Kalbear Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime L Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, Kalbear said: Drunk, stupid and a Pats fan is no way to go through life, son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 15 minutes ago, Jaime L said: Drunk, stupid and a Pats fan is no way to go through life, son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.H. Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 "I'm drunk, I'm stupid, I'm a Pats fan," said the man, [But I repeat myself?] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 10 minutes ago, .H. said: "I'm drunk, I'm stupid, I'm a Pats fan," said the man, [But I repeat myself?] #NotAllPatsFansButDefinitelyTheMajorityOfUs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonSnow4President Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 And the dude pleads not guilty. Jackass needs to own up to his drunk shenanigans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 On an aside, I hope they throw the book at this guy. They need to give jail time. A fine isn't going to cut it, as this guy will set up a gofundme and get 8 times the fine in the first day. And this kind of shitty behavior will just keep happening. I'm sure disorderly conduct has a maximum sentence of 3 months in jail or something like that, so actually give it to him to make sure the next drunk, stupid Pats fan doesn't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockroi Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 57 minutes ago, Kalbear said: For the record... I look NOTHING like that guy (But I have ABSOLUTELY been in that courtroom). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzanna Stormborn Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I'm sorry...... can you get off on charges by saying 'I'm Drunk so I'm innocent' Would that work on a DUI charge? 'Officer I was too drunk to know I was too drunk to drive, so that cancels the whole thing out right? If I had been sober it never would have happened, ipso facto I'm innocent' fucking Patriots fans.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 6 minutes ago, sperry said: On an aside, I hope they throw the book at this guy. They need to give jail time. A fine isn't going to cut it, as this guy will set up a gofundme and get 8 times the fine in the first day. And this kind of shitty behavior will just keep happening. I'm sure disorderly conduct has a maximum sentence of 3 months in jail or something like that, so actually give it to him to make sure the next drunk, stupid Pats fan doesn't do it. Tax dollars at work! Consider all the times that this has happened over the last 50 years. WE ARE DOOMED TO ONE OR TWO MORE IF WE DON'T INCARCERATE THIS JAMOKE. What will our society stand for then? /clutches pearls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockroi Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, Suzanna Stormborn said: I'm sorry...... can you get off on charges by saying 'I'm Drunk so I'm innocent' Would that work on a DUI charge? 'Officer I was too drunk to know I was too drunk to drive, so that cancels the whole thing out right? If I had been sober it never would have happened, ipso facto I'm innocent' fucking Patriots fans.... So, this is beyond the scope of this topic but: In Massachusetts the plea of 'Not Guilty' is automatically entered for you at the arraignment. I have been practicing for sixteen years and for that entire time I cannot recall a Defendant say in court "Guilty" or "Not Guilty" at the arraignment. Now his lawyer then responded that the statement the guy made could be inadmissible because of alcohol. So, it goes something like this: its NOT an element of the crime to be drunk to pull a fire alarm, BUT you can have a statement thrown out because the Defendant could not appreciate his rights etc while drunk. BUT ... this does not make him innocent of the crime; it is just a tactic to MAYBE get his STATEMENT thrown out. (It likely won't work because you can be drunk AND understand things) With drunk driving statements rarely work out because UNLIKE pulling a fire alarm, BEING DRUNK IS an element of drunk driving. So if a Defendant is pulled over and says "Yeah, I've been drinking all night long ..." its really hard to then try to get that statement thrown out of court under the guise that he was so drunk... because being drunk is an essential element of the crime. Thus arrely comes up EXCEPT when you see a Defendant who signs a statement that reads (paraphrasing) "I agree to take this Breathalyzer and I agree that its results were taken from me." I have had this issue come up where clients have actually asked me, "But is my signature binding? I mean, I was drunk when I signed that...." Its basically impossible to get out from under that and its always let in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockroi Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 4 minutes ago, Week said: Tax dollars at work! Consider all the times that this has happened over the last 50 years. WE ARE DOOMED TO ONE OR TWO MORE IF WE DON'T INCARCERATE THIS JAMOKE. What will our society stand for then? /clutches pearls Yeah, I agree. I assume