[Newsbot]

Title: Review ordered into drunk driving fine of Margaret MacDonald who couldn't provide breath sample | News | National Post
Category: Law & Order
Posted By: RUEZ
Date: 2012-01-12 14:02:50
Canadian

[uwish]

how does it feel to be punished without due process. As a firearms owner we are subject to this kind of BS simply for owning a firearm. Maybe a story like this will start to make people think about how laws infringe on their rights when they have done nothing wrong.

Firearms owners have been yelling about this since C-68 was introduced 15 years ago! NO DUE PROCESS yet treated criminally.

[Brenda]

WTF Uwish??

[uwish]

unjust laws with little to no recourse that violate the constitution. Probable cause, and the presumption of innocence are the corner stones of our judicial system. The new laws in BC regarding drunk driving leave people like this women victims of a cop who with no probable cause attempted to force this women to take a breathalyzer.

The legal parallels are more than obvious.

[RUEZ]

It's sad that the only thing this woman did wrong was being older and recovering from a sickness. Take note everyone that thinks overzealous clamp down are for the betterment of society.

[herbie]

I always thought the law was for REFUSING to blow the damn thing, not for punishing those physically unable to to the same degree as someone impaired.
What a crock!
Shirley Bond says she's looking into this.
She better.

I understand. An underage kid stole my truck and got caught driving it on the rez impaired. As the owner of the stolen vehicle, it cost me $1100.00 in impound fees and I hoofed it to work for a month while the Stupid Attendant Of Motor Vehicles denied the appeals.

[Prof_Chomsky]

Frankly this isn't so much a problem with the justice system as it is with our police.
Police are endowed with the ability to ascertain the situation on the spot and apply the law accordingly. The justice system then allows for an appeal. It's just a HORRIBLE state of affairs when these high school drop outs on a power trip decide to nail an 85 year old and make her go through the trouble of going to court. Then police wonder why most everyone has went from loving the sight of a cop 30 years ago to despising them today...

[2Cdo]

Prof_Chomsky Prof_Chomsky:

It's just a HORRIBLE state of affairs when these high school drop outs on a power trip decide to nail an 85 year old and make her go through the trouble of going to court.

Surely you have some evidence of police forces hiring high school drop outs?

$1:

Then police wonder why most everyone has went from loving the sight of a cop 30 years ago to despising them today...

Just morons like yourself who despise the police.

BTW I am not condoning the polices actions but the truly fucked up person in this story is M. Labell.

[andyt]

I don't know. I want her tested to see what her lung capacity really is. If she can't blow enough for the meter, how can she breathe enough to live? The cops had every reason to stop her. It sounds like they went a bit overboard after that.

The problem is with the law as passed, as the Supreme court has ruled. Insufficient ability to appeal.

[Scape]

Police have professional judgement. This sounds like someone was trying to pad their stats and didn't think she would put up a stink. This won't stand up in court.

[andyt]

She's in limbo tho, because the court has knocked down the law. Also she's already out 6k.

I think the cops got tunnel vision. An off duty cop reported she was driving erratically, so they were certain she must be drunk and just trying to avoid the test.

Ah, the good old days when I could talk my way out of a DUI just by keeping my act together while talking to the cop. And that bottle of booze, ocifer, that was left there by some of the people who I gave a ride home to.

[Brenda]

Funny thing tho, that no one thought she, at age 82, may just had a stroke or some other medical issue. Nope, she MUST have been drunk.

I'm sorry, but I am disgusted.

[RUEZ]

To be fair here, although I believe the police did the wrong thing at first they did try to correct their mistake. Now it's a Superintendant of Motor Vehicles adjudicator who upheld her three months suspension and fine. He also ordered her to pay for an interlock device to be installed in her car, despite the fact that a subsequent blood test that night proved she was sober. It started with overzealous policing and continued with a beaurocratic bully.

[Brenda]

RUEZ RUEZ:

To be fair here, although I believe the police did the wrong thing at first they did try to correct their mistake. Now it's a Superintendant of Motor Vehicles adjudicator who upheld her three months suspension and fine. He also ordered her to pay for an interlock device to be installed in her car, despite the fact that a subsequent blood test that night proved she was sober. It started with overzealous policing and continued with a beaurocratic bully.

Agreed.

[Benn]

Brenda Brenda:

Funny thing tho, that no one thought she, at age 82, may just had a stroke or some other medical issue. Nope, she MUST have been drunk.

I'm sorry, but I am disgusted.

Hard to say since the only reason given for the officers request for a breath test was he thought she was not driving well. Normally has to be more than that or the cops would be breath testing a hell of a lot of drivers.

Besides, stopping her and going through all this while off duty? Ugh, I'd just want to get home after work not spend the whole night working for free pressing a breath test on an 80 year old. Maybe she cut him off and he blew a gasket.