I have a question for all the LEO's out there:
If you were on the scene of an accident like this (but NOT involving a Police officer), and it was deemed necessary to have a blood alcohol test taken. Isn't there a list of approved locations to have this test taken at? Seems to me that if a civilian were to be in this same situation, that this test (the same one given to officer Basard) would hold up in court, as the officers on sight evidently "should" know proper procedure. Why else would an officer, thought to have killed an innocent civilian, be taken to an "unapproved" facility for testing? Having said that, I think I read somewhere that it was the person administering the test that was in question, but again, if a civilian went through the same exact series of events, I would bet hard earned cash that the results would differ, and the test would stand up as admissable in court. Am I wrong on this?
I have known too many officers in my life to fall to the easy way of condemning all LEO's as a**holes, and crooks. I have known some good ones, and a few bad ones. It happens. But when a bad one comes along and get's caught breaking the law, I think a public flaying is in order. It's that "higher standard" thing.
Police officers have a thankless job, and I for one appreciate what they (the good ones) do.
I live in the Indianapolis area, and I hope they loose the key when they send officer Bastard away.
Unfortunately, too many people are paying the price for his mistake. Not just the families of those involved, but also the local community at large. It will take a long time before trust can be restored in our local police force and governing agency, if at all.
IMO

 

I honestly believe, and I hope I'm right, that they just weren't thinking along the lines of a criminal DUI prosecution at that point. They were thinking administrative action. That's the only reason I can think of why they'd have taken him anywhere else.

 

Then I think cops need to work on their reputations huh. They are suppose to protect and serve. Not harass, kill, drive drunk on duty etc. Seems like our cops have turned into our government. Give them a bit of power and they lose control and become the thing they were trying to prevent others from becoming. Go to youtube and do a search for "bad cop" or "cops breaking the law" and watch some of the vids, if it doesn't **** you off nothing will.

 

Give me a break. I don't harass, kill and drive drunk, nor have I lost control. Of course a cop here and there will screw up...COPS ARE HUMAN. We weed out the bad ones as soon as we know they're bad.

 

Hi Ridin',

In California, there are slightly different protocols for different counties. However, the general guidelines are: 1) A breath test given by a certified officer, which most are shortly after graduating their Academy. 2) Blood sample taken at a hospital or by a certified phlebotomist service (using a particular vial with anti-coagulant/preservative), which comes to your location. Many hospitals don't like to do the blood draw, as their staff doesn't receive sufficient compensation for their court room testimony.

While I am not condemning nor condoning the actions of these officers (I don't have any factual information, as I wasn't there), another possibility for having the draw performed at an unapproved location may be the officer's lack of experience on the graveyard shift, when a great deal more DUI activity takes place. He/she MAY not have known/recalled the particular protocol. And yes, I am sure at one point they were advised of the protocol. However, like EVERYONE, we are subject to forgetting details, too. It is POSSIBLE the experienced staff and managers remained at the scene, leaving the blood draw to the junior guy. Of course, the flip side is they tried to bury or corrupt the evidence, in which case they should all be dealt with through the legal system or through a transparent internal investigation.

 

gunslinger,
Thanks for the reply. I can see how the details you described: ( may be the officer's lack of experience on the graveyard shift, when a great deal more DUI activity takes place. He/she MAY not have known/recalled the particular protocol. And yes, I am sure at one point they were advised of the protocol. However, like EVERYONE, we are subject to forgetting details, too), could happen. I too have been guilty of these details in my own business, when the tasks or particulars aren't used on a daily basis.
It will be interesting to see how this whole scenario is played out. I think it will raise interesting points of view in future cases in the civilian segment, as to protocall in DUI cases. As tragic as this whole situation is, I pray that something good will one day come from this.
Again, thanks for being candid with your reply.
Ride safe...

 

Really, seems like the one in question here is getting away with murder. Smells like one get off the hook to me. Doubt if I'd gotten the same luxury as he did. Way to weed them out.

 

Seriously? You know he's getting away with it already? He MIGHT be getting away with a DUI, he'll answer for the rest of it.

 

You have a problem with harassing and intimidating the kind of people I mentioned????? And I use the terms loosely. A better word/term might be "give lots of attention to". As in, I do so without breaking the law. I'll bet you wouldn't mind me "harassing/intimidating" these kind of people if they assaulted your daughter and stole your bike!

 

Another scenario could be the individual who gave the breath test (some places the jailers are certified) or drew the blood (lab tech) were not properly certified. Certifications lapse sometimes for whatever reason. In the case of a jailer giving the breath test. First, he would have to have been certified at some point to know how to do it. Maybe he changed departments, or quit for awhile then came back to work, and his certification lapsed without him/her realizing it. There may not be anything underhanded going on here at all. Of course it's a juicy story and everybody likes to jump to conclusions.