G&T

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ May 29, 2013 -> 09:57 PM) Can't see if his hand was raised for a penalty call before that. Whistle was in his mouth or something. The hands didn't go up until after the goal.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ May 28, 2013 -> 08:28 PM) Thinking ahead...anywhere online you'd be able to see the game tomorrow? Because if weather knocks out directv like it has now... Pretty sure NBC has been streaming

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ May 28, 2013 -> 04:47 PM) I hope that teacher prevails. No way you answer something like that truthfully, with your NAME ON IT. "We just need to know so we can help." Yeah, heard that before. What do you think would have happened if they answered truthfully?

QUOTE (greg775 @ May 27, 2013 -> 08:26 PM) Hawks getting totally outworked so far in the 2nd. They might as well be down three. Hawks getting out worked in every aspect.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 23, 2013 -> 09:57 PM) How about the NHL record holder for best record in a season not winning the Stanley cup Made it past the second round.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 23, 2013 -> 09:47 PM) Lol Every team that had one of those amazing starts won the cup. (Duck, oilers, canadiens)

Must be nice for Detroit to commit penalties to stop every scoring chance bc the pp is so bad.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 20, 2013 -> 10:33 AM) This? Yep

Is there anything worse than having to deal with a wife during house negotiations? No. Seriously, whatever the hell anyone asks, she is willing to pay, and more. And who is the bad guy for not jumping so fast? Me.

Penguins.

QUOTE (Tex @ May 18, 2013 -> 05:31 PM) So how would you make drunk driving penalties harsher? It seems like raising fines is the best for everyone. Jail time costs people jobs, stress on families, etc. Here part of the fines are made as donations to not for profits like the Boys and Girls Clubs and the local Animal Shelter. Wisconsin is the only state where OWI isn't criminal, yet the penalties are some of the harshest. I know someone who got a DUI in Illinois with .25 BAC. Got off with a fine lower than WI minimums and basically just had to stay clean and take some classes. Would have had a IID in Wisconsin plus maximum fine and a 9 month revocation. Of course, the problem here is that OWI is so common that I'm not even sure there is shame associated with it. Oh, interestingly enough, the average BAC for first offense OWI in WI is .17. Generally, people drink and drive a LOT before they get caught.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 18, 2013 -> 11:19 AM) Yeah, I'm surprised most judges would even care to listen to that, considering how there is really no record of when the drinks were consumed... Well, it's all about testimony. It's not like a prosecutor has evidence of their drinking in most cases so they can kinda say whatever.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 18, 2013 -> 09:09 AM) G&T...I've seen you mention this a few times now...what is the curve argument? A curve argument refers to the rise and fall of BAC levels. Tracked on a graph, it's sort of a bell curve. The argument is that at the time of operation a person had just finished drinking and had unabsorbed alcohol in their system. Driver is stopped, does the field tests, goes to the station, blows. In all that time, the BAC has risen as the alcohol is absorbed. So if someone blows a .15 in WI they will have an ignition interlock on their car. The defense will argue that BAC was rising so at the time of the stop, he was at a .14. This seems like an easy argument but it isn't. The stop would really have to occur within 30 mins or so (dependent in part on food consumption) of consuming the last drink. Eliminating alcohol takes longer than absorbing. It's far more likely that a person is on the way down rather than rising. Most defendants won't have a good memory of what they drank anyway.

Just kinda throwing this out for fun, but being a beer snob has proven very helpful. These days, it's really common for people to come in and say "I only had two beers" or whatever. Making defendants show what beers they were drinking by name to get the alcohol concentration is really helpful to block a curve argument. Police are getting savvier about that too. Meanwhile most people still don't realize that beer is much higher in alcohol than it used to be. So they have their 3-4 beers and are totally messed up because they were 8%.

QUOTE (farmteam @ May 16, 2013 -> 09:49 PM) This is exactly what I do. If I have any question at all about my ability to drive, even just a tiny one, then I don't drive. Either find a ride or wait. To clarify in terms of making yourself "feel" less drunk, eating more/drinking water doesn't actually lower your BAC, it just makes you feel less drunk, correct? Food absorbs alcohol thus spacing out the time it takes for the alcohol to enter your system. As you drink you will be eliminating alcohol. So if you lengthen the absorption time, there will be a more time to eliminate thus keeping your BAC a bit lower. However if you've already been drinking then food isn't going to do much.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ May 9, 2013 -> 02:32 PM) If you've had anything to drink, you will fail the eye test. I don't think it should be a part of the sobriety test. No matter what your tolerance is, if you are at a certain BAC you will fail. When I received my OWI, I passed everything easily except for the eye test. Nystagmus does not occur until bac reaches about .1. And I'm going to guess you didn't "pass" the other tests. You just thought you did.

