HawthorneVillager.com

Truck driver crashes into bridge
Police arrive and administer a breathalyser which says driver was impaired
Judge throws out the evidence because (get this) the test was taken too late after the crash and apparently police no longer allowed to request a test
I mean cmon... if he stood around for 3 hours after crash and still was impaired how drunk was he at time of accident?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/ ... -1.3490223

_________________
There is no reasoning with Tru-Anon people, it really is cult-like

That happened a while ago. I'm more shocked at the integrity of that bridge.
Bridges have collapsed in the past with no help, and along comes a constructobot trying to transform while passing through and just a dent. I can just hear Optimus Prime " AUTOBOTS ROLL OUT".......... Hey where's dumpy?

_________________
What kind of world are we gonna leave behind for Betty white and Keith Richards?

You should send a letter to the police so they can remind officers of the laws pertaining to obtaining breath samples during suspected impaired driving situations.

_________________

Discounting his obvious intoxication is allowing a procedural technicality to trump logic and justice. He had alcohol in his cooler!

Ridiculous, but sounds like he'll escape responsibility.

Another way to look at it is the police didn't do their job correctly and the basic rights of Canadian citizens are being upheld. It seems silly though doesn't it?

He still crashed in to the bridge and faces other charges.

_________________

You can't really blame the police for not administering the breathalyzer right away. Their main concern was the insane amount of traffic that was generated from this and clearing the bridge as they didn't know whether it would collapse or not.
You, me and everyone knows the guy was drunk. I think it was a special set of circumstances and that he should have been charged driving under the influence. If he had gotten away, then arrested later, then no he shouldn't be charged with under the influence. He could just say he was stressed and just started drinking. But since he was in the back of the cruiser the whole time, he should be charged. I seriously doubt he was chugging beers in the back seat of the cruiser.

Who decided that there was a 3 hour time frame to do a breath test ?? That's just some arbitrary random time limit that should and could be changed.

_________________
For Home Inspection services call Andy Shaw at Halton Home Inspection Service. 905 876 4761

I know, right? It seems crazy! Thing is, I seriously doubt you or I have the qualifications and knowledge of the incident to overrule the judge.

Sometimes guilty people go free. That's the system we have, and it's set up to err on the side of caution. While unlikely, you might appreciate this some day.

Self driving vehicles will fix all this soon.

_________________

They were discussing this on 1010 the other day and actually you can blame them because there was an officer sitting with him in the cruiser "babysitting him" the whole time and it didn't occur to him to test him until after the period of time had expired....

Can you imagine, just sitting there shitting yourself, wondering when this cop in the seat in front of you is going to make you take a breathalyzer, hours pass, but then, he just doesn't ask?

Jackpot!!

_________________

The blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the OPP. They know the laws and the timeframe involved, and they for whatever reason did not administer the test. It is not an "arbitrary" time limit, it is based on case law and years of jurisprudence.

Personally, I expect better from someone who makes 100k a year. Because of their failure, this guy will walk

I have a great quote from a friend of mine who is a Federal Judge is the USA who has sentenced many people to death and to life sentences.
" The reality of the law and the process of a trial in a court room is not about who is telling the truth and who is lying its the defending of the accused rights according to the law "

In other words doesn't matter who is right or wrong, we cant present everything that is will prove guilt or innocence all we really do is protect your rights as seen under the law.
TOTAL BULL!!!! In my opinion.

You know where they didn't do those things? Witch trials. We should totally go back to that style of proving guilt.

"Cut his throat! Kill the pig! Bash him in!"

_________________

The whole idea of a fair trial, and a set of rules is to balance the enormous power of the state, and at least allow a lowly citizen a possibility of fairness.

In this case, an agent of the state, screwed up. He simply did not do his job, and likely will not receive any sanction what so ever.