Our Chicago DUI Lawyers found this odd story out of Kentucky.  A man was pulled over for driving erratically and when questioned by the police, the man admitted that the cause of his poor driving was the oral sex he was receiving while driving. Then, after taking a breathalyzer that proves the man is under the legal limit, the police arrest him for DUI anyways.

A Louisville man was arrested for driving under the influence early Thursday morning, but told officers the reason for his erratic driving was because he was receiving oral sex from his female passenger, according to an arrest citation.

Jason Kircher, 31, was charged with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence, careless driving and speeding after he was clocked on Interstate 64 going 66 mph in a 55 mph zone, the citation said.

After an officer pulled Kircher’s vehicle over about 2:20 a.m., he found an open container on the vehicle’s console, plus Kircher had “glassy eyes,” according to the citation. Kircher then failed several sobriety tests.

He had a blood alcohol level of .054.

The legal limit in Kentucky is .08, but drivers can be convicted of drunken driving at levels lower than that based on other evidence that indicates impairment, according to the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet.

His passenger, Jessica Talarovich, 31, of Louisville, who police referred to as Kircher’s girlfriend, also was arrested and charged with public intoxication and possession of an open alcoholic container in a motor vehicle, according to her citation.

While the sex angle of this story will get a lot of attention, how about the fact that the man was arrested for DUI despite blowing UNDER the legal limit?  This is a perfect example of the joke DUI arrests have become.  Police, despite having evidence that someone is NOT under the influence, effectuate an arrest for driving under the influence.  Only in the world of DUI enforcement could this fly.

Our Chicago DUI Lawyers urge everyone to be safe and responsible if heading out this weekend. Another Chicago DUI checkpoint is set up, this time in the Englewood district.

The Chicago Police Department will conduct a DUI Strike Force Patrol in the Englewood (007th) District. The DUI Strike Force Patrol will commence at 8:00 p.m. on Friday, March 4, 2011 and end at 4:00 a.m. on Saturday, March 5, 2011.

Our Chicago DUI Attorneys urge everyone to be responsible when heading out this Friday night.  Another Chicago DUI Checkpoint is set of the Harrison District.

DUI STRIKE FORCE PATROL IN THE HARRISON (011th) DISTRICT

The Chicago Police Department will conduct a DUI Strike Force Patrol in the Harrison (011th) District beginning at 8:00 p.m., Friday, February 25, 2011 and ending at 4:00 a.m. on Saturday, February 26, 2011. DUI Strike Force Patrols conducted by the Department are funded by a grant from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and administered through the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT).

Our Chicago DUI Lawyers are constantly amazed at how one’s Constitutional Rights are destroyed everyday in the name of DUI.  This week, we explore the story of Rodger Festa, a decorated vietnam vetern who was arrested for DUI after blowing a .03.  That’s right, .03, or more that 60% BELOW the legal limit.

Federal Court Upholds DUI Jailing of Sober Man

The Eleventh Circuit US Court of Appeals on Tuesday saw no problem with jailing a man for eight hours after he blew .03 on a breathalyzer — far below the legal limit. Santa Rosa County, Florida sheriff’s deputies had arrested Roger A. Festa on the charge of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) on April 9, 2005. Since he had been entirely sober, Festa sued Deputy Adam Teichner and Deputy Douglas Burgett for unlawful arrest.

On the day in question, Burgett had received a 911 call describing a vehicle similar to Festa’s swerving. Burgett noticed Festa’s car and claimed he saw it make a sudden lane change in order to avoid a car that had made an unexpected turn. He also noted that Festa, while not speeding, was varying his velocity. Burgett initiated the stop.

Festa explained to the deputy that he and his wife were in an unfamiliar area looking for a place to eat. He admitted that he had a single drink earlier in the afternoon. Burgett claimed he smelled a “mild odor” of alcohol. Deputy Teichner performed the roadside sobriety tests and brought Festa to the station for a breath test that registered .03.

