Former anchor Amanda Davis found not guilty of DUI

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by neil0311

Not that I really care about what happens to her, but when you refuse to take a test under the implied consent law, your license is suspended for a year administratively. It's then much more difficult to get a conviction when you don't have the evidence that she was intoxicated, hence the reason why counties like Gwinnett get a warrant and forcibly take blood.

The implied consent loophole has allowed many people to be found "not guilty" or for charges to be dropped. If you have a good lawyer and didn't say anything or do anything stupid like take the non-required field sobriety tests such as walking lines, saying the alphabet, following a pen with your eyes, you will typically get acquitted of DUI. It doesn't mean she wasn't drunk, just that a conviction wasn't possible.

I would be okay with the law saying that if you refuse to take the test it is presumed that you are DUI.

That closes the loophole for drunks to wriggle off the hook, while still giving innocent folks the opportunity to stand their ground.

Of course nobody should be stopped in the first place unless there is reasonable cause.

[Caleb Longstreet]

Originally Posted by LynnHarris

Former anchor Amanda Davis found not guilty of DUI | www.ajc.com

Wow, only took a year or so.....and then, 20 hours community service and a $200 fine....in Atlanta??? In Fulton???? Hmmmmmmmmmm........doesn't sound as "punitive" as the layman might endure, does it? I guess that elongated 1.4 years away from the citation can do a judge (and Amanda) good? If I recall, it wasn't her first foray into DUI.....albeit, many years later....

She was a good anchor, sorry she left but, aside from that something doesn't sound consistent with punishment, does it? Christ, you run a stop sign and you are probably looking at the same punishment...driving the wrong way, at night, on a busy thoroughfare in Atlanta???

Who had the broom to sweep this under?

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by Caleb Longstreet

Wow, only took a year or so.....and then, 20 hours community service and a $200 fine....in Atlanta??? In Fulton???? Hmmmmmmmmmm........doesn't sound as "punitive" as the layman might endure, does it? I guess that elongated 1.4 years away from the citation can do a judge (and Amanda) good? If I recall, it wasn't her first foray into DUI.....albeit, many years later....

She was a good anchor, sorry she left but, aside from that something doesn't sound consistent with punishment, does it? Christ, you run a stop sign and you are probably looking at the same punishment...driving the wrong way, at night, on a busy thoroughfare in Atlanta???

Who had the broom to sweep this under?

It doesn't seem like celebs get the same treatment meted out to the rest of us schmucks. One of my friends got a DUI last year and, unlike Davis, he did not crash into another car and was not driving on the wrong side of the road.

He got fined $1500, had to do 80 hours of community service (picking up trash on weekends), attend DUI school and go to AA for six months. It was his first offense and he was only .08, which is the legal limit.

His lawyer told him that was pretty standard.

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I would be okay with the law saying that if you refuse to take the test it is presumed that you are DUI.

That closes the loophole for drunks to wriggle off the hook, while still giving innocent folks the opportunity to stand their ground.

Of course nobody should be stopped in the first place unless there is reasonable cause.

Unfortunately, there would need to be a change in the law. And not sure that would stand up to scrutiny. The administrative penalty in lieu of criminal conviction was supposed to deter people.

What I think they need to do is increase the suspension to something very tough like 2 years, with hefty fees for reinstatement for the first time you refuse the test, and increase it for the second time to 5 years with a hefty fee for reinstatement, and revoke the license for a third time.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by neil0311

Unfortunately, there would need to be a change in the law. And not sure that would stand up to scrutiny. The administrative penalty in lieu of criminal conviction was supposed to deter people.

What I think they need to do is increase the suspension to something very tough like 2 years, with hefty fees for reinstatement for the first time you refuse the test, and increase it for the second time to 5 years with a hefty fee for reinstatement, and revoke the license for a third time.

Agreed, neil. Good suggestions.

[AcidSnake]

Miss Davis got the movie star hookup-treatment.

Didn't she drive the wrong way and cause a crash? And then don't get criminally prosecuted for causing a potentially life-threatening accident?

I'm amazed no one didn't catch this.

Oh, the wonders that is the power of the mainstream media.