# DUI question: would this fool the judge/police? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 27, 2012, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273 "2012-12-27T13:34:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![am77494](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d2c977/32.png) [@am77494](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/am77494)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/21 "2012-12-28T01:05:40Z")
Now if you took an alcohol enema after the accident … (sorry couldn’t resist - it seems like a popular thing nowadays) ---
**Author:** ![jnglmassiv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f07891/32.png) [@jnglmassiv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jnglmassiv)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/22 "2012-12-28T03:24:57Z")
Seems like the thing to do would be to keep a one third full bottle of whiskey (or whatever) in your trunk. When tragedy strikes, you simply retrieve the bottle and make sure the police see you taking a nice long swig as they pull up. No way of telling how much you drank before they arrived. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/23 "2012-12-28T03:43:50Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > I can certainly see the law progressing in the future to the point where if your ass is found drunk AFTER the accident, they will assume you were drunk DURING the accident. And if you are stupid enough to get drunk after it, knowing such a law exists, then it is your own fault. Bingo. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/24 "2012-12-28T16:50:58Z")
That’s the old joke about the doctor and the lawyer who have an accident on an incredibly foggy road. There is not much injury, but both are shaking, the lawyer pulls out his flask and politely offers the doctor a drink first. After the doctor takes a swig, he puts it away. “Aren’t you having some?” asks the doctor. “Not til after the police arrive” says the lawyer. My favourite is the “Gordon Lightfoot defence”. He was pulled over because he forgot to turn on his headlights; he was taken to the police station, where he blew over his limit. The judge (obviously a fan) accepted the argument that just because he was over the limit when he reached the station does not mean he was over in the car, since alcohol takes a while to be absorbed into the bloodstream. Of course, the prosecutor and the newspapers went ballistic and the appeal judge (no fan, I presume) decided no special “Get Out Of Jail Free” for celebrities. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/25 "2012-12-28T18:53:39Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > I remember that Quincy episode - the driver wasn’t drunk before the crash, he deliberately ran down the victim, and then downed the better part of a fifth, figuring that the penalty for DUI death resulting would be trivial compared to the penalty for murder. That was true in the '70s, but nowadays I think you’d get more for DUI than for first-degree murder… In this state the penalty for 1st degree murder is either: 1. 15 to life (15 years before parole eligibility) or 2. Life without parole at the jury’s discretion. The penalty for DUI causing a death is 2 to 10 years in prison, out in 3 years if you keep your nose clean… ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/26 "2012-12-28T19:49:57Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > I can certainly see the law progressing in the future to the point where if your ass is found drunk AFTER the accident, they will assume you were drunk DURING the accident. And if you are stupid enough to get drunk after it, knowing such a law exists, then it is your own fault. The law might just say that you were tested as intoxicated when the police arrived and the burden of proof falls on you to prove you weren’t intoxicated at the time of the accident. The other possibility is the DA just prosecutes you for a different felony charge instead of DUI manslaughter. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2012, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/27 "2012-12-29T03:42:21Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > In this state the penalty for 1st degree murder is either: > > 1. 15 to life (15 years before parole eligibility) or > 2. Life without parole > > at the jury’s discretion. > > The penalty for DUI causing a death is 2 to 10 years in prison, out in 3 years if you keep your nose clean… IANAL, but I think 2nd degree murder would be a more likely conviction that 1st. 2nd degree would probably be a better comparsion. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2012, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/28 "2012-12-29T03:47:34Z")
> [@Rick](#): > > IANAL, but I think 2nd degree murder would be a more likely conviction that 1st. 2nd degree would probably be a better comparsion. I understand that some states use “malice murder” for DUI causing death, but it has never happened here. That debate perhaps is for another thread… but I can’t imagine how a non-intentional homicide done while intoxicated is done with malice.. ---
**Author:** ![Seanette](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/seanette/32/9139_2.png) [@Seanette](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Seanette)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2012, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/29 "2012-12-29T05:48:09Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > I think you lost your chance at reasonable doubt when your immediate action after killing someone is to go shopping for booze. If I was on that jury I’d certainly want you in prison for the good of society. QFT. Also, you just added hit-and-run by leaving the scene of the accident to go get more “liquid stupid” (great phrase, BTW). ---
**Author:** ![Dog80](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/6bbea6/32.png) [@Dog80](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dog80)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2012, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/30 "2012-12-29T13:31:41Z")
In my hypothetical the booze store is right next corner. I doubt going there for a minute and coming back would count as a hit and run. ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2012, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/31 "2012-12-29T13:38:13Z")
