Believe me, officer, I only had just one

Believe me, officer, I only had just one

There are 143 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Jul 12, 2010, titled Believe me, officer, I only had just one. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

A math mistake led to 11 people being charged with drunken driving, even though they weren't over Minnesota's legal limit.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

First Prev
of 8
Next Last
Insert Name Here

Saint Joseph, MN

#1 Jul 12, 2010
Urine trouble!
FL Guy

Cambridge, MN

#2 Jul 12, 2010
DWI's should all be dropped and they people should be charged with the actual driving violations they commit instead and penalties should reflect those actions. Those crimes could include careless and/or wreckless driving, driving over the line, inattentive driving ... really what does it matter what is causing the poor driving isn't the problem, it's the poor driving. I've seen better drunks drive a car down the road than a teenager texting on a cell phone, a woman putting make-up on or somebody reading a newspaper or map ... these crimes and potential harm they cause to themselves and others is no different and so should the penalty.
why confess

Minneapolis, MN

#3 Jul 12, 2010
hey, if you're too drunk to think straight you'll never get past a seasoned cop. And if you are NOT too drunk to drive, one or two drinks, why would you confess that to a cop?

They can arrest you for admitting ANY alcohol intake before driving.
Ora Lee

Delano, MN

#5 Jul 12, 2010
Interesting wrote:
And they blow it off like it was no big deal. These **** clowns are SCIENTISTS and they are dealing with a SIMPLE math equation for christ sake.
That's why I don't believe that global warming, climate change or whatever else BS they want to call it!
Stupid

Eden Prairie, MN

#7 Jul 12, 2010
They hired stupid people...
Paul

Saint Paul, MN

#8 Jul 12, 2010
FL Guy wrote:
DWI's should all be dropped and they people should be charged with the actual driving violations they commit instead and penalties should reflect those actions. Those crimes could include careless and/or wreckless driving, driving over the line, inattentive driving ... really what does it matter what is causing the poor driving isn't the problem, it's the poor driving. I've seen better drunks drive a car down the road than a teenager texting on a cell phone, a woman putting make-up on or somebody reading a newspaper or map ... these crimes and potential harm they cause to themselves and others is no different and so should the penalty.
Actually, as of this date, you have written the most stupid post ever to be read on this Topix board. Congratulations. You really have no idea what you have accoplished. Even redeemer and IrishMN have not written such stupidity. Are you by any chance also 'No Spin Zone' from Forest Lake?
TWI

Saint Paul, MN

#9 Jul 13, 2010
I'm hammered as I type this!
AMRC77

Saint Paul, MN

#10 Jul 13, 2010
This is just another example of the Government being wrong. And who pays for it??? you and I. Yet the minute that you or I Say a word about it, we're anti gov. well i've been stating for the last 10 years that their methods were wrong and that i was not drunk. looks to me like i have a lawsuit on my hands...
Observer

Minneapolis, MN

#11 Jul 13, 2010
Drunken driving is NOT a crime.

http://www.examiner.com/x-36867-Minneapolis-E...
Michelle

Saint Paul, MN

#12 Jul 13, 2010
My comment is 'only' this ... Anoka County has more judicial/court issues, from conciliation to civil court matters. This one, unfortunately, is in the criminal court system in Anoka County. I have NO faith in that County's 'judicial' system ....
The Profiler

Saint Paul, MN

#14 Jul 13, 2010
No spin zone wrote:
<quoted text>Paul wait until your mother finds you playing on the Internet again. Get back in the basement, and please don't hump the do again! You tool!
And once again the pot calls the kettle black...
R Joe

Minneapolis, MN

#15 Jul 13, 2010
How much money and time did this cost the innocent? Lawyers, inpoundments, court time from work, and embarassment. Math error sounds like a poor excuse for the cops to pad their DUI arrest totals to make it look they are doing a great job while sitting in the donut shop or pizza parlor. They have more electronic gizmos in the cop cars now days it makes me wonder how they even are able to drive and pay attention to their driving. When proven not guilty you do not even get an apology from courts and the cops disciplined for their mistake. But we make an error and all hell breaks loose. DUI should be enforced but legally.

“Peace the old fashioned way”

Since: Jan 09

Montevideo

#16 Jul 13, 2010
Ora Lee wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why I don't believe that global warming, climate change or whatever else BS they want to call it!
Its faulty, like AlGores scam, because its a shell game......a for profit enterprise. That's what law enforcement has deteriorated to. Another way to circumvent "taxation without representation". When your kingdom is broke you become creative in ways to raise money without risking a revolt by the peasants. You pass a plethora of laws & regulations & send out the Kings highwaymen to extract payment for violating those laws & regulation. While DWI enforcement is necessary to protect the public, it, like a lot of other laws, are more a source of revenue than anything else. It would be interesting to see how much revenue laws, like the seatbelt law, generate for the kingdom.

