Vincent Jackson wants evidence tossed out

"In a motion filed Thursday in San Diego Superior Court, Jackson's attorney said Jackson was forced to have his blood drawn "against his will" after repeatedly requesting a breath test instead, as was his right."

Sounds to me like a cop who was desperate to get his name in the papers may have screwed this thing up. If what VJ is saying is true, I wouldn't doubt this whole DUI case against him being thrown out.

about 3 years ago John Gennaro 7 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

yeah

that red light camera took a picture of me running that red light against my will also. I’m going to see if I can get it thrown out as well.

Thanks for the idea VJ!!

by Stephen (shaynes41) on May 1, 2009 6:49 AM PDT reply actions

Having blood drawn

is basically illegal under 4th amendment search a seizure laws unless the detainee opts to forgo the breathalizer in favor of a blood test. Compulsive blood draw is usually held invalid if other tests such as a breathalyzer test are available and have been or could have been performed.

VJ will not get the DUI. Good news as a fan, bad news if you have any faith that cops actually abide by the laws they are entrusted to enforce.

by soulSD on May 1, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions

according to VJ's lawyer

It sounds like the breathalizer wasn’t functioning. Of course you would demand the test be done by a machine that wasn’t functioning, especially if:

Jackson’s blood-alcohol content measured 0.17 percent, according to court records. The legal limit in California is 0.08 percent

and if:

At the time of his arrest, Jackson was on five years probation for a 2006 drunken driving arrest and conviction in San Diego.

as you said, he will probably get off. Good news for the Chargers offense, but bad news if you enjoy seeing laws fairly enforced and would like people to be held responsible for their actions.

by Stephen (shaynes41) on May 1, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions

Not to nitpick but

VJs lawyer never said the machine wasn’t working. He said

the officer became impatient when the machine didn’t accept the sample right away

During DUI arrests there are usually 2-4 police cars present, each with their own working breathalizer. So if his didn’t work (the sheer fact that the cop didn’t know how to work his own equipment is suspect) he could have used any of the other cops breathalizers.

I’m thinking the cop thought VJ may have been under the influence of other substances (cocaine, pot) but, not having any reason (VJ acting erratically or being aggressive), he decided to fake the machine not working to get the blood test to nail a big name football star.

VJ is an idiot. F that guy for being such an arrogant prick. But also F the cop for essentially trying to bend the rules in order to further screw over a citizen. Thats not the way it works.

by soulSD on May 1, 2009 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions

So ive been reading

that the most likely reason the breathalizer didn’t accept the sample was because VJ did not blow hard enough into the breathalizer. Something that is very likely considering he is on probation. If this is true the blood test are allowable in court and VJ is fucked. Also this means that the cop was in fact acting within the law and is not a douche and i apologize.

by soulSD on May 1, 2009 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions

also

there is implied consent to chemical tests if you are behind the wheel of a car in the state of california. Either blood or breath (there may be a urine one now as well). I’m not sure the choice is a right as much as it is a preference.

plus 0.17 is pretty drunk, 10 drinks drunk… He’s lucky he didn’t kill someone.

by Stephen (shaynes41) on May 1, 2009 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah

.17 is seriously impaired. These aren’t choir boys, but call a damn cab; and if you’re that drunk sack up and take what’s coming to you. All this hiding behind procedure says is that he has learned nothing.

"Football is a physical sport, sometimes you have a disagreement on what's going on, and you have a discussion about it." Kris Dielman

by Brian (DaBolts) on May 1, 2009 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions