Story at: Washington Post Article

Taylor Arrested On DWI Charge
Redskins Rookie Won't Play Sunday

By Nunyo Demasio and Carol Morello
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, October 29, 2004; Page D01

Washington Redskins rookie safety Sean Taylor was arrested by the Virginia State Police early yesterday morning and charged with driving while intoxicated and declined to take an alcohol blood or breath test, according to Virginia law enforcement officials. Taylor, the Redskins' first-round pick (fifth overall) from the University of Miami, was released on a $5,000 personal recognizance bond and faces a Dec. 1 hearing in Fairfax County.

Taylor, 21, missed yesterday's practice at Redskins Park, an absence the club considered unexcused after initially being unable to contact him. Later in the afternoon, the 6-foot-2, 230-pound Taylor arrived at the training facility for a meeting with team officials, including Coach Joe Gibbs and Gregg Williams, the assistant head coach of defense.

Coach Joe Gibbs talks to reporters about Sean Taylor on Thursday. Taylor will be inactive for Sunday's game. (Larry Morris - The Washington Post)

Last night, the team announced that Taylor will be inactive for Sunday's game against the Green Bay Packers, who own the No. 2-ranked offense in the 32-team league behind star quarterback Brett Favre and Pro Bowl tailback Ahman Green.

"You don't ever want [this]. On this football team, we've got some of the neatest people I've ever been around," Gibbs said in brief remarks about Taylor after practice. Gibbs added that the team has "great character guys and people that care a lot about the football team. I hurt for the team, and you don't like to see somebody in trouble, either. You hurt for the person. So we'll just try and deal with all of it as best we can."

Taylor, whose father is chief of police in Florida City, Fla., did not return a telephone message seeking comment. The player faces two Class 1 misdemeanors: driving under the influence (DUI) or driving while intoxicated (DWI) -- the charges are synonymous in Virginia; plus refusal to submit to a sobriety test to gauge his intoxication level. Taylor also faces a penalty of $2,500 and one year in jail.

Complicating matters for Taylor is the fact that Virginia has some of the nation's toughest drunken driving laws. Convictions for refusing blood or breath tests mean the one-year suspension of a driver's license.

If Taylor is convicted or admits to the charges, he also faces a fine, suspension or other discipline by the NFL at the discretion of Commissioner Paul Tagliabue. NFL fines against alcohol-related convictions amount to one-half of a regular season game, up to $20,000, for a first offense. Taylor had never committed an alcohol-related offense, according to Fairfax County prosecutor Robert Horan.

NFL teams are allowed to fine or suspend players for violating team rules. Gibbs has only one rule, which he disclosed in his first address to the club: Don't embarrass the organization or yourself.

According to the court documents, Taylor was stopped at 2:40 a.m. when a Virginia state trooper spotted his 2004 BMW sedan speeding along the outer loop of I-495 just south of Georgetown Pike. Taylor lives in Ashburn, roughly 20 minutes from where he was stopped.

Lt. Harry Newlin of the State Police said Taylor was stopped for speeding and suspicion of drunk driving. Taylor was given field-sobriety tests, which he failed, then refused to take a breath test, Newlin said. Taylor was arrested and taken to the Fairfax County detention center, where he was booked. Second Lt. Tony Shobe, of the Fairfax County Sheriff's office, said Taylor was brought in about 6 a.m. and released at 10 a.m.

Details of Taylor's whereabouts before his arrest couldn't be confirmed. Some players said they were told Taylor had been at a birthday party thrown by wide receiver Rod Gardner at a D.C. club. When Gardner, who turned 27 Tuesday, was asked about the party yesterday, he refused to take any questions "not related to football."

Phillip Daniels, a nine-year veteran and one of the team's leaders, said, "Being out Wednesday night, after 2 [a.m.], there's nothing good going on out there. It's time to be home. We have a big game this week, there's no reason to be out late on a Wednesday night.

"It would be sad for me to know that we had guys out there at a party that knew that he had too much to drink and didn't make sure he was safe to get back. But we're a family. We're going to hang in there with him, get him back on the field and win games."

