Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

Updated Report: DWI and Reckless Driving Charges Dismissed - lack of evidence (p 34)


Recommended Posts

The DUI will be dismissed, obviously, unless there is compelling testimony from the Federal officer that made the arrest that Springsteen was visibly impaired, which would require the administration and subsequent failure of a field sobriety test.  Officers have a degree of discretion, given the very low BAC, I'm surprised there was an arrest.  I'm spit balling here but one possibility is that Springsteen made some unusual maneuver while operating his vehicle that attracted the attention of law enforcement.  An officer initiated the stop and observed an open container in the vehicle (an offense that can require a citation) which led to the BAC. Reckless driving is probably a lesser included offense and was added in the event that the DUI is kicked.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rizla said:

It's "presumed innocent until proven guilty".

That’s a good distinction. He either is guilty or innocent. But the legal presumption is that he is treated legally as innocent until/unless he is proven guilty.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Floom2 said:

The DUI will be dismissed, obviously, unless there is compelling testimony from the Federal officer that made the arrest that Springsteen was visibly impaired, which would require the administration and subsequent failure of a field sobriety test.  Officers have a degree of discretion, given the very low BAC, I'm surprised there was an arrest.  I'm spit balling here but one possibility is that Springsteen made some unusual maneuver while operating his vehicle that attracted the attention of law enforcement.  An officer initiated the stop and observed an open container in the vehicle (an offense that can require a citation) which led to the BAC. Reckless driving is probably a lesser included offense and was added in the event that the DUI is kicked.  

Im pretty sure he never had professional driving lessons when he was learning !

He might have all sorts of bad driving habits ingrained over the years 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the sake of Bruce I hope it’s proven it was an error on the officer. I just have a hard time believing some officer in the great state of NJ is going to arrest one of the best known homegrowns and not know what they are doing. He screws up, bye bye job. 
Am I wrong!? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thunder Roadie said:

So why was he arrested ? Surely you don’t get arrested in America walking out of a shop if you’ve got your receipt! 
 

 
 

I believe you're mistaken, it does happen and unfortunately more than we hear about it.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, zzcoolness said:

I believe you're mistaken, it does happen and unfortunately more than we hear about it.

Not just in America

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Rizla said:

It's "presumed innocent until proven guilty".

Presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

If this thread continues as long as the Archive Rumor thread, we could have a complete introduction to law text...

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Daisey Jeep said:

Im pretty sure he never had professional driving lessons when he was learning !

He might have all sorts of bad driving habits ingrained over the years 

Don't  we all.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From random legal info sites:

"On land controlled by the National Park Service, you can be convicted of a federal DUI if you are found to have driven on federal land with a blood-alcohol content (BAC) over the legal limit in your jurisdiction, or if you were under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs such that you were incapable of driving a vehicle safely.

This latter condition is a higher standard than most state laws have. You can be convicted of a federal DUI even if your chemical test indicated a blood-alcohol content below 0.08 (the legal limit in all states), if other evidence shows that you were too impaired to drive safely.

Furthermore, because you do not actually have to be driving, just in “actual physical control” of the vehicle, sleeping off your drunkenness alone in the backseat of your car can be grounds for a DUI.

For other federal DUIs, conviction requires a BAC over 0.08."

"National Park Service laws impose severe penalties for DUI. As a Class B misdemeanor, these penalties include:

Maximum of six months in jail
Maximum fine of $5000
Maximum probation of five years"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A fan on Sunday: "I can't believe Bruce made a Jeep commercial! That bastard!"

Same fan today: "I can't believe Jeep pulled down Bruce's ad over a .02 bac! Those bastards!"

 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Trang said:

Presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

If this thread continues as long as the Archive Rumor thread, we could have a complete introduction to law text...

 

Hey look I am taking an intro to law class, this could be an excellent place to see a real life example...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, now he’s got a real story to tell before "Open All Night (84)" :mellow:

 

Its really not cool but our mans never fucked up before - unless adultery counts (jk) - so, hopefully he won’t do it again but I’m not looking at him any differently because of this incident. Certainly, he would NEVER have gotten that commercial from "Jeep" had they known so I’m expecting a law suit pretty soon from them.

Too bad the local Police couldn’t figure something out more private for the old dude .... chances are, they like "Bon Jovi” :angry:

 

Drive safe Bruce ..... try smoking some good marijuana instead bro B)

 

 

Brad

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stangman39 said:

For the sake of Bruce I hope it’s proven it was an error on the officer. I just have a hard time believing some officer in the great state of NJ is going to arrest one of the best known homegrowns and not know what they are doing. He screws up, bye bye job. 
Am I wrong!? 