he does not have a record so if he did something stupid he should get probation and community service etc. We all make mistakes; they should not result in railroading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Just now, Rockroi said: Yeah, I agree. I assume he does not have a record so if he did something stupid he should get probation and community service etc. We all make mistakes; they should not result in railroading. https://imgflip.com/i/1i7sxe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Jaime L said: Drunk, stupid and a Pats fan is no way to go through life, son. Being a sober, stupid Pats fan has worked out okay for me so far, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockroi Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 He looks like Casey Aflek's character from that SNL Dunkin's commercial... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonSnow4President Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 32 minutes ago, Suzanna Stormborn said: I'm sorry...... can you get off on charges by saying 'I'm Drunk so I'm innocent' Would that work on a DUI charge? 'Officer I was too drunk to know I was too drunk to drive, so that cancels the whole thing out right? If I had been sober it never would have happened, ipso facto I'm innocent' fucking Patriots fans.... So, I'm an accountant, not a lawyer, but in one of my law classes in college, I remember the professor using this as a kind of WTF kind of example. (It's been 6 or 7 years, so I apologize if I miss anything). The facts were a guy left his car at home, went out and got black out drunk. However, he was responsible, and arranged to get himself home safely (and did). However, while black out drunk, he takes his car out and gets pulled over and is given a DUI. However, in court, he is able to argue that he had no intent to commit the crime, and since he actually did make arrangments to not drive, the prosecutor was unable to prove the general intent required and the guy got off. Obviously, it's non specific, I have no idea what jurisdiction this was supposed to be, and I'm not entirely sure if it was intended to be a "what if" example or an actual example of something that had happened. If I remember correctly (and there's a big chance I'm not), it was brought up during the lessons including Mens Rea defenses. I know we have lawyers here, so I'm sure I"m about to find out exactly how bullshit that is, but take it for what it's worth. A several year old memory from an accounting student taking an undergrad law class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 38 minutes ago, Rockroi said: Yeah, I agree. I assume he does not have a record so if he did something stupid he should get probation and community service etc. We all make mistakes; they should not result in railroading. How is a penalty contemplated by the statute railroading? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime L Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 11 minutes ago, Rockroi said: He looks like Casey Aflek's character from that SNL Dunkin's commercial... Yes which is why it's too bad Mark Wahlberg is definitely getting cast as him in the inevitable Peter Berg movie made on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 54 minutes ago, JonSnow4President said: So, I'm an accountant, not a lawyer, but in one of my law classes in college, I remember the professor using this as a kind of WTF kind of example. (It's been 6 or 7 years, so I apologize if I miss anything). The facts were a guy left his car at home, went out and got black out drunk. However, he was responsible, and arranged to get himself home safely (and did). However, while black out drunk, he takes his car out and gets pulled over and is given a DUI. However, in court, he is able to argue that he had no intent to commit the crime, and since he actually did make arrangments to not drive, the prosecutor was unable to prove the general intent required and the guy got off. Obviously, it's non specific, I have no idea what jurisdiction this was supposed to be, and I'm not entirely sure if it was intended to be a "what if" example or an actual example of something that had happened. If I remember correctly (and there's a big chance I'm not), it was brought up during the lessons including Mens Rea defenses. I know we have lawyers here, so I'm sure I"m about to find out exactly how bullshit that is, but take it for what it's worth. A several year old memory from an accounting student taking an undergrad law class. DUI statutes tend to not require intent. Involuntary intoxication (i.e. you were drugged, or had an adverse reaction to prescribed medication) tends to be an affirmative defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrl6199 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 21 minutes ago, sperry said: DUI statutes tend to not require intent. Involuntary intoxication (i.e. you were drugged, or had an adverse reaction to prescribed medication) tends to be an affirmative defense. Makes sense. I mean you dint really tend to intend to drive under the influence criminally you just need to get somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.