2006-06-13 02:14:51 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
You shouldn't have to convince them of anything. A random breath test station is in violation of the forth amendment to the Constitution of theses United States in that they had no probable cause to conduct a search of you are your person, and a breathalyzer test is a search of your person. Years ago some states conducted similar stops under the pretense of checking to see if the people they stopped had a valid drivers license. These were ruled unconstitutional. I am all in favor of law and order, but the constitution is either the ultimate law of the land or we are in big trouble.
2006-06-13 03:35:40 · answer #1 · answered by Den_Rode_Bjornen_Losener 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Your question lacks a lot of additional facts. Vomiting alone will not get you arrested for DUI. It may attract attention from the police. If your breath (or your vomit) smells like booze, that is a pretty good clue. A breath test with alcohol in your system doesn't come from food poisoning, either.
Your question sound like you're fishing for an excuse to use in court for a DUI.
2006-06-13 16:10:53 · answer #2 · answered by gunsandammoatwork 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Real simple question so here's your real simple answer: IF, & I emphasize the word 'IF', you had food poisoning & had just vomited all over yourself prior to being pulled over at a roadside sobriety checkpoint, you are well within your rights to request & expect to receive immediate medical attention, which, in that sort of scenario would require the summoning of emergency medical personnel. By doing so, you would not only be exercising your right to expect the police, who are supposed to not only serve & protect but to assume the preponderence of innocent until proven guilty, to assit you as the endangered motorist that you'd like us to believe you were but would also be more concerned about your own health & well-being than whether or not you were under the influence of alcohol. Are we clear now or d'ya need a shot & a beer to understand what I'm laying down for ya here?
2006-06-13 09:56:23 · answer #3 · answered by brmick1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Did you take a breath test? If so did you pass it? If not, did they want to give you a blood alcohol test? Did you refuse to take one or if you took one, did you fail it or pass it? Those are things I believe a Police Officer should have wanted you to do if he thought you were vomiting because of alcohol and you stated you weren't that it was food poisoning.
2006-06-18 21:37:58 · answer #4 · answered by yankeechik 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It wouldn't make any difference. When you do a breath test it measures the alcohol that's already in your system (not just in your stomach) so vomiting wouldn't affect the breath test anyway. So it doesn't matter whether you vomitted from being drunk or having food poisoning, or forced gag reflex.
2006-06-13 09:20:04 · answer #5 · answered by butireallyam_nikkijd 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You get a good lawyer.
I was involved with someone that was busted for DUI, but couldn't take the breath test. That would normally be an automatic DUI but a good lawyer got her off cuz the weaving during the 'walking the line' and 'stand on one foot' test was due to surgery on her foot a few days before. Of course the cops ignored her statement about that.
A good lawyer and lying like hell may get you off.
2006-06-13 09:26:06 · answer #6 · answered by Imaginer 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it was a breath test station, wouldn't they have given you a breathalizer? If not, they have no proof, so there is nothing to convict you with. Vomitting does not equal drunk and no court of law would uphold that.
2006-06-13 10:28:43 · answer #7 · answered by Goose&Tonic 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You don't, and of course it does not matter what the police beleive or don't beleive, it is what a judge beleives when you get to court.
Also vomiting is not really one thing or another, if you failed to take or failed to pass a breath test, that is the evidence.
2006-06-13 09:56:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Right, all they have to do is look at your 360 home page and see the Pabst Blue Ribbon tag to know you didn't have food poisoning. Besides, its not the cops you have to convince, it's the judge now....
2006-06-13 11:31:11 · answer #9 · answered by aitutaki98 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You should have asked to be breath tested. I don't think they would have turned you down if they thought you were drunk, if they did then you could say "They knew I wasn't drunk because otherwise they would have obligued". When you came up negative it would prove one important fact: The cause of vomiting wasn't from alcohol.
2006-06-20 07:48:55 · answer #10 · answered by Bad bus driving wolf 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