops (ie plates, licenses, seatbelts) so why in light of other "rights" that a person may object to, they object to lowering their windows, after being legitimately stopped for a traffic violation, and knowing that an officer may believe impairment may be a factor?

It's unusual and suspicious, and a driver will justifiably, be asked to step out of their car, if refusing to lower their windows for no articulatable reason (ie rain snow)

Tempting but I'm about 2hrs from Indy and I don't think my wife would agree to driving me home.

But to make it fair and unbiased, if you get any takers. Step out of the room and have some of them do a shot and some of them just swish their mouth out with the booze. Have them make it random, where you won't know which ones did what at any point. Then whenever you feel one of them has failed the SFST give them a PBT to check.

Swishing a mouth out with alcohol will do nothing SFST requires that an officer wait 15 minutes prior to taking a certified test.

Anyways, I was think more like a control group where people steadily drink and we measure their BAC via a PBT, at 20 minute intervals. When people reach .08, we would start with the "stupid human tricks." It would would be nice if I wasn't the only guy drinking so I could show people HGN, clues, and how the test is generally conducted.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Swishing a mouth out with alcohol will do nothing SFST requires that an officer wait 15 minutes prior to taking a certified test.

Anyways, I was think more like a control group where people steadily drink and we measure their BAC via a PBT, at 20 minute intervals. When people reach .08, we would start with the "stupid human tricks." It would would be nice if I wasn't the only guy drinking so I could show people HGN, clues, and how the test is generally conducted.

I know it wouldn't do anything for the tests, but it would make them all smell alike. I was thinking something along the lines of testing what the officers on here are saying about being able to tell BAC from the SFST.
And when did they change it? I thought it used to be 30 minutes before the certified test. Or am I wrong?

But your idea sounds fun also, just wish I could make it. I would be interested in watching the "stupid human tricks" And maybe one idea, do the SFST at the beginning before drinking starts, that way their is a "base line" for people to compare.

And your going to be drinking? I thought you were offering rides home?

 

[Denny347]

Have you ever driven tired? Studies have shown that that can be worse than driving at a .08 or even .10. If your impaired through lack of sleep, how can you judge if your safe to drive or not? Or even some OTC medications such as benadryl?

Sure, I have stopped drivers I thought were drunk only to find them tired.

Just a question. Do you check/ask if the person is wearing contacts? And if so do you make them remove them for the HGN?

I check the eyes for contacts, if they are wearing them, they have the option to remove them. If they choose not to, note it in the report or at least your notes for court.

Lots of things including caffeine, nicotine and aspirin can cause HGN almost identical to that caused by alcohol. I'm usually on at least 2 of those at all times. Not to mention there is at least one thing for me that should cause an officer to at least take the results of a HGN test with a grain of salt. My one eye will not track if something crosses out of the line of sight of it on the other side. Yes my one eye will continue to track, the other will either return to straight forward or go in the opposite direction. It will even sometimes do it with something on the same side, it can make it a pain in the behind to put in contacts at times.
Forensic-Evidence: Biological Evidence - H.G.N. (Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus)
Attacking horizontal gaze nystagmus evidence. - UNDERDOG - Criminal Defense Lawyer in Virginia & Maryland

Yes, Nystagus is not alcohol specific. HGN alone is just 77% accurate. If I had HGN and NOTHING else then I would not have enough to make a case. Before I start the HGN test, I check the eyes for equal tracking. If I do not have that, I cannot administer the test. Also, a driver with one eye cannot fail HGN. There are 6 clues for HGN...3 for each eye. You have to show 4 out of 6 clues to fail...you would have to have both eyes to fail. HGN should be plainly obvious. If I have to "Look" for it...it is not there.