Probably "Bon Jovi" fans 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Trang said:

From random legal info sites:

You can be convicted of a federal DUI even if your chemical test indicated a blood-alcohol content below 0.08 (the legal limit in all states), if other evidence shows that you were too impaired to drive safely.

 

 

The 'other evidence' would be results of a failed field sobriety test or perhaps some observation of impairment by the officer.  I still think the DUI gets tossed, as does the reckless driving, and there will be a fine for the container.  

This is truly a minor offense.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, rockaway88 said:

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

Yep, the timing seems...interesting. <_<

2 hours ago, Daisey Jeep said:

What's going to suck is when this goes to court and he doesn't get convicted for DIY its not going to be headline news like it is now

Someone's got it in for him 

Exactly- you can't un-ring a bell, as they say. People won't hear the follow-up.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rough week for Bruce. His ad seems to have angered people on either side of the political divide. Now this.

While facts will come out eventually and maybe Bruce was guilty, the timing of something which happened in Nov seems strange. Also, I find it hard to believe that after having held out doing commercials since the 80's, Bruce would agree to do a commercial , that too for Jeep, with this in the background and knowing that it was a matter of time before the news would be out unless it was really nothing. Guess the .02 bit might be true. 

Maybe someone saw the Jeep ad and thought wtf how can this guy endorse a vehicle when he was arrested for DWI and leaked the news or maybe there is someone who was angered with Bruce's politics and leaked it despite knowing that there might be no credible case(assuming .02 is true)

Till facts emerge we have to give the benefit of doubt to both Bruce and the LE officer who was probably doing his job.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh geez, he's not a saint in the city you know.  What's everybody getting their shorts in a knot for.  I'll wait for all the facts when it goes to court.  Doesn't change a thing as far as I'm concerned, nobody's perfect.  It was equivalent to one drink, blood alcohol level 0.02, LOL.  I wouldn't call that anywhere near drunk.  Per the NYT "since the arrest occurred in a national park, federal prosecutors will pursue the case. The singer will make his first court appearance virtually later this month."

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/jeep-bruce-springsteen-super-bowl-ad-dwi-1126740/?fbclid=IwAR2A4CTt6tcbPf8W0QCEoSGCMhRM4IjGR9fIPCU4B7Hn8DF18I6O4Fmn5SU

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Flagofpiracy said:

Oh geez, he's not a saint in the city you know.  What's everybody getting their shorts in a knot for.  I'll wait for all the facts when it goes to court.  Doesn't change a thing as far as I'm concerned, nobody's perfect.  It was equivalent to one drink, blood alcohol level 0.02, LOL.  I wouldn't call that anywhere near drunk.  Per the NYT "since the arrest occurred in a national park, federal prosecutors will pursue the case. The singer will make his first court appearance virtually later this month."

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/jeep-bruce-springsteen-super-bowl-ad-dwi-1126740/?fbclid=IwAR2A4CTt6tcbPf8W0QCEoSGCMhRM4IjGR9fIPCU4B7Hn8DF18I6O4Fmn5SU

I agree. "Driving drunk" seems a bit overblown when you look at the actual blood alcohol level.

Maybe Bruce needed a shot after he heard that Taylor Swift is gonny be the next... just kidding.

He was caught breaking laws/rules and now he is gonna take on responsibility. But I'm not close being shocked or disappointed . It's not that he drank like crazy and jumped in the car with 0.2

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Flagofpiracy said:

Oh geez, he's not a saint in the city you know.  What's everybody getting their shorts in a knot for.  I'll wait for all the facts when it goes to court.  Doesn't change a thing as far as I'm concerned, nobody's perfect.  It was equivalent to one drink, blood alcohol level 0.02, LOL.  I wouldn't call that anywhere near drunk.  Per the NYT "since the arrest occurred in a national park, federal prosecutors will pursue the case. The singer will make his first court appearance virtually later this month."

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/jeep-bruce-springsteen-super-bowl-ad-dwi-1126740/?fbclid=IwAR2A4CTt6tcbPf8W0QCEoSGCMhRM4IjGR9fIPCU4B7Hn8DF18I6O4Fmn5SU

I give that article a 4 star review

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good news is np Bruce on the news

Never thought id say that .

Its all about air nz doing maintenance work for the Saudi military and huge news

Male PMs dont have to wear ties in parliament any more 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • JoanFontaine changed the title to Updated Report: DWI and Reckless Driving Charges Dismissed - lack of evidence (p 34)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...