Texas Prosecutors Training- DWI is an Opinion Crime

DWI prosecution is a threat to freedom because it is an opinion crime. href=”http://www.duiblog.com/2007/11/27/another-dui-supercop-2/”>it is easy for cops to file false DWI charges, or unilaterally decide that a suspect is intoxicated and arrest. Combine the vague law with the “you must arrest more” propaganda we feed young cops and you have a recipe for injustice.

As a prosecutor and defense lawyer I have read the DWI Investigation and Prosecution Training Manual by TDCAA. Until today, I never read the intro. I was to learn that the author of the DWI manual agrees with my conclusion that DWI is an opinion crime.

The goal of this book is to serve as an aid to those prosecutors who face [DWI]
in trial daily, to help them overcome the difficulties inherent in attempting to
prove an offense that, at its core, is based upon an “opinion”.

Actually, the goal of the book is help get convictions, not to see that justice is done. Notwithstanding the above statement an opinion crime is great for the State. There is no physical evidence to contradict and few, if any, unbiased witnesses to worry about. To make things easier we have eliminated the pesky 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments in DWI cases. More from the intro…

Most DWI cases do not involve “falling down drunks” who stumble from their cars
and give breath samples that register at over twice the legal limit. Instead,
most cases- if they include bad driving form the defendant at all- involve….
police stops in which a defendant performs, at most, three fields whose
methods are hard to follow and whose scoring is an easy target for defense
cross-examination. DWI prosecutors will most likely be trying cases where [the
suspect on the videotape] does not sway, slur his speech, and wants to talk to
an attorney before he decides to give a breath sample…

This is an important message to young prosecutors. Even if there is no evidence of intoxication that affects driving, or speech, or balance, you can use this training manual to get convictions.

The reason that the “methods” of “field tests” are “hard to follow” and are an “easy target for defense” lawyers is because SFST science is garbage.

Everyone agrees that “falling down drunks” who “blow over twice the legal limit” should not be driving. Unfortunately, we are targeting social drinkers who pose a threat to no one. This book helps prosecutors feel good about convicting citizens of an opinion crime.p>

<img src="http://www.blogge says:

November 28, 2007 at 8:42 am

It is definitely an opinion. I’m one of the lucky ones. I recently had an accident (I hit a building while parking) and should have had a DUI, but I tend to do well under pressure and passed all the verbal tests and eight cops decided I looked sober. I was able to convince them that my foot had slipped off the brake due to an old injury so I had to prove that I was capable of driving. I will NEVER put myself, or anyone else, in that position again. To this day I wonder why other people get busted for having one drink when I know I had more. It’s all about appearances.

Richard Alpert says:

May 16, 2008 at 8:23 am

Thanks for plugging my book! If you enjoyed the DWI book (which by the way was updated after the date of your blog) you should really like the “Intoxication Manslaughter: Investigation and Prosecution” book even more. Copies of both can be purchased online at http://www.tdcaa.com.