Alcohol & Drugs: DUI, DWI Shady DUI arrest

[slowluv]

I was stopped after an officer observed me drive out of the parking lot of a bar. As I made the ever popular Michigan U turn placing me approximately 3 cars in front of the officer, i noticed that he seemed fixed on me. I made a right turn onto the road that I was to take home and as I was about an 8th of a mile up the rd, the officer turned onto the same road taking the same path that I had taken.

The officers report claims that he was conductiong "stationary traffic" when he clocked my speed on radar at 52 in a 25 zone.

The result was a DUI and a loss of my job. I don't blame them for the loss of my job BUT if this illegal stop had not taken place, I'm sure that I'd still be employeed.

What does the law state about civilians getting a copy of any dash cam footage available?

 

[CdwJava]

As I made the ever popular Michigan U turn placing me approximately 3 cars in front of the officer,

Is this "ever popular" type of turn unlawful? if so, it is no surprise that he started paying close attention to you.

The result was a DUI and a loss of my job. I don't blame them for the loss of my job BUT if this illegal stop had not taken place, I'm sure that I'd still be employeed.

So, you are claiming that at no time did you ever do approximately 50 MPH? You can certainly raise that defense at trial. But, depending on how inebriated you were, your recollection of events might be considered to be a tad questionable.

What WAS your BAC?

What does the law state about civilians getting a copy of any dash cam footage available?

The law says that your attorney can get all the evidence through discovery prior to trial. IF there is a dash cam, it may not have your violation on it because it may not have been running when you sped past him ... or sped away from him ... or whatever the allegation is.

Ask your attorney, he should know how to get this info if it exists.

- Carl

 

[raskalnikov]

Michigan U turn is illegal. And 52 in a 25 zone is a misdemeanor of reckless driving in and of itself.

When I studied it a few years ago, the State is not required to give you cam footage. Some police still don't have their cars equipped with it. It's one of the many reasons why in Michigan one needs to get an attorney immediately to secure all evidence that may be helpful.

 

[CdwJava]

In discovery, the state will have to provide all its evidence. Most states do not require agencies to provide evidence to the suspect, but they should be required to divulge it as part of discovery if it is to be used at trial or can be exculpatory.

- Carl

 

[raskalnikov]

Right, but in Michigan if they see no need in using the footage, they can dump it. The State is only required to keep it as evidence for a fairly short period of time.

 

[CdwJava]

Right, but in Michigan if they see no need in using the footage, they can dump it. The State is only required to keep it as evidence for a fairly short period of time.

Wow! I see all sorts of claims of malfeasance in that one! I'm not saying you're wrong, but it runs contrary to issues involving the turning over of potentially exculpatory evidence, and I can see defense attorneys making a LOT of legal hay over a quick destruction. Out here, we'd get eaten alive!

That's why few agencies have much video out here - the space to digitally store, or PHYSICALLY store, is often expensive and cost prohibitive.

I can't imagine they can just dump it quickly ... I suspect there are laws concerning public records that this might fall under, not to mention the fact that a jury might find it suspicious if an agency admits that they quickly destroyed video footage.

- Carl

 

[raskalnikov]

I know Cdw, and agree with you. Sometimes there's a difference between fair law and new technology.

 

[slowluv]

Thanks everyone but.....

Thanks for your responses guys. The u-turn is on a divided roadway. It's the only way to get from east to west and vise versa.

There was no speeding or speeding past him.

The part that is most disturbing is that he claimed to have shot me with a stationary radar but at no time was he stationary. The question that i have is does this county's patrol units have the ability to clock a vehicle while the squad is moving. If it does not then the officer is lying and it will be easier to prove that he simply picked on me because I drove out of a bar parking lot.

Is this "ever popular" type of turn unlawful? if so, it is no surprise that he started paying close attention to you.


So, you are claiming that at no time did you ever do approximately 50 MPH? You can certainly raise that defense at trial. But, depending on how inebriated you were, your recollection of events might be considered to be a tad questionable.

What WAS your BAC?


The law says that your attorney can get all the evidence through discovery prior to trial. IF there is a dash cam, it may not have your violation on it because it may not have been running when you sped past him ... or sped away from him ... or whatever the allegation is.

Ask your attorney, he should know how to get this info if it exists.

- Carl

 

[CdwJava]

Thanks for your responses guys. The u-turn is on a divided roadway. It's the only way to get from east to west and vise versa.

Yes, but is the U-Turn illegal?

There was no speeding or speeding past him.

And apparently the officer will say otherwise.

The part that is most disturbing is that he claimed to have shot me with a stationary radar but at no time was he stationary.

No time that you saw.

The question that i have is does this county's patrol units have the ability to clock a vehicle while the squad is moving.

Probably - if the device is set to do so ... and, of course, depending on the type of the radar they have.

If it does not then the officer is lying and it will be easier to prove that he simply picked on me because I drove out of a bar parking lot.

It might add some reasonable doubt ... but, if the state can show that you were seriously impaired, then your recollection of events may be a tad fuzzy. Hence, the reason I asked what your BAC was. Any DUI expert with his salt will get on the stand and quote studies that show that among the first things to go is judgment.

- Carl

 

[raskalnikov]

Yah, michigan U-turn is illegal. Just like a "california stop."

 

[slowluv]

Come on, this is MI.

Wow! I see all sorts of claims of malfeasance in that one! I'm not saying you're wrong, but it runs contrary to issues involving the turning over of potentially exculpatory evidence, and I can see defense attorneys making a LOT of legal hay over a quick destruction. Out here, we'd get eaten alive!

That's why few agencies have much video out here - the space to digitally store, or PHYSICALLY store, is often expensive and cost prohibitive.

I can't imagine they can just dump it quickly ... I suspect there are laws concerning public records that this might fall under, not to mention the fact that a jury might find it suspicious if an agency admits that they quickly destroyed video footage.

- Carl

Hey, this is MI, home of the state where juas three months ago, A speeding Detroit police officer went through a major intersection without his lights and sirens and collided with another car. Because it happened on the boarder, the Redford MI police responded. The detroit police officers were caught on tape by the Redford Squads, modifying the video in the offending squad. The story broke when, after the detroit police officer claimed that his lights and sirens were on, the victim was issued a few citations. He contacted thenews for help.

These officers tried to dump their responsibility for this accident onto an innocent civilian. They were repermanded.

Now that's sad. They should have been given 6 months in jail.