One offensive player said that three weeks ago the team conducted a players-only meeting called by a few veterans when the Redskins were in the midst of a four-game losing streak. According to two players present, one issue that came up was the need to avoid the lure of Washington's nightlife during the season.

"We talk about stuff like this way before it happens," Daniels said. "And for it to happen is a slap in the face. But if you look at every team across this league, there's no team that's perfect. Sean is a good guy."

The arrest is only the latest controversy for Taylor. Two days after the April draft, Taylor fired agent Drew Rosenhaus. Taylor was fined $25,000 by the NFL for leaving a mandatory rookie symposium in June. In late July, Taylor fired his new agents, Eugene Mato and Jeff Moorad, because of unhappiness over a seven-year, incentive-laden contract potentially worth $40 million that they negotiated. Taylor subsequently rehired Rosenhaus, who did not return two calls yesterday.

Coach Joe Gibbs talks to reporters about Sean Taylor on Thursday. Taylor will be inactive for Sunday's game. (Larry Morris - The Washington Post)

A few Redskins players, including wide receiver Laveranues Coles and linebacker LaVar Arrington, said they intended to counsel Taylor, who had never lived outside Miami before moving to Washington.

"Now, it's not about the situation that has happened," Arrington said. "It's about how he's going to handle it. It can be a blessing in disguise because now it's a wakeup call -- make him focus a little bit more.

"He's a great kid. That doesn't change because he's made a mistake. A lot of people can get caught up into that nightlife in Washington D.C. There's a lot of beautiful women in this city."

Cornerback Fred Smoot said: "There's a lot in this city for a rookie to be exposed to. I'm sure the rookies in Green Bay or Kansas City don't have the same problem."

Gibbs addressed the team before practice about the Taylor situation. The Redskins had a characteristically spirited practice, and players and coaches said that Taylor's arrest wasn't a distraction. Taylor arrived at Redskins Park later in the afternoon, entering and departing through a back door to avoid reporters.

In Taylor's place, Andre Lott is expected to start next to strong safety Ryan Clark. But Williams is known for rotating players. "If you make the active squad, you're a starter," Williams said. "We play a lot of people."

Staff writers Jason La Canfora and Fred Barbash contributed to this report.

[This message was edited by Andy Porter on 11-02-04 at .]

Did anyone else see the video of the actor Rip Torn on his DWI arrest? I'm assuming he refused the test as well, as his Atty was claiming he was just tired. He was slurring his words and stumbling all over the booking area and the Jury found him not guilty. Was anyone as shocked as I?
Also on a related note, we implimented the DWI search warrant program a few weeks ago for both felony and misd. cases and, so far, things seem to be going smoothly. No one has resisted or caused too many problems. Expect the cases to start coming on the docket in the next few weeks when the blood test results are returned.

I disagree, in cases where there is a delay before the test *and* where the officer got answers to at least several of the Mata questions. As long as you can ret. extrap. back to a test >.08 at the time of driving, or you have some indication of drugs being involved, go for it.

georgette

STATES SEEK TOUGHER DRUNK DRIVER PENALTIES
States are trying to toughen penalties for suspected drunken drivers who refuse to take a breath test, arguing motorists too often get a milder penalty than if they had provided evidence that could convict them.

Bills to lengthen license suspensions or make it a criminal offense to refuse a test are pending in five states, including Ohio, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, where the percentages of people refusing are among the highest in the nation.

Nationwide, an average of 25 percent of people pulled over on suspicion of drunken driving refuse to take a breath test, which is designed to estimate the amount of alcohol in the blood, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

In every state but Nevada, the punishment is a suspended driver's license. Still, people who refuse believing they would fail a test might avoid a drunken driving conviction and jail time.

Defense attorneys and motorist groups oppose stricter penalties, and some lawmakers don't see the need.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/19/AR2006011900549_pf.html

Promise that I tried the search enging b/4 posting this, but didn't come up with anything so here goes...

