Wintergreen Chewing Tobacco - DUI

[kell490]

How did they know the OP was driving when they approached he wasn't behind the wheel. This is why if I have any idea that ill be drinking I just don't bring my car, or take a cab, or uber ride. Just sitting in your own car police can say you were driving while sitting in a parking lot how do you challenge that maybe body cameras.

 

[tawood]

How did they know the OP was driving when they approached he wasn't behind the wheel. This is why if I have any idea that ill be drinking I just don't bring my car, or take a cab, or uber ride. Just sitting in your own car police can say you were driving while sitting in a parking lot how do you challenge that maybe body cameras.

Through my 29-year police career (now retired/on my second career), I've heard this often: I'll get a DUI even if I'm not driving when I'm in my car. Here is a true story about my own personal experience with this BS:

Many years ago, I was working mid-nights with a partner (he was driving), during a heavy snow storm on a quiet Tuesday night, about 2:30 AM. We were driving down a city side street, pretty much not seeing another car on the road for hours, when suddenly a car came head-on in our lane right at us, causing us to swerve off the road and up across the sidewalk / onto a lawn. As soon as we cleaned out our shorts, we turned around as the car tried to speed off and lose us...but he wasn't getting away from us, as his tracks would be very easy to follow as the only car on the road with the fresh snow. We never lost sight of him either, although he did get a couple of blocks ahead of us.
We watched the car suddenly come to an abrupt stop, and shut off it's headlights. We thought the guy was going to run on foot, but as we pulled up to the car we saw no one run, but also saw no one in the driver's seat! I looked inside, and the driver and only occupant of the car was now in the back seat, lying down, and pretending to be asleep! We got him out, put him through field sobriety tests (he was completely wasted), and arrested him for drunk driving. The entire time, he complained that he wasn't driving, that he had been at a party nearby and was sleeping off his drinking without driving. Never mind that he couldn't explain why his car had fresh tire tracks, no snow on the windshield, no footprints, no party nearby, warm engine but now off, slush under the wheel wells, etc.
The guy actually took his case to a bench trial. The judge agreed with us, found him guilty. I clearly remember this case because the guy completely lost his composure upon hearing the verdict, started yelling and swearing saying my partner and I were liars, he was going to get us if its the last thing he does, he was never driving, etc....He kept up his swearing tirade until the judge also found him in contempt and dinged him with a few days in jail (1st offense DUI never got jail time in my jurisdiction, but swearing/threatening cops in the court will).

This might of been the end of the story, but a few years later, I was on duty driving down one of our multi-lane roads when I noticed a car ahead driving really badly: swerving, lane straddling, speeding up and slowing down. I made a traffic stop on the car, and when I approached, I immediately recognized the guy as the same guy from the snowy night. Again he seemed drunk, so I got him out, put him through field sobriety tests, then arrested him for 2nd offense drunk driving. This time, he was very reserved and apologetic. While I was waiting for the tow truck with him in my back seat, he said to me, "I don't blame you for doing you job officer, I was drunk driving. But let me tell you about these other cops that were complete liars..." He then goes on to tell me the story about how he was "wronged" by two lying cops who said he was driving on a snowy night when he wasn't, etc. He didn't realize he was telling the guy that knew the truth of the matter.

Here's the thing: I bet you this guy had told this story dozens of times, to anyone that would listen. I think he told the story so many times, he personally believed it himself...probably would pass a lie detector test over it. I'm not saying cops are never wrong, and mistakes haven't been made, but I get tired of these OWTs.

