Breaking: Joey Porter arrested

[mjb21aztd]

So do you guys think he will be suspended like 3 games to start the year? or just fined real heavy, I am not sure on the nfl rules for dui etc. Thanks hopefully he doesn't face any jail time... but Arenas can get off for carrying a gun then i'm sure Porter can get a lot lesser penalty.

 

[cardsfanmd]

He will not be suspended at all by the league IMO. The Bidwills however could take a different stance on things.

 

[red desert]

Not misinterpreting it at all. That's the law out here. They tell you that all of the time here: MVD, defensive driving, driving school, etc.

I did mean to say there is a warrant involved....sorry....but you understood what I said

Understood. The fact is they cannot force you to take the test. They build in punishment if you don't, the legislature does in their passing of the Implied Consent, but they cannot FORCE YOU to actually take the test.

 

[Buckybird]

He will not be suspended at all by the league IMO.

I think it will depend on if charges are brought against him for resisting arrest or possible assault.

 

[Shane]

I don't live in az, but I suspect you are misinterpreting the law.

Seriously, how can you force someone to allow a needle to be stuck in their arm? You can't. Maybe in some third world country or 17th century America, but not today. Not in this country.

You absolutely can do a forced blood draw. I have done more than 50 of them personally. Completely legal and yes in THIS COUNTRY!

 

[jefftheshark]

You absolutely can do a forced blood draw. I have done more than 50 of them personally. Completely legal and yes in THIS COUNTRY!

Oh, that would explain the blood draw up in Flagstaff last year.

And here I was thinking that you were a vampire.

JTS

 

[lobo]

it just seems Mr. B has always run a tight ship in the past& they tend to draft players without prior legal issues. I wouldn't be suprised if he's gone if found guilty of assault.

sadly, NOT totally out of the question

 

[Monty]

You absolutely can do a forced blood draw. I have done more than 50 of them personally. Completely legal and yes in THIS COUNTRY!

I never knew you were an actuall cop, sorry a Police Officer, Shane. Id better watch what i say from now on.

Note to self never again refer to police officers as unclean farm yard animals.

 

[Sandan]

And your being argumentative. If he did "Slap" an officer. If he ignored the orders of the officers. And finally if he did refuse a field sobriety test (An OBVIOUS sign of guilt) then yes.... Void away baby.

Refusing a field sobriety test is NOT sign of guilt. They are subjective unlike a breath or blood test.

I would not want to submit to a field sobriety test either.

 

[Shane]

Refusing a field sobriety test is NOT sign of guilt. They are subjective unlike a breath or blood test.

I would not want to submit to a field sobriety test either.

Yes it is a sign of guilt. Whether you believe it or not. It's not the end all be all. But like I said earlier it is the icing on the cake.

 

[TJ]

Yes it is a sign of guilt. Whether you believe it or not. It's not the end all be all. But like I said earlier it is the icing on the cake.

Or could just be someone standing up for their rights. You cannot make the assertion that just because he wont take a field sobriety test that he is automatically guilty.

I wouldn't let a cop overstep their boundaries against me. Never

 

[Shane]

Or could just be someone standing up for their rights. You cannot make the assertion that just because he wont take a field sobriety test that he is automatically guilty.

I wouldn't let a cop overstep their boundaries against me. Never

Two completely different arguments. I never said I could make you do the tests. You have every right to refuse. In fact as a cop I prefer you to refuse. It saves me time and way less paper work.

 

[Sandan]

Yes it is a sign of guilt. Whether you believe it or not. It's not the end all be all. But like I said earlier it is the icing on the cake.

Hmm so exercising my rights is a sign of guilt ?

Not saying I would refuse a breath test or blood test.

 

[Cheesebeef]

why on earth is this thread 20 pages long?

 

[splitsecond]

why on earth is this thread 20 pages long?

Its the offseason!

 

[TJ]

Two completely different arguments. I never said I could make you do the tests. You have every right to refuse. In fact as a cop I prefer you to refuse. It saves me time and way less paper work.

But your argument was that if I refuse, then I am automatically guilty. That's what I was responding to.

 

[Shane]

But your argument was that if I refuse, then I am automatically guilty. That's what I was responding to.

I did not say you are automatically guilty. Could you please quote that? I said it is a sign of guilt. One of many. Just like your crappy driving while drunk and why I pulled you over. Just like the odor of alcohol on your breath. Just like the piss in your pants etc... etc...

Totality of the circumstances. It all paints a picture. It's just one of many signs.

