Question for LEO on DUI.

[yzErnie]

A couple posts ago I suggetested there is no legal way to convict a person of being under the influence of marijuana without a coroborating statement from the user. I continue to wonder, with the tremendous amount of marijuana floating around, how convictions (DUI) are achieved without an admission of guilt?

Alright - plain English. If a guy refuses to confess or consent to a seach and refuses a pee test - how can you convict? Please shoot straight and admit that you use your skills and wear down subjects until they confess.

I'm not judging law enforcement for that tactic. I use whatever tactic necessary to do my job. But lets put it out in the open, okay? If tactics and methods are hidden or only amongst other personal it suggests.... It suggests cops are counting on a subject to confess after enough pressure.

A confession only maximizes your suspicions and evidence presented to you by the suspect. If I were to make an arrest for DUI I would already have my facts detailed and would not need to have a confession...very similar to an alcohol DUI arrest.

I will not articulate the steps that lead me to my conclusion to you ar anyone else in a public forum. There are some things about how we do our job that simply need to remain unstated. Nothing personal.

[Uhhlexxxis]

Ahh I claim the 5th on this one... too much to tell, but too many secrets to be had. There's tests and ways to find out the truth. just good investigation skills lead you in the right direction..

It's pretty obvious.

/end

[retired]

My question does California LE have an court accepted test available for determining DUI of Pot. I am concerned a bunch of new people driving DUI and no way to easily arrest them like those that have been drinking.

This is the topic at hand, not whether or not pot should be legalized, drug offenders are taking up valuable space in jails, police resources are being wasted or taxpayers' money is being drained.

If you wish to speak to those subjects, please begin a thread in the OT forum. As a matter of fact, there is one there now on marijuana.

Also, accusing one of our active leo members here of making an ignorant statement is considered an attack on the leo and per the rules, not permitted. Please do not do it again.

Since the OP has come to the leo forum, it is obvious he is asking this question of the leos here, so there is no reason for any non-leo to try and do so.

If a non leo has a question they want to ask that is related to the OP's question and does not cover the any of the subjects that should be in the OT forum as mentioned above, please do so civilly as stated in the rules.

[ArtP88]

I will not articulate the steps that lead me to my conclusion to you ar anyone else in a public forum. There are some things about how we do our job that simply need to remain unstated. Nothing personal.

No response would be better than an elusive response. Just when I was beginning to feel comfortble talking to the police again, you say something like that.

Quite honestly the question wasn't about your conclusion, unless someone is mildly stoned I'm sure you're pretty accurate. My question was about how a conviction is obtained, possibly from a jury, without a confession. I take it you're somehow gathering evidence or getting a confession in a shady way that you don't want the public to know about. NICE!

The problem you're creating isn't about me and how I interact with law enforcement, which is rare to never. You're tainting the jury pool, the next time I serve.

You have attacked one officer here by accusing him of making an ignorant statement. In this post you are attacking another one by calling his methods shady. I would strongly suggest you either read or review the rules about personal attacks against leos on this site. It might save you from a temporary or permanent vacation from this specialty forum.

[ArtP88]

Again, I'm not sure where you're going with this secret tactic talk.

I will not articulate the steps that lead me to my conclusion to you ar anyone else in a public forum. There are some things about how we do our job that simply need to remain unstated. Nothing personal.

Is it more clear now? What I meant about secret tactics?

[Californio]

Thank You Retired,

My thread was addressed to LEO's not anyone else. I wanted to know if California had an accepted "Field Sobriety Test for Pot" like the field breath test for alcohol, the answers seem to say No.

Before I vote, I wanted to understand what is in the DUI tool kit for Pot.

I thank the Officers for their responses.


Those who think DUI Pot is harmless, ask this Officer who was a Triathlete.


The man responsible for killing one, and leaving CHP Officer Pediferri a paraplegic is sentenced to 15 years.

A Paso Robles man learns his fate for killing a man and severely injuring a California Highway Patrol officer on Highway 101 in Ventura.