“Unfortunately, I couldn’t just let you go,” Burgett told Festa in a court deposition. “You were under arrest for DUI.”

Festa, who could add to his arrest statistics for the month, then explained how plea bargains would take care of the inconvenience done to Festa.

“Basically, once you were arrested for DUI, I made a determination from the conversations that we had between there and the jail that I was going to have this pled down to a reckless driving and then the reckless driving to a [nolle prosequi] so you would suffer no monetary damages or a record,” Burgett said.

Instead of cutting a deal, Festa pleaded not guilty to both charges. The state eventually dropped the DUI charge and a judge tossed the reckless driving charge nearly a year later. The three-judge federal appeals panel found that the deputies were entitled to immunity for their actions while on duty because they had done nothing unconstitutional.

“No decision from the United States Supreme Court, this court, nor the Florida Supreme Court has clearly established that continued detention after an arrestee registers a breath-alcohol level of 0.05 or less is unconstitutional,” the per curiam decision stated. “Indeed, neither the United States Supreme Court, this court, nor the Florida Supreme Court has established within what time frame nor under what circumstances an officer has an affirmative duty to release an arrestee. We therefore cannot conclude that Deputies Teichner and Burgett had fair warning that their continued detention of Festa was unconstitutional.”

“No decision…has clearly established…” is the reasoning that the Supreme’s use to justify this joke of an arrest.  In other words, it’s incumbent on Festa to find a similiar situation in which someone was arrested and detained with a .03 BAC.  And if he can’t find a case like that?  Too bad, you lose.

Would the same reasoning have applied if someone was held for a burglary that the evidence showed they didn’t commit?  Nope, only in the world of DUI arrests can something like this happen. 

Our Chicago DUI Lawyers urge everyone to be careful and responsible out there this weekend.

ROADSIDE SAFETY CHECK IN THE Ogden (10th) DISTRICT
The Chicago Police Department will conduct a Roadside Safety Check in the Ogden (10th) District at 2701 S. Western Ave. The Roadside Safety Check will commence at 8:00 p.m. on Friday, February 18, 2011 and end at 4:00 a.m. on Sunday, February 19, 2011.

The Super Bowl is upon and with it comes the usual hype – not about the game, mind you, but about DUI.  Our Chicago DUI Lawyers explore the latest tactics design to violate your 4th Amendment Rights while lining the coffers of local police departments and municipalities.

Springfield, Illinois – DUI Checkpoints and Patrols Scheduled Throughout Super Bowl Weekend 2011

SPRINGFIELD– The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) and Illinois State Police (ISP) officials today launched the You Drink & Drive. You Lose campaign and announced their efforts to boost enforcement over Super Bowl weekend. As part of the mobilization, nearly 100 local police departments and county sheriff offices will host a combined total of over 500 roadside safety checks, safety belt enforcement zones and other details scheduled to take place this weekend.

Highly visible law enforcement and roadside safety checks are an effective tool in the impaired driving battle.

Of course there are ZERO statistics to back up the claim that these checkpoints, violations of your right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, are effective at all.  In fact, the American Beverage Institute estimates that  around three DUI arrests are made out of every 1,000 stops conducted during a checkpoint.  Far more effective, are roving patrols, which look out for erratic driving behavior.

“[T]he number of DWI arrests made by the roving patrol program was nearly three times the average number of DWIs made by the checkpoint programs,” NHTSA reported. “If making a large number of DWI arrests is an objective of a program, [the data] clearly suggests that roving patrols would be the preferred option.”

“Roadblocks, lower arrest thresholds, and red-ribbon campaigns are not going to change the behavior of the alcohol abusers who are the source of today’s drunk driving problem,” said ABI executive director John Doyle. “In fact, these efforts divert funds and attention away from the real problem. We need to use the most effective law enforcement methods we have to get drunk drivers off the road.”

So if roving patrol are more effective, why would Illinois use sobriety checkpoints?

