Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

maccawings

Members
  • Posts

    142
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by maccawings

  1. Now some clarity to the Attorney Kassman that is quoted earlier.

    Despite the fact that you can be found guilty with a BAC under .08%, it is a very rare event. So I would say in my experience that his comment about never getting a conviction is accurate. As I stated earlier, alcohol does not mix well with numerous prescribed drugs and of course the Alcotest does not measure the existence or amount of any narcotics/ prescribed drugs in your system.

    If the officer’s observations did not line up with the reading that was achieved. They should have taken him to the hospital and had blood drawn. It would have been the only way to prove that he was impaired after the low BAC reading and that there was more at play than just alcohol.

    judging by what’s out so far, I would say a conviction would be a heavy lift. Doesn’t make the officer wrong, but I’d love to see any body cam footage of the incident

     

    • Like 1
  2. 1 hour ago, Jason1978 said:

    My big question is...why did this take 3 months to leak? Celebs are arrested all the time for being drunk. The media, sites like TMZ instantly report on it. So how in the hell did Bruce fly under the radar for 3 months? Bruce arrested in NJ in November but we find out about it in February? Come on! Now we have new reports saying he took 2 shots, had an empty bottle. This is said to be from the police report. No mention of fans any more. So Bruce on his motorcycle went to the park and got wasted? Just doesn't seem Bruce like. Of course I don't know Bruce but still something doesn't seem right.

    It really sounds like a cop arrested him for no reason, tried to cover his ass and he clearly was in the wrong here and they tried to keep this under wraps. Now it has leaked with different accounts. Also...where is the mugshot? Again celeb mugshots get out pretty damn fast. I just never have heard of ANY celebrity arrested and it took 3 months for that arrest to be made public

    Ok, let me take a stab at this one. When a local, county or state officer makes an arrest, they generally disseminate that information to local papers by either press releases or a department approved information for the police blotter. Arrests, reports and general info

    However, I am not sure that the Federal Agencies do the same. The APP which is the main Monmouth/Ocean County papers, I have never seen a Sandy Hook blotter in that paper. And I used to read the police blotters quite regularly. So if the Federal Park Rangers do release that information, I have no clue where that would be.

    I would lean towards them either not announcing them or only announcing them periodically ( maybe in this case months). Local PD’s generally are in the paper between 1 to 3 weeks

    • Like 1
  3. I’m going to take an educated guess from the different reports. While not versed on procedure of Federal Park Rangers. 
     

    Since he has not been charged with Refusal to my knowledge, it appears to me that he refused a PBT on scene. Those PBT readings are used towards probable cause to arrest and usually added info to the standard field sobriety tests. You are not mandated by law to take the PBT.

    It would make sense that he was arrested on scene and then brought into the PD and was asked again to submit to breath samples which is mandatory by law.  If the .02% reading is true, it’s from these tests that the reading comes from

    I think the confusion here, is any reading on the PBT is not your official BAC level in court and is mainly used towards officer’s probable cause to arrest. Not taking it left the officer one less tool in the tool box leaving him to make his decision on observations and balance tests.

    Your official BAC is taken inside the PD, most likely taken on the Drager Alcotest . This is where Bruce probably complied with the officer and submitted samples of his breath and where the .02% BAC reading is being quoted from

     

     

     

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  4. 1 minute ago, Flagofpiracy said:

    Lots of conflicting reports coming out, and I don't see Bruce refusing to take a breathalyzer test.  Also, if he was offered a drink by people taking pics with him, why were those people not arrested for consuming alcohol in a closed area.  Bruce is not popular with cops, cops love to go after big fish, brag they bagged a big one.  Until he goes to court, we won't know the facts.  
    https://www.tmz.com/2021/02/11/bruce-springsteen-blood-alcohol-dwi-arrest-below-legal-limit-nj/

    It is very common for people to refuse breath tests. I’d say a good 30-35% of the time

    • Like 1
  5. 1 minute ago, Jertucky said:

    Just searched around and found an article from the Asbury Park Press from earlier this afternoon. It says he did refuse a breathalyzer. It won’t link for some reason, but it’s out there. 

     

     

    The article from zzcoolness has the refusal in it but then states that samples given later were measured at .02% but not how long after the arrest

  6. 5 minutes ago, zzcoolness said:

    Yeah see, the story continues to morph. This is the first mention I’ve seen of a refusal.  If he did refuse, than the .02% is most likely false

    if you look at this article, it says he was viewed taking the last swig of a tequila bottle, not just a shot

  7. 2 minutes ago, Jertucky said:

    Wouldn’t that fit with Bruce getting a DWI but the claim being that his BAC came out at .02? If he refused it he would be assumed to have failed, regardless of what a breathalyzer may have said later?

    No, refusal to submit to breath samples is a stand alone and additional charge. Which means if the judge found you guilty for DWI, you would receive a 6 month loss of license and could receive an additional 6 month loss for the refusal conviction. According to the articles that I have seen, there is no mention of a refusal

    • Like 2
  8. 26 minutes ago, Jertucky said:

    You are also not required to take a breathalyzer, are you? I’m thinking the .02 will have more to do with when it was taken than with his actual level at  the time he was stopped.

    Yes, you are required by law to submit to breath samples. Refusal to do so is an automatic 6 month suspension of license.

    Generally it is 40 minutes or more between the traffic stop and the taking of breath samples 

  9. 2 hours ago, JudgeBrown said:

    I just saw this, and am wondering if you know if it is accurate?  It lists 3 possible scenarios for being DUI.  That first one seems pretty vague, in that it seems to leave that to being a judgment call of the arresting officer. 

     

    The National Park Service defines the commission of a DUI offense as a driver:

    Who is rendered incapable of safely operating a vehicle

    With a BAC of .08 percent or greater, or

    With a BAC that is greater than the limit established by state law, if the state’s DUI limit is more stringent.

    Well, certain medicines have warnings on the labels not to mix with alcohol. But when folks ignore those warnings, they can technically be impaired without actually being over the legal limit.

    Not really strictly a judgement call, as sobriety tests (balance tests) are always given to help the officer judge a person’s capacity to operate a motor vehicle. Within those balance tests are simple mental acuity tests as well

    The 2nd part is strictly .08% or higher

    And the 3rd option would be if arrested in a State where the legal limit is below .08%. In that State they would charge at that State’s lower rate

     

    • Thanks 1
  10. 5 minutes ago, rockaway88 said:

    This is just so sad. What are the chances this would come out days after the Jeep ad?

    My guess would be that because Sandy Hook is a National Park, they do not disseminate arrests to the local papers as the local and county police do.

    And I guess it came out now due to his court appearance scheduled in federal court in Newark

     

     

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...