Jeremy White was sentenced to 15 years in prison. He pled guilty in July to vehicular manslaughter, DUI and transporting marijuana.

White was high on ecstasy and marijuana last December when he drove his car into CHP Officer Tony Pedeferri, who had pulled over Phoenix resident Andreas Parra.

Parra was killed in the crash.

[SVT-40]

My question was about how a conviction is obtained, possibly from a jury, without a confession. I take it you're somehow gathering evidence or getting a confession in a shady way that you don't want the public to know about. NICE!

The problem you're creating isn't about me and how I interact with law enforcement, which is rare to never. You're tainting the jury pool, the next time I serve.

The bottom line is LEO's don't "obtain convictions" period when it comes to court they are just witnesses.

Like any other case where there is no confession the jury listens to testimony from the officers as well as others involved in the case. The jury gets to decide based on the testimony and the jury instructions given by the judge whether to convict or not.

The officers through their training and experience obtain a level of expertise where they are allowed to state an opinion as to the defendants sobriety. Based on this expertise they are able to state an opinion as to what drugs, alcohol or both the defendant consumed as well as the defendants level of intoxication. Nothing shady at all.

All drugs will cause a level of intoxication. Persons using drugs or alcohol who display these symptoms are relatively easy to spot. Officers get real good at recognizing the objective symptoms of both drug and alcohol intoxication.

Expertise is built on repetition LEO's see literally hundreds of persons under the influence of drugs and alcohol each week.

How is anyone "tainting the jury pool"?

It sounds to me like you have already tainted yourself by your own statements.

[ArtP88]

I am confident LE is right on, the majority of the time they suspect someone under the influence. I have never questioned the accuracy of their personal suspicion. My curiosity lies only in proving it for a conviction.

You quoted me somewhat out of context without including what I was addressing, which was the other officers comments that he wouldn't disclose how a suspicion forms into a conviction. It's certainly his right to not disclose, I'm only saying that sort of hidden tactic lends to a distrust of law enforcement and won't mean squat, until I'm asked to serve on a jury. If that happens you might say that I started to develop a bias.

[Samuelx]

Alright - plain English. If a guy refuses to confess or consent to a seach and refuses a pee test - how can you convict? Please shoot straight and admit that you use your skills and wear down subjects until they confess.

I call BS on "started to develop a bias"... I'm pretty sure you've BEEN "biased" for some time now...

[Uhhlexxxis]

Thank You Retired,

My thread was addressed to LEO's not anyone else. I wanted to know if California had an accepted "Field Sobriety Test for Pot" like the field breath test for alcohol, the answers seem to say No.

Before I vote, I wanted to understand what is in the DUI tool kit for Pot.

I thank the Officers for their responses.


Those who think DUI Pot is harmless, ask this Officer who was a Triathlete.


The man responsible for killing one, and leaving CHP Officer Pediferri a paraplegic is sentenced to 15 years.

A Paso Robles man learns his fate for killing a man and severely injuring a California Highway Patrol officer on Highway 101 in Ventura.

Jeremy White was sentenced to 15 years in prison. He pled guilty in July to vehicular manslaughter, DUI and transporting marijuana.

White was high on ecstasy and marijuana last December when he drove his car into CHP Officer Tony Pedeferri, who had pulled over Phoenix resident Andreas Parra.

Parra was killed in the crash.

we have DREs, Drug Recognition Experts.. that's all you need to know. they do some/all of the NHTSA FSTs (field sobriety tests) plus additional ones that may determine the influence of controlled substances (other than alcohol).. yup...

Marijuana wears off quickly, but stays in the body for a bit.. Pretty quick to get them to a DRE so we can enjoy all the effects.

LOL @ Pot kit.. that made me laugh. if it were only that easy.

[IrishJoe3]

Alright - plain English. If a guy refuses to confess or consent to a seach and refuses a pee test - how can you convict? Please shoot straight and admit that you use your skills and wear down subjects until they confess.
.

I use thumb screws to get a confession...works every time!

