A driver approaches an officer and tells him he was in an accident on the interstate and that he walked "a mile and a half" to get help.

Officer takes him back to the scene (not a mile and a half) and the driver describes the wreck to him. He says he's buzzed but not intoxicated.

Eventually he fails the SFSTs and blows a .12 and .13.

How much trouble is pin-pointing the time of accident / driving going to cause me? He approached the officer at 2:25 am and blew at 4 am?

Suggestions?

First of all, can you wheel the driver? I would suspect at trial the defendant will claim his friend was driving (even though never mentioned to officer) and not him. It's been years since I have done extrapolation so I'm gonna defer to others.

He'll say he had a bottle of booze in the trunk and he drank it only after the wreck... on the way to finding help... he finished it and tossed the bottle somewhere on the side of the road.

He's all over the video describing the wreck and how this car fishtailed and he thought he was going to die--tells it probably three or four times, slurring away and adding that he hopes his honesty will get him "some slack."

So I can wheel him....but the time lapse is what worries me. The truck was in a dark spot, so noone saw it and called 911 to help with the time of the wreck.

And yes, he didn't say then that he had some booze in the car, but he might think it up before trial time.

What do you have to corroborate his statements that he was the driver?

The truck belonged to him with no passengers...and that's about it.

Were the keys to the vehicle in his pocket?

Did the truck belong to the defendant? Were his personal belongings in it? Just this morning I was looking at the issue of putting a suspect behind the wheel in a single vehicle crash with no witnesses. One of our Sergeants arrested a man for DWI following a single vehicle crash. The EMS and officers go there within 10-20 minutes of the call--truck still warm, etc. Suspect owned the vehicle and his stuff was in it. He admitted driving and said how happy he was that he didn't die. I had to send the Sergeant some case law because one of the Dallas magistrates found no PC in the DWI case (the POM case was OK) because no witness could corroborate the suspect was operating the vehicle!

Janette A

What about the skid marks?
Can't an accident reconstruction officer can possibly testify that the marks on the road indicate that the accident happened as the defendant described it?