QUOTE (farmteam @ May 9, 2013 -> 09:23 AM) I remember seeing a comparison in the Indiana Daily Student when I was there about how different things affect your reaction time while driving on average. IIRC, texting and alcohol both slowed reaction time by about 20%-25%, whereas weed slowed it by roughly 35%. I guess my question was, if we're saying the field sobriety tests aren't great indicators for alcohol, why are we saying they're great indicators for other substances? Or is it just that we lack something comparable to BAC for those other drugs, and therefore have to rely on field sobriety tests? Or perhaps I am overstating the uselessness of field sobriety tests? Never actually taken one, but my guess is that I'd be pretty terrible at them sober. I do remember hearing something in Crim Pro about the test where your eyes follow the pen, though. Apparently when you're drunk your eyes can't follow something in a continuous motion, they just skip across. The eye test is highly predictive of bac above .08. Walk and turn is even 80% predictive if I'm not mistaken. They aren't as bad as people think. In any event, they are only used for probable cause to arrest and are taken as a whole with witness observations of actual driving, and other indicators of alcohol like odor, speech, lack of concentration etc. Usually for other drugs the driver is confused, disoriented, eyes are dilated, lack motor skills but no odor of alcohol. They field sobriety tests will confirm officer observations, generally. Then they can get a blood test which now requires a warrant. The effectiveness of the tests is dependent on which side of the law you practice. Science actually supports their use and are still the best we have. But I'm a prosecutor.

QUOTE (farmteam @ May 9, 2013 -> 08:49 AM) I figured that were the case, just seems like a lot of times the "I smoked a week ago, I was in no way stoned when driving" would be...persuasive? I have wondered what they'll do for sobriety tests after weed's legalized. I assume it would be similar to regular field sobriety tests? Motor skills and attention span are still impacted by weed so I'm doubtful anything will change. Field sobriety tests are divided attention tests. So you have to listen to complicated instructions then do what you've been told. Not easy on weed. Not any different than for other medications. As far as the "I smoked last week" defense, that doesn't work for another reason. The blood work shows various compounds for THC in the blood that rise and fall at different rates. An expert knows immediately how recently they smoked. Plus the likelihood of having probable cause to arrest based on the presence of weed from a week earlier is very low.

QUOTE (farmteam @ May 8, 2013 -> 08:59 PM) So if BAC is the be-all end-all, what do prosecutors do for non-alcohol DUIs? I mean, I suppose some drugs, like cocaine, if it's in your system that means you're probably high or at least very very recently were. But for others, most notably (and commonly) marijuana, that's definitely not the case. Certian drugs, including weed, are per se prohibited while driving. The mere fact that its in your system is enough. Most prescription meds require impairment so proof of bad driving and the presence of the drug is required.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 7, 2013 -> 03:06 PM) Yeah criminal lawyers still advise not to blow if you believe youll fail. In WI that results in a refusal which itself carries a 1 year revocation of your DL and an ignition interlock for 1 year. So, basically, you have to blow.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ May 6, 2013 -> 08:19 PM) It's ABSURD. And to successfully convict someone of DUI is unbelievably difficult. The most mundane details get cases thrown out regularly. It's why every department has only a handful of "DUI" guys. Not really. There are go to arguments for defense attorneys but most cases settle early on if the cops do their jobs. The problem comes when a good defense attorney convinces a jury that field sobriety tests are harder than they look. Wait. I should go back a second. The difficulty isn't getting a conviction, it's establishing BAC. If a curve argument is in play then prosecution becomes a major challenge.

QUOTE (Tex @ May 6, 2013 -> 10:47 AM) The driver was charged with intoxicated manslaughter. The family does not have money for a funeral. We're having a fundraiser. I can't imagine the pain of not being able to bury your child. I get all choked up just thinking about it. I was talking to a lawyer who had a sentencing hearing on that charges for killing his best friend while drunk driving. I think he got 3 years in prison. No priors either.

QUOTE (Tex @ May 6, 2013 -> 06:08 PM) So this is the driver's second DUI arrest. He had one in 2010 that he still has not gone to court for. In my small county there are over 4,500 pending DUI cases. They just can't get to them all. My office prosecutes first offense OWI in WI and reading that makes no sense to me. I really don't think there can be that many cases for DUI in a small county.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 2, 2013 -> 10:42 AM) Why the hell is his death making national news? They had one hit! 20 years ago! Don't producers stop and think about covering the story when the ONLY footage they have is from the time the person was 13 years old? I'm happy I was informed. I needed the closure.

We are starting to look too. Of course the area we want is one of the most expensive in madison. Our pre-approval is well above what I'm comfortable spending but I'm wondering if I should stretch it. The real problem is taxes. $9k a year in taxes sucks. Here is one question I need opinions on. How does one approach an offer where the asking price is well above assessment? I mean like $100k above. Is that just an owner that isn't serious?