Well, you already had a guy or gal come in here and post, who sat on a jury where this exact excuse was tried, and they convicted him. So, there you go, you got your answer. It won’t work. It’s not even a novel idea. ---
**Author:** ![Yorikke](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yorikke/32/4335_2.png) [@Yorikke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yorikke)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2012, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/32 "2012-12-29T13:39:04Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > I think you lost your chance at reasonable doubt when your immediate action after killing someone is to go shopping for booze. If I was on that jury I’d certainly want you in prison for the good of society. I’d ASSUME that you were up to exactly what you were in fact up to. Not everyone is a mouth-breather. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2012, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/33 "2012-12-29T15:19:17Z")
> [@Dog80](#): > > In my hypothetical the booze store is right next corner. I doubt going there for a minute and coming back would count as a hit and run. As I mentioned in my first post a dead body buys a LOT of police attention. Expect to be charged with leaving the scene, and they might throw in littering for the various broken pieces of your car laying scattered about. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2012, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/34 "2012-12-31T22:50:10Z")
> [@Rick](#): > > As I mentioned in my first post a dead body buys a LOT of police attention. Expect to be charged with leaving the scene, and they might throw in littering for the various broken pieces of your car laying scattered about. I’ll take a leaving the scene and littering charges every day of the week and twice on Sunday instead of a DUI or a DUI causing injury/death. Plus, just keep the whiskey bottle in the trunk as a prior poster suggested. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2012, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/35 "2012-12-31T23:16:38Z")
If I were on the jury in a dui/vehicular manslaughter case, the defendant’s claim that he had downed a six-pack immediately after the accident would make me _more_ likely to convict him, not less–_even if he had multiple witnesses to his having drunk those beers_. The fact that his immediate reaction to [del]such an accident[/del] such a crash was to drink would make me think he had already been imbibing too much and probably did so habitually. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2012, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/36 "2012-12-31T23:20:20Z")
**jtgain** , I think **Rick** was saying you get those IN ADDITION to doing the do. Juries tend to think the way **Skald** does. The urge to chug immediately after an accident and before the fuzz shows up seems odd to everybody. The first question then is, “Why’d he do that?” and the answer is a swift, “Because he’s trying to cloud the investigation & hide the fact he was already loaded.” That’s a jury for ya. You do NOT want to get sideways of the jury. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2012, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/37 "2012-12-31T23:22:21Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I’ll take a leaving the scene and littering charges every day of the week and twice on Sunday instead of a DUI or a DUI causing injury/death. Plus, just keep the whiskey bottle in the trunk as a prior poster suggested. I meant in addition to DUI, vehicular manslaughter, reckless driving, and possibly a murder charge. Pretty much the DA is going have stand there and ask you to catch the very large book he is going to throw at you. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2012, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/38 "2012-12-31T23:38:20Z")
Here is the link: [During deliberation, juror introduces argument not brought up at trial. Grounds for appeal?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=15849133#post15849133) ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2013, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273/39 "2013-01-03T15:20:19Z")
> [@Inigo\_Montoya](#): > > **jtgain** , I think **Rick** was saying you get those IN ADDITION to doing the do. > > Juries tend to think the way **Skald** does. The urge to chug immediately after an accident and before the fuzz shows up seems odd to everybody. The first question then is, “Why’d he do that?” and the answer is a swift, “Because he’s trying to cloud the investigation & hide the fact he was already loaded.” That’s a jury for ya. You do NOT want to get sideways of the jury. I agree. If I was the defense attorney, I would definitely ask for a bench trial in that situation or a directed verdict because jurors will definitely think that. But I would hope a judge would decide, as a matter of law, that being drunk 20 minutes after an accident when witnesses and cops saw you drinking after the accident would leave the police with no way of telling if you were or what level of intoxication you were DURING the accident. As I said, there would be other factors. Did you blow a .083 at the scene? To me, that’s evidence that you were under the limit at the time of the crash. Did you blow a .31? Then you were drunk beyond a reasonable doubt at the time of the crash. But the evidence needs to be analyzed. I agree that you would have to be a complete dumbass to drink right after a car crash, and that could be used as evidence against you. But I wouldn’t automatically put a guy in prison for being an idiot if the evidence showed reasonable doubt that he was not drunk at the time of the crash. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dui-question-would-this-fool-the-judge-police/645273.md?page=1)