 

[Salty]

Through my 29-year police career (now retired/on my second career), I've heard this often: I'll get a DUI even if I'm not driving when I'm in my car. Here is a true story about my own personal experience with this BS:

Many years ago, I was working mid-nights with a partner (he was driving), during a heavy snow storm on a quiet Tuesday night, about 2:30 AM. We were driving down a city side street, pretty much not seeing another car on the road for hours, when suddenly a car came head-on in our lane right at us, causing us to swerve off the road and up across the sidewalk / onto a lawn. As soon as we cleaned out our shorts, we turned around as the car tried to speed off and loose us...but he wasn't getting away from us, as his tracks would be very easy to follow as the only car on the road with the fresh snow. We never lost sight of him either, although he did get a couple of blocks ahead of us.
We watched the car suddenly come to an abrupt stop, and shut off it's headlights. We thought the guy was going to run on foot, but as we pulled up to the car we saw no one run, but also saw no one in the driver's seat! I looked inside, and the driver and only occupant of the car was now in the back seat, lying down, and pretending to be asleep! We got him out, put him through field sobriety tests (he was completely wasted), and arrested him for drunk driving. The entire time, he complained that he wasn't driving, that he had been at a party nearby and was sleeping off his drinking without driving. Never mind that he couldn't explain why his car had fresh tire tracks, no snow on the windshield, no footprints, no party nearby, warm engine but now off, slush under the wheel wells, etc.
The guy actually took his case to a bench trial. The judge agreed with us, found him guilty. I clearly remember this case because the guy completely lost his composure upon hearing the verdict, started yelling and swearing saying my partner and I were liars, he was going to get us if its the last thing he does, he was never driving, etc....He kept up his swearing tirade until the judge also found him in contempt and dinged him with a few days in jail (1st offense DUI never got jail time in my jurisdiction, but swearing/threatening cops in the court will).

This might of been the end of the story, but a few years later, I was on duty driving down one of our multi-lane roads when I noticed a car ahead driving really badly: swerving, lane straddling, speeding up and slowing down. I made a traffic stop on the car, and when I approached, I immediately recognized the guy as the same guy from the snowy night. Again he seemed drunk, so I got him out, put him through field sobriety tests, then arrested him for 2nd offense drunk driving. This time, he was very reserved and apologetic. While I was waiting for the tow truck with him in my back seat, he said to me, "I don't blame you for doing you job officer, I was drunk driving. But let me tell you about these other cops that were complete liars..." He then goes on to tell me the story about how he was "wronged" by two lying cops who said he was driving on a snowy night when he wasn't, etc. He didn't realize he was telling the guy that knew the truth of the matter.

Here's the thing: I bet you this guy had told this story dozens of times, to anyone that would listen. I think he told the story so many times, he personally believed it himself...probably would pass a lie detector test over it. I'm not saying cops are never wrong, and mistakes haven't been made, but I get tired of these OWTs.

What’s the OWT? In many places, you can be charged with dui being drunk in a car even when not driving. It’s a bad idea to sleep off a drink in your car. No OWT.

 

[tawood]

What’s the OWT? In many places, you can be charged with dui being drunk in a car even when not driving. It’s a bad idea to sleep off a drink in your car. No OWT.

BS. The law is "Operating" or "Driving". Show me a law that says not driving or operating.

 

[tawood]

What’s the OWT? In many places, you can be charged with dui being drunk in a car even when not driving. It’s a bad idea to sleep off a drink in your car. No OWT.

I once got a conviction on a guy that was asleep in his car at a red light, foot on the brake, car running in drive. In that case, he wasn't driving, but we could show he was "operating", because how else could he have gotten into that condition?
Your attitude only reflects how engrained this OWT is.

 

[flyingron]

What constitutes "driving" varies from state to state. In NC, it just means in physical control of the vehicle. So, in the backseat, you're probably safe. In the drivers seat, makes it risky. The engine running is, even more, a dead giveaway.

Amusingly, unlike some other states, in NC vehicle doesn't include a horse. Other animals are not exempted

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Babes really go for a guy with a mouthful of chaw...

 

[Tarheelpilot]

BS. The law is "Operating" or "Driving". Show me a law that says not driving or operating.

Where I worked if you are sitting in the car, impaired and have keys you meet the elements. No need to be observed driving. If you don’t have keys you’re good. That said I personally never charged unless I observed operation and effected a traffic stop.

