Drunk Driving Defense

Drunk Driving Defense

Back in 1971, Melvin Baker offered a novel defense for why he shouldn’t have been charged with drunk driving. He was, he said, too drunk to have made an intelligent decision about whether to submit to the breathalyzer test — the results of which led to him being charged. He apparently argued this case all the way up to the New York Supreme Court.

Santa Rosa Press Democrat – July 7, 1971

Details about this case are hard to come by, but this other brief article offers an explanation for why Baker persisted with his seemingly hopeless argument. Because if he had refused to take the test, he would only have had his license suspended. But having taken the test, and failed it, he also faced criminal prosecution. So it was all an elaborate, legalistic ploy to get the lighter penalty.

Long Beach Independent – Sep 7, 1971

Source link

Leave a comment

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Breitbart
Coindesk
Daily Beast
Defence
Defense
Gateway Pundit
Itamil Radar
Middle East Monitor
NASA Space Flight
Natural News
News
NewsWars
NPR
Politico
Popular Resistance
RT
Sputnik
Veterans Today
Weird Universe
Zerohedge
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!