Approximately $400,000 in federal highway safety funds are being committed to provide stepped up impaired driving and safety belt enforcement.

Follow the money, that’s our guess.

Our Chicago Injury Lawyers bring you the latest in absurd lawsuits.  A woman is suing Diddy for, among other things, conspiring with Rodney King to orchestrate the 9/11 attack in New York City.

Diddy Sued for $1 Trillion, Blamed for 9/11

A woman has filed a $1 trillion lawsuit against Diddy (real name: Sean Combs), alleging that he caused 9/11, put her child in the hospital and stole a poker chip worth “100 zillions of dollars.”

Valerie Joyce Wilson Turks is seeking a restraining order against the mogul, which a judge denied, but set a hearing for Jan. 31.

Turks believes Diddy, his ex-girlfriend Kim Porter (the mother of their twins) and LAPD brutality victim Rodney King were behind the collapse of the World Trade Center towers, according to court papers obtained by RadarOnline.com.

“[Diddy] went through Kim Porter and Rodney King and knocked down the WTC and then they all came and knocked my children down. Set me up to be on disability and disabled my baby. he put my baby in a wheelchair,” Turks writes in her papers.

Turks claims she once dated Diddy, and they have a son together, Cornelius Wilson, 23.

She also says: “”Plus I won a lot of money at the casino in Mississippi and Sean P. Diddy Combs has my chip to my money. I heard he gave it to Gwen Allen to hold but she can not cash it in. I want my chip please help me. it’s well worth over 100 zillions of dollars, and my hospital keys. They put me and my baby in the hospital and broke my baby 2 legs and sexual assaulted my children and crushed us.”

She’s asking for $900 billion dollars in child support, and $100 billion dollars for “loss of income.”

Our Injury Lawyers wish her all the best.

Our Chicago DUI Lawyers ask: When does not starting your car equal driving your car?  Answer: When it comes to convicting people of DUI.  Want proof?  Look at what happened to a MA man who didn’t even start his car but was nevertheless charged with drunk driving.

Court: Key enough for drunk driving conviction

By Associated Press

The state Appeals Court has ruled that someone who inserts a key in a car’s ignition and turns on the vehicle’s electricity without starting the engine can be convicted of drunken driving.

Robert S. McGillivary of Salisbury appealed his 2007 drunken driving conviction on the grounds that he was not operating the vehicle when an officer found him slumped over the steering wheel with the key in the ignition and the dashboard illuminated.

The court said Tuesday that turning the key is the first step in a sequence to set the vehicle in motion and “was sufficient to permit the jury to conclude that he ’operated’ the motor vehicle.”

So if I point a gun at someone, it’s murder?  What if I “think about” robbing a bank?  The penal code is full of “attempted” crimes (murder, robbery), so why not a charge of “attempted drunk driving”?  Only in the world of DUI prosecution can someone be found guilty of a crime, without even committing the crime.

Our Chicago Injury Lawyers got a kick out of the video of the woman who fell in the mall fountain while texting.  Now we learn that the woman has filed a lawsuit against the mall.

Texting woman falls in fountain, files lawsuit

FRESNO, California (KFSN) — Earlier this week ABC30 showed you video of a woman who mistakenly fell into the fountain at a Pennsylvania mall, because she was distracted by text messaging. Well now that woman is suing the mall for not helping her.

The video has received more than 1.5 million views since it went viral on YouTube last week. The woman in the video, Cathy Cruz Marrero, doesn’t think the video is very funny. She claims she could have gotten seriously hurt and that the security guards should have helped instead of laugh.

“I’m just like dumbfounded. And all I kept saying was, ‘I fell. I fell. I fell in the fountain. I fell in the fountain.’”

Marrero has hired a lawyer to pursue legal action. The investigation is ongoing at the mall as to who leaked the video online.

Thanks to Ms. Marrero for giving personal injury lawyers a bad name.  Good luck with this one.