 

[Rushie]

I once got a conviction on a guy that was asleep in his car at a red light, foot on the brake, car running in drive. In that case, he wasn't driving, but we could show he was "operating", because how else could he have gotten into that condition?
Your attitude only reflects how engrained this OWT is.

Stupid question. What does OWT stand for? All I can find is OWI (operating while intoxicated).

 

[tawood]

Stupid question. What does OWT stand for? All I can find is OWI (operating while intoxicated).

OWT=Old wives' tales

 

[flyingron]

Your attitude only reflects how engrained this OWT is.

This is right up there with the people who believe the cop is required to answer truthfully when you ask them "Are you a cop?"

Or that if they get home and out of the car, they are free from being charged with DUI.

 

[bflynn]

What constitutes "driving" varies from state to state. In NC, it just means in physical control of the vehicle. So, in the backseat, you're probably safe. In the drivers seat, makes it risky. The engine running is, even more, a dead giveaway.

Amusingly, unlike some other states, in NC vehicle doesn't include a horse. Other animals are not exempted

Unamusingly, in NC it does include things like riding lawnmowers and bicycles. Have a beer while cutting your grass and pull out to the street to turn around and you've committed a DUI. An inner tube is considered a "vessel". Do a beer float down the river and you're Boating While Impaired.

I know someone who was arrested for DUI because he was sleeping in his car rather than driving, he had put the keys in the trunk. The judge threw it out, but it would still be a reportable incident to the FAA.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

Unamusingly, in NC it does include things like riding lawnmowers and bicycles. An inner tube is considered a "vessel". Do a beer float down the river and you're Boating While Impaired.

I know someone who was arrested for DUI because he was sleeping in his car rather than driving, he had put the keys in the trunk. The judge threw it out, but it would still be a reportable incident to the FAA.

This right here is where I lose respect for law enforcement pretty quickly. One of the many reasons I left the racket. Of course not all are bad. In fact most are not but it doesn’t take many bad ones to make up for all the good ones.

 

[bflynn]

It isn't law enforcement, it's the guys in Raleigh that made the laws.

 

[kell490]

I personally know 2 friends who were charged with DUI who came out of a bar sat down on the drivers seat and laid down over towards the passenger side. Once in the bar parking lot, and 2nd guy was parked in street in front of a bar. Both never went to trial I don't know if they were plea deals or just plead guilty. Just because one officer chooses not to charge people for this doesn't mean other won't. Personally I just choose not to even be in a car when drinking because it's likely the folks I'm with are also drinking I don't want to end up dead easier to take a uber, or taxi.

My brother was charged with DUI riding a bicycle on bike trail though a park late at night.

 

[steingar]

Abuses are apocryphal, and stay with us. For every abuse I bet there are 100 folks that drove drunk over and over again before they were caught. I doubt few get caught their first time. I've turned in a very antisocial drinker; I will not drink if I go out unless I know I'm not going to drive. I worked hard to get my aviation privileges and I will not imperil them for ethanol.

 

[MaineMike100]

The FAA only cares about alcohol related incidents. Even if charges were dropped, never going to court, I would be in the same predicament. Again, one DUI under .15= ISSUE for AME. My .19 was false

Not one of you understands. Chewing Tobacco must be removed from the mouth 15 or more minutes before test. I tested with tobacco in my lip 1st time and 2 ND test was immediately after I spit I try out. Both tests were false. .19 with chew in, .16 moments after spitting it out.

I deserve to jump through the hoops related to my true bac...not the bac with Copenhagen containing ethyl alcohol adding to lung air reading.

To make this argument one must plead not guilty and fight it out in criminal court. If this could likely be a successful argument, I'm confident your attorney would have advised you as such and the post would not be here. You'll not find much sympathy from this group. Once you plead guilty, all these arguments are void in the eyes of FAA.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

It isn't law enforcement, it's the guys in Raleigh that made the laws.

It’s both and as a society we are holding neither one accountable. So truthfully it’s our fault.

