Slashdot Mirror
Live-Streaming Florida Woman Charged With Drunken Driving
HughPickens.com writes: Christine Hauser writes in the NY Times that police in Lakeland, Florida say 911 dispatchers started receiving calls Saturday from viewers who were watching a woman broadcasting herself while apparently driving drunk, using the live-streaming app Periscope. Despite the tip being generated in the virtual world, it took some traditional police sleuthing to find the woman and, ultimately, arrest and charge her. The woman first invited her viewers to follow her as she went bar-hopping in downtown Lakeland. During the live stream, Beall repeatedly said that she was drunk and appeared to be asking viewers for directions. She noticed that there were at least 57 people watching and asked, "So where am I right now, people?" One 911 caller said Beall was driving a Toyota in the north Lakeland area. "I just saw a girl on Periscope driving drunk. She doesn't know where she is and she's driving really fast," said the caller. As officers pulled Beall over, her 2015 Toyota Corolla, which already had a flat right front tire, rammed into a curb. Beall failed the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests and she refused the breathalyzer test.
Taking the optional Field Sobriety Test (FST) is never a good idea. Not doing the Breathalyzer test after being arrested in Florida is also not a good idea as it results in the automatic suspension of your license and your refusal to take the test can be used against you in court. In addition, it doesn't prevent the police from obtaining a warrant to draw your blood and determine your BAC.
Take neither test.
If you're in doubt about what to do, please remember the police are not administering these exams to help prove your innocence.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Since online approval via "likes" or equivalent seems to be the basis of self-worth for so many, how many more crimes are going to be live streamed?
"Sure, I got eighteen months but I got 10,000 likes!"
you're giving legal advice to people who drive drunk
1. they obviously aren't the best decision makers, even before drinking, so you might as well be giving advice to farm animals on taking a calculus test
2. to all drunk driving irresponsible assholes: fuck you. the legal in and outs of the exact procedure to establish your level of inebriation is secondary. the primary topic is the police should do whatever they need to to take away your driving privileges, as they should be taken away. oh you need to drive to your job? you drove drunk you stupid asshole, you have proven to society you don't deserve to drive. take the bus you irresponsible douchebag
i know: how about don't drive drunk?
there are no lame ass whiny entitled excuses or explanations that apply. don't drive drunk, no exceptions
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I have no rebuttal. You're spot on.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
failing a BAC because of a medical condition is not driving drunk, you moron. you don't win an argument by changing the topic
the most frequent defiler of your freedoms and liberties is not cartoon authoritarian jackboots working for big government. it's the irresponsible douchebags you run into in your life who will take your property, your health, your life. simply because they think freedom means freedom from responsibility. in fact, there is no such thing as freedom without responsibility
and those who often do the most damage to the notion of freedom are not your cartoon notions of statist authoritarians, but social retards like yourself who think freedom means there is no such thing as consequences for *you* defiling the freedoms of those who have to live near you, share the roadway with you, work with you. you damage the notion of freedom by showing there are morons out there who don't even know what freedom is. and when you defile the freedom of others, do you know what society does? it limits your freedom, up to and including prison. as it should. to preserve the freedom of those of us who actually know what freedom fucking is: "i can do whatever i want, as long as i don't hurt anyone else"
you can't increase freedom in society when you allow people who are so egregiously stupid or malicious, that they constantly limiting the freedom of others they encounter with their behavior. freedom is not destroyed just by government. it is also destroyed by the irresponsible and the malicious and the social retards, which is the category you seem to fit into: people who don't have a grasp of what freedom actually means. it does not mean freedom from consequences and responsibility, and never did, and never will
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Here is part of your own quote of Florida Law:
... if the person is lawfully arrested for any offense allegedly committed... The chemical or physical breath test must be incidental to a lawful arrest
That means "after you are arrested" with, you know, probable cause and stuff. Here is the Intoxilyzer 8000 that is used by the Florida Department Of Law Enforcement (a.k.a state police): http://www.alcoholtest.com/int...
Here is their web page on their alcohol testing program:
http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Co...
I don't know, Bob, that looks like a big machine to me. Although it does have what looks like a handle, I'll give you that. But it is not a breathalyzer. A breathalyzer is not used in BAC tests. A breathalyzer is not a "breath test instrument" as referred to in 316.1932 (1)(a)2. You should also read 316.1932 (1)(f)1. If you refuse to blow into a breathalyzer on the side of the road, you are not "refusing to submit to a BAC test".
Actually a LOT of this depends on the state you live in. I spoke to an atty friend of mine here and he said basically if you get pulled over and are a bit tanked, don't say a word, don't do any field tests....just hold your hands out because you are going to be arrested.
He said all the field tests are doing, is collecting evidence against you, so you don't want to give them any help. Don't do any tests till you can get an atty. present....if nothing else this will give your body more time to process the alcohol so that if you do have to get blood drawn, it will be less.
But know the laws of your state, if you refuse tests most will suspend your license, but still, that's better than a DWI....and get a good lawyer, they help. You can often get special permission to drive on suspended license for work, groceries, etc.....so, life will go on for you.
With the alcohol laws SO drastic today..the BAC level is now a low 0.08 in most states, as a grown man just having a couple glasses of wine with a meal out can get your dangerously close to the legal level, when in reality you are just fine to drive.
But being pulled over for DWI is like being pulled over for ANY infraction, the police are NOT there to help you, and you need to know your rights and stick by them and not give them any evidence to charge or prosecute you, which IS their job.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I often wonder if social media is just making people more stupid....
Or if social media just brings the people that are stupid more out of the woodwork for the rest of us to see.
Why would anyone FB, Tweet, Periscope or whatever ANY activity that might potentially get you jailed?
We see gang members with FB pages of stolen goods, drugs and cash online. This chick live streams a drunk drive home (not to mention many shots of her early drinking heavily with a timecode attached to it)...I mean, why do people gather so much evidence against themselves and just hand it to the police?
Are we just getting dumber as a country?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
With the alcohol laws SO drastic today..the BAC level is now a low 0.08 in most states, as a grown man just having a couple glasses of wine with a meal out can get your dangerously close to the legal level,
True
when in reality you are just fine to drive.
False
The objective data is way against you. You might be OK to drive, you're probably moderately impaired. Now, you can argue that being tired, taking benadryl, being distracted or texting / whatever is just as bad and you are correct. But two wrongs don't make a right.
Society is trying to tell you that alcohol and automobiles are not a good mix. If you want two glasses of wine at dinner, fine. Either don't drive or wait several hours for the alcohol to clear off. Yes, it might change your lifestyle. Sorry. So did seatbelts.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
the answer is "Or if social media just brings the people that are stupid more out of the woodwork for the rest of us to see."
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
Alcohol has an effect on reflexes from about 0.02. Some even say your judgement starts getting impaired at this level.
Alcohol starts to affect reasoning at 0.04, every study picks it up at this level at the latest.
So fuck you if you think you have no problem doing the most dangerous activity of your day with the highest statistical chance of killing a third party by accident with a 0.08 level.
Or you could just skip the fucking wine if you're going to be driving.
Is sobriety that much of a burden for just one night?