Have discussed this over lunch w/co-counsel as well as couple of dark side...er Defense attorneys and wonder about the pro's and cons of this -
Being able to offer Def. Adj. on a DWI, so long as a DWI 1st and have the ability to enhance any later DWI's (like Family Violence cases).
Wouldn't be opposed to requiring there to be a breath test provision (ie- only elgible for Deferred IF gave breath test) where it can't be over a certain level.
This conversation came up in that we have so many refusals and how alot of those arrested that don't look all that bad would likely be under the limit. Thought this might throw wrenches in Def. Atty's advice to clients on whether to give samples. Might also cause more to provide samples. I know that I haven't thought this all the way through, but just curious as to the pros & cons of such.

Herein lies the rub, and I'm just throwing you my ideas. If I (were the state) and accused someone of being a rapist, I'd haul out my DNA evidence (lets just assume there's DNA for this hypo), and have my expert test it. Let's say the DNA is positive on the person I charged.

Well, I just expect that the scientific evidence I am using is going to be evaluated by the defense under a claim of innocence. They are going to hire an expert, secure a lab and keep the court busy with motions until the courts allows them access to the records, and possibly a defense testing of the evidence.

At the hearing, just imagine if I get up and tell the judge that my expert is always perfect, he was competent before the test, competent after the test, and the test appeared to have no problems with it, so I threw away the sample, no need to maintain it.

Can you imagine the story the Chronicle might print on that one?

Or better yet, I'm not going to tell you how the theories work in getting the DNA, I'm just going to tell you that my expert was competent before the test, competent after, and the test appeared to have no problems, so you don't need to know how I arrived at the DNA results, oh and I threw away the evidence.

The upshot is:

My advice won't change anytime soon. As Defense Counsel, not having access to the samples to retest and the software that runs the machines will always have me believing that the scientific method is not being employed here. Maybe if you kept the samples for a retest, or made available the software that runs the machines, it would have the appearance of validity.

Otherwise, I will not personally blow unless I was drinking in the presence of 3 district judges, 2 baliffs and maybe ol Al himself, who could testify that they personally saw me drink my driving maximum, 3/4 a glass of wine over a 2 hour period. Otherwise, without decent and credible witnesses, if the machine is wrong, I have no way of proving it.

Can I have your blood?

quote:

---

Have discussed this over lunch w/co-counsel as well as couple of dark side...er Defense attorneys and wonder about the pro's and cons of this -
Being able to offer Def. Adj. on a DWI, so long as a DWI 1st and have the ability to enhance any later DWI's (like Family Violence cases).
Wouldn't be opposed to requiring there to be a breath test provision (ie- only elgible for Deferred IF gave breath test) where it can't be over a certain level.

---

John H., you just described part of what was in HB 3241, the big DWI pushed by prosecutors last year. The bill got a late start and never made much headway, but MADD even signed off on the bill to grant limited deferreds.

If you support initiatives like this, be sure to stay involved next legislative session; I'm certain this bill will be reintroduced in some form or fashion.

Yup, absolutely. I want a vial saved for me at the hospital lab under a chain of custody also, but no problems there.

Rapid City (SD) Journal

PIERRE - South Dakota would be the first state in the nation to repeal its implied-consent law for all drunken-driving arrests if a proposal before the Legislature is approved, lawmakers were told Wednesday.

That came to light during testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on a measure in which people who are arrested for drunken driving could no longer refuse to give a blood sample.

"We are not looking at losing some substantive informed right," Sen. Lee Schoenbeck, R-Watertown, told the committee. "I think we should quit the gamesmanship and get down to the basic idea of let's take drunks off the road. It will improve the conviction rate and result in fewer drunks on the highway."

(For more on the pros and cons as presented to the SD Legislature, see below)

The Article

Like several other counties in Texas, we got tired of prosecuting repeat DWI offenders who refused all SFSTs, PBTs and requests for Breath or Blood. This last November we instituted a county wide DWI Blood Search Warrant Program for all DWI Felonies. We provided all the forms and paperwork to each law enforcment agency in the County.