 

[tawood]

Where I worked if you are sitting in the car, impaired and have keys you meet the elements. No need to be observed driving. If you don’t have keys you’re good. That said I personally never charged unless I observed operation and effected a traffic stop.

What state? (I'm still calling BS, but its your chance to prove me wrong).

I've read that between midnight and 6am, 1 out of 6 drivers on the road are intoxicated. My personal experience found it much higher than that actually. Finding drunk drivers is ridiculously easy...so easy that it is probably one of the easiest arrests to find (well, maybe suspended drivers are easier to find, especially on day shift, but OWI is still very easy even on days). On the other hand, a drunk driving arrest is TONS of paperwork, the drunks puke or pee in your car, ask the same questions over and over and over, they have lower inhibitions so they'll physically fight you on a whim, so its not an easy arrest to make...when an officer makes an OWI arrest, he knows he's about to kill some trees when it comes to paperwork, kill a few hours of his time, baby sit a drunk, and most likely clean his car/change his uniform afterward.

So lets see, we could claim that instead of actually arresting easy-to-find real drunk drivers, cops are out there making one BS OWI arrest after another all over the country, risking their careers and reputations with these lies...OR... maybe being arrested for OWI is so embarrassing, its much easier for people to tell their friends that the cops arrested them when they were sleeping in their cars with their keys in their trunks.

Again, not saying it has never happened, just saying that the VAST majority of these stories are complete BS

 

[bflynn]

What state? (I'm still calling BS, but its your chance to prove me wrong).

In many states - if you are in the drivers seat with the keys, you are considered to be in control of the vehicle and therefore operating, FL is one example and I believe NC as well. Some other states it’s considered attempt to DWI and is punished the same.

 

[Lachlan]

What state? (I'm still calling BS, but its your chance to prove me wrong).

Again, not saying it has never happened, just saying that the VAST majority of these stories are complete BS

https://www.fightduicharges.com/blog/getting-a-dui-while-parked/

https://dui.drivinglaws.org/resources/can-i-get-a-dui-for-sitting-in-a-parked-car-while-drunk.html

https://www.freeadvice.com/legal/ny...ay-apply-even-if-you-werent-actually-driving/

Lots of info out there if you’re sober enough to click Search on the ol’ Googoogly machine…

 

[Morgan3820]

In NC, I had a friend who had a daughter that got a DUI because she was sitting in the car in the passenger seat the cop knocked on the window so she turned on the ignition to lower the window and he charged her with DUI.. I agree that most cops are probably OK, the problem is you don’t know which is which, until after the fact.

 

[tawood]

https://www.fightduicharges.com/blog/getting-a-dui-while-parked/

https://dui.drivinglaws.org/resources/can-i-get-a-dui-for-sitting-in-a-parked-car-while-drunk.html

https://www.freeadvice.com/legal/ny...ay-apply-even-if-you-werent-actually-driving/

Lots of info out there if you’re sober enough to click Search on the ol’ Googoogly machine…

Did you actually read your sources? You do realize those sources say you have to be operating, right? As @flyingron said, there are different definitions of operating, but just being in a car isn't one of them.

 

[tawood]

In many states - if you are in the drivers seat with the keys, you are considered to be in control of the vehicle and therefore operating, FL is one example and I believe NC as well. Some other states it’s considered attempt to DWI and is punished the same.

...As well as just having keys...Florida definition of control was decided by case law, and (rightfully) is decided on a case by case basis, with limits such as found in Fielsman vs State: "evidence that the key was in the ignition does not inexorably lead to the conclusion that the defendant was in actual physical control of the vehicle." (Since you claim Florida is one state you can be arrested without operating or control)

 

[tawood]

In NC, I had a friend who had a daughter that got a DUI because she was sitting in the car in the passenger seat the cop knocked on the window so she turned on the ignition to lower the window and he charged her with DUI.. I agree that most cops are probably OK, the problem is you don’t know which is which, until after the fact.

