Salt Lake City DUI Lawyer & Attorney : Glen Neeley : Serving Davis County, Ogden, Brigham City, Logan

I have had several cases in Farmington, Utah, where the officer will draw blood from the arrested person rather than take him or her to get a breath test.  Is this really a good idea?  I mean, police drawing blood on the side of the road doesn't seem sanitary.   The police are there collecting evidence.  The police are not there to ensure the health and safety of the person arrested.  I'm not sticking my arm out and allowing a trooper stick me with a needle.  The Arizona police have the same type of practice.  Here's a story with some problems they are having with officers drawing the blood.

Tucson Region
Blood draws by officers in DUI stops questioned
Man files claim vs. county saying deputy infected arm
By Erica Meltzer
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 10.14.2007
"They have succeeded in getting blood evidence tossed out of court and charges against their clients dismissed based on the fact that it was a law enforcement officer, not medical personnel, who took the sample.
Now the man who believes an officer-administered blood draw caused his persistent infection has filed a claim against Pima County and the Pima County Sheriff's Department. A claim is the first step in a lawsuit.
"I think most of the public does not realize that law enforcement personnel are doing the draws," said Michael Bloom, an attorney in the case.
He said the practice raises several concerns, including that "the officer is not there in a medical capacity, he is there in a law enforcement capacity. He is not there to safeguard the health and safety of the suspect." "

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Here is an interesting article about the prohibition of drinking.  Some points that I find interesting are:

1. The person who started MADD feels that the organization has gotten way out of hand and no longer supports the organization.
2. MADD is pushing for complete prohibition of any alcohol.
3. Lowering the legal limit has not lowered DUIs as predicted.
4. Ignition interlock devices are not working.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

The Utah police agencies used to do "administrative checkpoints" to pull people over for no reason and then check them for alcohol.  The problem is that that charges can be challenged because there are so many rules the police must follow to make them constitutional.  So the police answer this by doing Saturation Patrols.  The highlights of this technique are as follows:

• Citizens get pulled over for a claimed legal, but usually minor reason.  (i.e. burned out license plate light, failure to signal for 2-3 seconds before turning, not coming to a complete stop, or if nothing else works, tell the driver the officer's computer shows the car is not insured when it actually does).
• The police usually get several agencies involved like the Utah Highway Patrol, Salt Lake City Police Department, and the Salt Lake County Sheriff's office.
• The patrol occurs heavily around the time the bars are in full force and the patrol occurs around these bars.

774 PEOPLE PULLED OVER!  If an officer wants to pull you over, I'm sure the officer can find a reason.  What a waste of taxpayer money in an effort to effect the witch hunt.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Utah has one of the most stringent alcohol limits in the country.  Not long ago, the alcohol breath/blood limit was .10.  Pressure from sources that advocate against drinking caused most, if not all, states to reduce the limit to a .08.  Just a couple of years ago, Utah legislators wrote in certain criteria where a person cannot have alcohol in  their system that is .05 or above.  This involves a second offense and having children in the car.  The question is when will it go lower, "not if."  Here is an article where Britain is looking at this very issue.

Drink drive limit to be reduced
By David Millward, Transport Correspondent
Last Updated: 12:56am BST 17/06/2007

Bypass surgery may cause drink problem
The drink drive limit could be cut under plans being considered by the Government.

Stephen Ladyman, the roads minister, said that the Department for Transport would produce proposals for consultation later in the year.

advertisementThe Government first hinted that it was ready to reduce the limit - probably from UK is 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood to 50 in February.

Ministers have come under mounting pressure to do so from road safety groups and also the British Medical Association to act.

Earlier this year several police forces voiced alarm that the "do not drink and drive" message was not getting through, especially to young motorists.

The Department for Transport’s own figures showed that there were 1,050 17-19 year olds involved in drink drive accidents in 2005, compared to 810 a decade ago.

Yesterday a pan-European study showed that drink driving was the cause of an increasing proportion of fatalities on the country’s roads.

Motoring groups believe the Government could act if it is convinced that its strategy of strict enforcement of existing limits was no longer working.

Last night a DfT spokesman said: “As part of our latest road safety review in February we said we would keep under review the case for a lower drink drive limit.

“The UK already has stringent penalties for drink driving, and better enforcement than many countries, but that doesn’t mean we can’t do better.

“We have said many times that we plan to explore ways of making drink driving enforcement easier for police. This will take the form of a consultation later in the year - and until that is complete it is impossible to say what measures may or may not be taken forward.”

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks