Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Dinner with the “One Trick DUI lawyer” Warren Redlich
I recently had the opportunity to host the Fair DUI Lawyer, Warren Redlich, featured in several media outlets. He takes the idea of not incriminating yourself to a different level.
The conversation was very revealing. There have been cases of people being charged despite having a 0.0 alcohol reading on the breathalyzer machine, according to Mr. Redlich. The trouble, according to him, is that DUI laws assume a person is guilty until proven innocent; and in a lot of cases, the innocent end up paying the price. A breathalyzer has a margin of error of 15% – that would be considered ridiculous in any other type of crime/scientific purpose, but the public opinion on DUI is so strong that we allow innocents to be prosecuted in the name of safety.
Apparently, having consumed Wonder bread, and no alcohol, can create a positive reading on a breathalyzer test. So imagine of you have a slice of bread with a glass of wine. A conviction under the DUI laws can be damning. And in many cases, the people being charged have no idea how to get out of the mess.
One of his points is this: if the point is to reduce drunk driving, then the more efficient way would be to offer free rides to drunk drivers, not create DUI checkpoints.
A recent video featuring his technique has gone viral; and as of this post has had more than 2.5 million hits.
My own view of all DUI laws are that they are “pre-crime” laws – a la Minority Report. In other words, laws created to “prevent crime” are on morally dubious grounds. Punishment should be for committing a crime, not for creating a possibility of committing a crime. Mr. Redlich did not dismiss my point of view.
In any case, it is good to see some new perspective and some push back on the encroachment of our freedoms. Especially when there is a distinct possibility of the innocent getting incriminated.
What are your thoughts?
Published in General
This is kinda the NSA attitude – if you don’t have anything to hide, why worry about the wiretap?
As I mentioned in some of my comments, in Florida there has been not one incident where a person was brought to the precinct and was NOT charged, irrespective of the breathalyzer reading.
Warren seems to be doing fine with defending the innocent as a career. If you think lobbying for changes in laws are a noble cause, I think you should pursue them.
Personally, I think, if everyone in FL drives up to a DUI checkpoint with a flyer, the likelihood of having more check point goes down not up.
If everyone in Fl drives up to a checkpoint with a flyer, the FL state legislature would probably make it illegal to NOT roll down your window at a checkpoint, and likely with public support.
Ryan – I believe the punishment can be in the process. I recounted the story of good friends (I was waiting for one to return with dinner, drove the other to the police station)
He was involved in a car accident that was not his fault. The cop breathalyzed him, he blew .03. Cop arrested him because he decided he was impaired, and his wife (an attorney) had to bail him out. Cost of $2,000 +.
And the judge threw it out.
No DUI on his record, but a large out of pocket, which would have been a lot more had his spouse not been a lawyer.
If cops are going to enforce 0.0, what’s the point of having a legal limit?