NC is also decided by case law, but again, you have to be considered operating. I'm sure the cop did ask her to roll down her window from the passenger seat. If she was convicted, she also was proven (or pled to) also operating that vehicle at some point.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

What state? (I'm still calling BS, but its your chance to prove me wrong).

I've read that between midnight and 6am, 1 out of 6 drivers on the road are intoxicated. My personal experience found it much higher than that actually. Finding drunk drivers is ridiculously easy...so easy that it is probably one of the easiest arrests to find (well, maybe suspended drivers are easier to find, especially on day shift, but OWI is still very easy even on days). On the other hand, a drunk driving arrest is TONS of paperwork, the drunks puke or pee in your car, ask the same questions over and over and over, they have lower inhibitions so they'll physically fight you on a whim, so its not an easy arrest to make...when an officer makes an OWI arrest, he knows he's about to kill some trees when it comes to paperwork, kill a few hours of his time, baby sit a drunk, and most likely clean his car/change his uniform afterward.

So lets see, we could claim that instead of actually arresting easy-to-find real drunk drivers, cops are out there making one BS OWI arrest after another all over the country, risking their careers and reputations with these lies...OR... maybe being arrested for OWI is so embarrassing, its much easier for people to tell their friends that the cops arrested them when they were sleeping in their cars with their keys in their trunks.

Again, not saying it has never happened, just saying that the VAST majority of these stories are complete BS

So you think I’m a liar. And you expect me to prove you wrong.

I didn’t insult you or question your integrity. Thanks for showing your true colors.

 

[Lachlan]

Did you actually read your sources? You do realize those sources say you have to be operating, right? As @flyingron said, there are different definitions of operating, but just being in a car isn't one of them.

So you’re saying it doesn’t happen? No one has ever been arrested for DUI or DAI, DWAI, etc, for sitting in their car drink?

Please provide me with the legal definition of “operating” a motor vehicle. Try to include as many states as possible.

I’ll be the first guy to admit being happy to find out I’m wrong. I don’t care much either way, I just want proof that you can’t be arrested for DUI for simply sitting in your car, drunk.

 

[tawood]

So you’re saying it doesn’t happen? No one has ever been arrested for DUI or DAI, DWAI, etc, for sitting in their car drink?

Please provide me with the legal definition of “operating” a motor vehicle. Try to include as many states as possible.

I’ll be the first guy to admit being happy to find out I’m wrong. I don’t care much either way, I just want proof that you can’t be arrested for DUI for simply sitting in your car, drunk.

You clearly either lack reading comprehension, or didn’t read my posts.


Either way, I see no point in responding further.

 

[bflynn]

Since you claim Florida is one state you can be arrested without operating or control

you are changing my statement.

First, you can be ARRESTED for a lot of things. I never said you can’t be arrested without control. I said you could be in control of the car without operating it.

The legal concept here is “actual physical control” and is most certainly part of the law in FL. In FL law it is defined as the imminent ability to operate the vehicle.

 

[Half Fast]

Florida statute:

316.193 Driving under the influence; penalties.—
(1) A person is guilty of the offense of driving under the influence and is subject to punishment as provided in subsection (2) if the person is driving or in actual physical control of a vehicle within this state and:
(a) The person is under the influence of alcoholic beverages, any chemical substance set forth in s. 877.111, or any substance.....


Driving is not necessary.

 

[Lachlan]

Did you actually read your sources? You do realize those sources say you have to be operating, right? As @flyingron said, there are different definitions of operating, but just being in a car isn't one of them.

No, "just being in a car" is not necessarily the only definition of operating a motor vehicle. If you're the only occupant, though, and you have the keys, whether you're sitting in the passenger seat, driver's spot, et cetera, doesn't matter in several states. See quoted statute in Post #110, for an example. It's not always a myth or an OWT.

You clearly either lack reading comprehension, or didn’t read my posts.

Either way, I see no point in responding further.

Oh, I'm wounded. Man down. Just don't arrest me for being sleepy, Officer Friendly. I'm just sitting here...