 

[Mainstreet]

Or could just be someone standing up for their rights. You cannot make the assertion that just because he wont take a field sobriety test that he is automatically guilty.

I wouldn't let a cop overstep their boundaries against me. Never

The same here and I have worked closely with law enforcement over the span of many years.

 

[TJ]

I did not say you are automatically guilty. Could you please quote that? I said it is a sign of guilt. One of many. Just like your crappy driving while drunk and why I pulled you over. Just like the odor of alcohol on your breath. Just like the piss in your pants etc... etc...

Totality of the circumstances. It all paints a picture. It's just one of many signs.

Sign of guilt, automatic guilt. In some cases its the same thing depending on the officer. Im not here to play semantics.

 

[Shane]

Sign of guilt, automatic guilt. In some cases its the same thing depending on the officer. Im not here to play semantics.

Quite frankly your just being silly. An officer doesn't determine the guilt and never has. So what your saying makes no sense. That is for the courts to decide. There are no semantics at all.

 

[TJ]

Quite frankly your just being silly. An officer doesn't determine the guilt and never has. So what your saying makes no sense. That is for the courts to decide. There are no semantics at all.

I was talking about officer perception. I honestly thought you would get that based on what I was saying. The mere fact that you always shy away from topics to get into semantics is silly.

How about this; next time I spell out everything for you so you and I can talk about the topic at hand. Deal?

 

[Shane]

I was talking about officer perception. I honestly thought you would get that based on what I was saying. The mere fact that you always shy away from topics to get into semantics is silly.

How about this; next time I spell out everything for you so you and I can talk about the topic at hand. Deal?

Perception? The officer paints a picture with the details. Refusing to do FSTs is part of that picture plain and simple. There are no semantics no matter how much you claim there is. If the officer put cuffs on you and took you to jail he thinks your guilty of DUI and has the articulable evidence for that arrest. That's a given. BTW how am I shying away from anything?

 

[TJ]

Yes it is a sign of guilt. Whether you believe it or not. It's not the end all be all. But like I said earlier it is the icing on the cake.

Or could just be someone standing up for their rights. You cannot make the assertion that just because he wont take a field sobriety test that he is automatically guilty.

I wouldn't let a cop overstep their boundaries against me. Never

Two completely different arguments. I never said I could make you do the tests. You have every right to refuse. In fact as a cop I prefer you to refuse. It saves me time and way less paper work.

I did not say you are automatically guilty. Could you please quote that? I said it is a sign of guilt. One of many. Just like your crappy driving while drunk and why I pulled you over. Just like the odor of alcohol on your breath. Just like the piss in your pants etc... etc...

Totality of the circumstances. It all paints a picture. It's just one of many signs.

This is where it got off topic.

By the way, after further review you are wrong. I do not piss my pants

 

[Mainstreet]

Perception? The officer paints a picture with the details. Refusing to do FSTs is part of that picture plain and simple. There are no semantics no matter how much you claim there is. If the officer put cuffs on you and took you to jail he thinks your guilty of DUI and has the articulable evidence for that arrest. That's a given. BTW how am I shying away from anything?

Maybe arrest yes. Guilt no.

May I ask you a hypothetical question? Do police have a right to search your vehicle say for a minor traffic violation (e.g., burned out tail light) absent any other information relating to any other offense. I frequently see officers asking people if they can search their vehicle. What happens if you just say no because you like to keep your right to privacy. I have in the past heard officers say they can detain someone for hours if they refuse to allow a search. I presume they are not going to get a warrant to do a search unless they can create probable cause out of something which is not so hard to do with the intricacies of the law.

 

[Shane]

Maybe arrest yes. Guilt no.

May I ask you a hypothetical question? Do police have a right to search your vehicle say for a minor traffic violation (e.g., burned out tail light) absent any other information relating to any other offense. I frequently see officers asking people if they can search their vehicle. What happens if you just say no because you like to keep your right to privacy. I have in the past heard officers say they can detain someone for hours if they refuse to allow a search. I presume they are not going to get a warrant to do a search unless they can create probable cause out of something which is not so hard to do with the intricacies of the law.

Part 1 correct. Bad wording on my part.

Part 2 if an officer pulls you over for a tail light no that in and of itself is not enough to toss your car. That being said you would be surprised how many people just give consent. Even people with plenty to hide. You do have a right to say no. An officer does have a right to detain you for up to 60 minutes while conducting an investigation. It's called an "investigative detention" it would be highly highly questionable to detain someone for 60 minutes based on just a tail light however.