We have two district courts and two CCLs. The judges couldn't have been more supportive in agreeing to take month-long rotations. We purchased fax machines and put them in each of their homes.

To date, we've done approximately a dozen of these search warrants. None of them has been less than a .15. Cases where guilt/innocence would have been a struggle before are now quick guilty pleas.

To counties that have not yet instituted such a program, I would urge you to do so. Assuming that you have a hospital/emergency room in your locale, the whole process can be done in thirty minutes or less.

Furnishing CDs w/Form to Law Enforcement: $15
Purchasing Blood Vials for the Jail: $90
Seeing the look on a drunk's face when
he's told he's getting blood taken: PRICELESS

UT-ex Cedric Benson arrested again
Drunken-driving charge follows arrest in downtown Austin
By Patrick George and Suzannah Gonzales
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Sunday, June 08, 2008

A month after being charged with boating while intoxicated and resisting arrest on Lake Travis, former University of Texas running back Cedric Benson was arrested and charged with driving while intoxicated in downtown Austin early Saturday, police said.

Austin police spokeswoman Veneza Aguiaga said Benson, 25, who plays for the Chicago Bears, was driving his BMW at Fifth and Colorado streets when he was pulled over early Saturday morning. After a series of sobriety tests, Benson was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving. He later refused a breath alcohol test and blood test, Aguiaga said.

[Why didn't the police seek blood through a search warrant?]


Details.

The thought that comes to mind is how many people would have had to hold him down to take his blood?

I hadn't thought about this before, but I wonder if any of these counties doing all of these blood draws have had any people physically fight the draw? If this football player resisted on the boat, it would be fairly safe to assume he wasn't sweet and compliant to the officers.....and they knew from his history that he had resisted....and he's famous in Austin and not a small guy....Maybe they were worried he would cause trouble?

Benson says volunteered to give a blood sample instead of breath but the arresting officer declined.

quote:

---

Originally posted by AlexLayman:
Benson says volunteered to give a blood sample instead of breath but the arresting officer declined.

---

Where'd you see that? The only thing I saw was "He later refused a breath alcohol test and blood test, Agui�aga said." (Bottom of second paragraph.)

I saw on the local NBC affiliate Houston channel that the Bears let him go. The anchor added, "He just had a little problem with alcohol, go figure." (Or words to that effect.) I guess he hadn't read the comments posted by the local Austin folks re: Benson and his antics.

The police spokeswoman said it was a total refusal but his attorney Sam Basset says Benson volunteered for the blood test. I wonder if its on the tape.

The quotes below are from the bottom half of this Sports Illustrated story about Benson being fired from the football team.

[... snip ...]
Benson was pulled over for running a red light and refused to take a breath test or provide blood samples Saturday, Austin police spokeswoman Veneza Aguinaga said.

Bassett, however, said Benson thought the light was yellow when he went through around 2 a.m. but stopped immediately when police appeared, and he added that Benson told him he wasn't speeding or driving recklessly.

Bassett also said Benson offered to provide police a blood sample for testing and believes video of the arrest will show his client did well in the field sobriety test, although he hasn't seen it yet.

Texas law allows a driver to take a blood or breath test for alcohol content, Bassett said. When Benson offered to take a blood test, the arresting officer told him he'd have to take a breath test, which Benson refused, Bassett said.
[... snip ...]

State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez, D-Austin, was arrested and charged with driving while intoxicated Thursday night, he said Saturday.

Details.

An arrest affidavit filed early Friday morning provides a few details about the arrest Thursday of state Rep. Eddie Rodriguez, D-Austin, on driving while intoxicated charges.

Details.

[Does anyone find it strange that the Statesman shows virtually no curiosity as to whether this public official provided a breath or blood sample?]

State troopers arrested a Mercedes municipal judge on felony driving while intoxicated charges early Saturday morning.

[Be sure to read the story at this link. Guess what happens after the public official refused a BT?]