“Peace the old fashioned way”

Since: Jan 09

Montevideo

#17 Jul 13, 2010
R Joe wrote:
How much money and time did this cost the innocent? Lawyers, inpoundments, court time from work, and embarassment. Math error sounds like a poor excuse for the cops to pad their DUI arrest totals to make it look they are doing a great job while sitting in the donut shop or pizza parlor. They have more electronic gizmos in the cop cars now days it makes me wonder how they even are able to drive and pay attention to their driving. When proven not guilty you do not even get an apology from courts and the cops disciplined for their mistake. But we make an error and all hell breaks loose. DUI should be enforced but legally.
If you think its bad now wait till this comes to Minnesota:
"The Associated Press Updated 11:42 AM Wednesday, June 2, 2010

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio's highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that an officer's visual estimation of speed is enough to support a conviction if the officer is trained, certified by a training academy, and experienced in watching for speeders. The court's 5-1 decision says independent verification of a driver's speed is not necessary.

The court upheld a lower court's ruling against a driver who challenged a speeding conviction that had been based on testimony from police officer in Copley, 25 miles south of Cleveland. The officer said it appeared to him that the man was driving too fast.

I bet the cops in MN are green with envy that they can't do this.....yet. It will come, the state & municipalities are broke & this would be a fantastic source of revenue.
Bob B

Mattapan, MA

#18 Jul 13, 2010
I hope the county will also pay for the lawyers that the drivers had to hire when they went to court!! AND, on the other hand, if they did hire a lawyer and he/she did not pick up on this mistake in the calculations, and they were found guilty, I hope they sue the lawyer for malpractice!!
EqualRights

AOL

#19 Jul 13, 2010
Urine tests can also be very inaccurate. A urine sample begins to immediately deteriate, especially if any yeast is present in the sample.
Saint Paul RiverRat

Minneapolis, MN

#20 Jul 13, 2010
Roughrider50 wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think its bad now wait till this comes to Minnesota:
"The Associated Press Updated 11:42 AM Wednesday, June 2, 2010
COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio's highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that an officer's visual estimation of speed is enough to support a conviction if the officer is trained, certified by a training academy, and experienced in watching for speeders. The court's 5-1 decision says independent verification of a driver's speed is not necessary.
The court upheld a lower court's ruling against a driver who challenged a speeding conviction that had been based on testimony from police officer in Copley, 25 miles south of Cleveland. The officer said it appeared to him that the man was driving too fast.
I bet the cops in MN are green with envy that they can't do this.....yet. It will come, the state & municipalities are broke & this would be a fantastic source of revenue.
You don't have to wait. It's called the basic speed law and it has been in Minnesota for well over 60 years.
P T Bull

Minneapolis, MN

#21 Jul 13, 2010
Paul wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, as of this date, you have written the most stupid post ever to be read on this Topix board. Congratulations. You really have no idea what you have accoplished. Even redeemer and IrishMN have not written such stupidity. Are you by any chance also 'No Spin Zone' from Forest Lake?

He is advocating a well reasoned libertarian view. If you are so smart, why didn't you engage on the substance of his argument and go straight to the name-calling. Oh, I know, its because liberals never talk substance.
Mr T

San Francisco, CA

#22 Jul 13, 2010
are they going to reimburse these folks for:
lost time on job,
lawyer fees,
time spent in overnight jail,
finding alternative transportation to work,
possible job losses due to the charges??
Dr Johnny Fever

Minneapolis, MN

#23 Jul 13, 2010
Paul wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, as of this date, you have written the most stupid post ever to be read on this Topix board. Congratulations. You really have no idea what you have accoplished. Even redeemer and IrishMN have not written such stupidity. Are you by any chance also 'No Spin Zone' from Forest Lake?
You forgot Mrs. R.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Andover Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 118 Cats Euthanized After "Rescue" from Mobile ... (Feb '09) Jul 1 hog jaws 597
Trying to decide where in Blaine to live Jun '16 Fancyuniqueuser1 1
City of ham Lake (Mar '15) Jun '16 Ham Lake Citizen 2
News Coon Rapids Could Get Name Change (Jan '06) May '16 Daniel 73
News Looking for God? Try the 'burbs. (Feb '11) May '16 ikeepmymoneyforme 932
News Minnesota bill would limit transgender bathroom... Apr '16 Three Days 6
News Minnesota won't pay for pro soccer field - but ... (Jul '15) Jul '15 PB in Saint Paul 1

Andover Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Andover Mortgages