[ArtP88]

I call BS on "started to develop a bias"... I'm pretty sure you've BEEN "biased" for some time now...

Good call. I'll be the first to admit that I have been suspicious of law enforcement for some time. It's not BS though. We all may not agree, but I'm honest about everything I write and you can count on that honesty to admit when I'm wrong or be persuaded to change opinion if better information is brought to my attention.

I can't take credit for what I'm about to write, someone else wrote it, but I find it very fitting. Just as most people are good, but cops have to watch out for their own safety because of a few bad apples; most cops are good but citizens much watch out for the few bad cops out there. Either side need spend just a little bit of time to discover which type is being delt with. I think it's prudent that both sides approach the other with caution. Understanding this philosophy - I know you do - how can you fault a guy for being careful and suspicous?

[yzErnie]

Is it more clear now? What I meant about secret tactics?

There's nothing secret about what we do. I (we) simply don't discuss how I (we)prove the cases against someone on a public forum. If that philosophy is against your beliefs, so be it.

Your demeaning the integrity and your comments of "secret tactics" directed towards LEOs only make me and others laugh.

[ArtP88]

There's nothing secret about what we do. I (we) simply don't discuss how I (we)prove the cases against someone on a public forum. If that philosophy is against your beliefs, so be it.

Your demeaning the integrity and your comments of "secret tactics" directed towards LEOs only make me and others laugh.

We can agree to disagree then. I don't have a philosophy about it (which is how the question came to be in the first place - curiosity) and fully respect your decision to keep it secret. Anytime something remains hidden it suggests it's something shady -or- if word gets out that there is a "trick" to the investigation it might compromise future investigations. IT's similar, if not the same, to an earlier post where several LEO stated subjects being evasive or playing word games only brews more suspicion.

I've got nothing against you personally and I'm sure the majority of the work you do, if not more, is good honest police work that makes a difference in the community you serve. But trust me, I'm not the only guy looking at what you wrote with suspicion. So you and the other officers can laugh and a good bunch of us can view you with suspicion, but you can't put the genie back in the bottle, especially while continuing to laugh at me.

There's a common conception floating around that some cops operate above the law, your language and demeanor only fuel more suspicion. It seems your only defense is to attempt to turn my comments into something laughable.

[Spanky8601]

Thank You Retired,

My thread was addressed to LEO's not anyone else. I wanted to know if California had an accepted "Field Sobriety Test for Pot" like the field breath test for alcohol, the answers seem to say No.

Before I vote, I wanted to understand what is in the DUI tool kit for Pot.

I thank the Officers for their responses.


Those who think DUI Pot is harmless, ask this Officer who was a Triathlete.


The man responsible for killing one, and leaving CHP Officer Pediferri a paraplegic is sentenced to 15 years.

A Paso Robles man learns his fate for killing a man and severely injuring a California Highway Patrol officer on Highway 101 in Ventura.

Jeremy White was sentenced to 15 years in prison. He pled guilty in July to vehicular manslaughter, DUI and transporting marijuana.

White was high on ecstasy and marijuana last December when he drove his car into CHP Officer Tony Pedeferri, who had pulled over Phoenix resident Andreas Parra.

Parra was killed in the crash.

Just to add just a little to this particular case. White was evaluated by 2 CHP Drug Recognition Experts. They used a battery of tests to make a determination of his intoxication. White's level of intoxication, from the blood test was extremely high.

While currently there is no presumptive level for intoxication for drugs, like the .08 for alcohol, observations of the suspect and the driving pattern are necessary for the DA to obtain convictions.

Law Enforcement uses a series of physical tests, coupled with observations such as blood pressure, pulse, and eye observations to help make determinations of a suspect being Under the Influence.

Regardless of your opinion on the legal/illegal personal use of drugs, drugs and driving are a formula for accidents. Someone under the influence of drugs (high) is just as dangerous as someone (high) under the influence of alcohol. Ask yourself, why drugs are used? To get high? When high do you really think you are a better driver. I doubt it.