[tag08]

I also don't think that it is "beyond ridiculous" that if someone is involved in an accident that is under the influence but is not at fault would be found legally responsible. Not saying that I think it's right, but it reminds me of the movie, Flight. I thought it was crazy that he had to go to prison for piloting the plane while under the influence, although he had prevented the majority of the passengers' deaths.

I've seen someone get arrested for DUI when they were making out with their girlfriend on the hood of their car. True story. I'm not saying it's right...just sayin'.

[tazz]

Originally Posted by lvoc

Yes..but the law appears to require that the prosecutor prove that negative. I suspect they mostly use the statement of the perpetrator.. So if the perp keeps his mouth shut?

Are we not using reasonable doubt here?

I suppose we can run into the lying cop here. "I asked if he had a prescription and he said no". Thus shifting the burden to the defense.

If your last sentence were true then the defendant could easily prove that he had a right to be in possession of the med if he had a prescription.

The defendant either has a prescription or he does not. Why would a jury have a "reasonable doubt" that the defendant had a prescription if he mounted no defense?

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by tazz

If your last sentence were true then the defendant could easily prove that he had a right to be in possession of the med if he had a prescription.

The defendant either has a prescription or he does not. Why would a jury have a "reasonable doubt" that the defendant had a prescription if he mounted no defense?

Actually the whole thing is pretty much absurd. What you have is a nest of laws that are probably unenforceable and that are mostly never enforced. They are used to extract pleas to lesser charges from defendants

I would for instance be willing to bet that I can find out of date drugs, including schedule 2 ones, in 80% of the occupied homes in Sun City Summerlin. So 80% of that community are committing felonies? I also think you will find it quite common to lend each other various pain drugs. .

You are also heavily revising the standards for a criminal prosecution. The defendant is not required to prove anything. I would think the defense attorney asking the investigator if he has checked all prescriptions written in the US, Canada and Mexico for one held by the defendant. I know that I routinely buy certain drugs in Canada and have done so in Mexico in years past.

.

[vtvette]

Originally Posted by tag08

I also don't think that it is "beyond ridiculous" that if someone is involved in an accident that is under the influence but is not at fault would be found legally responsible. Not saying that I think it's right, but it reminds me of the movie, Flight. I thought it was crazy that he had to go to prison for piloting the plane while under the influence, although he had prevented the majority of the passengers' deaths.

I've seen someone get arrested for DUI when they were making out with their girlfriend on the hood of their car. True story. I'm not saying it's right...just sayin'.

In Vermont if you are parked with the keys in the ignition (car not running) you can be arrested for DUI as keys in the ignition show control of the vehicle as well as intent. A quick Google search shows this is true of other states as well. Don't know about Nevada/Clark County though.

[Girlesq]

Originally Posted by vtvette

In Vermont if you are parked with the keys in the ignition (car not running) you can be arrested for DUI as keys in the ignition show control of the vehicle as well as intent. A quick Google search shows this is true of other states as well. Don't know about Nevada/Clark County though.

Yes-- in Nevada it is "driving and/or being in actual physical control of a motor vehicle"

[StaggerLee22]

Originally Posted by las vegas drunk

Ok, very misleading thread title.

Here are the facts:

1. She passed the breathalyzer meaning she was not intoxicated alcohol wise,

How is that a fact?
Maybe it was then...not now.
Miller is accused of having a blood-alcohol level more than twice the legal limit and a blood marijuana level more than five times the limit when the Hummer she was driving plowed into a Ford Escort a little before 7:30 a.m. March 23.