Students Against Destructive Decisions

In a somewhat confusing attempt to build an organization similar to MADD, students decided to form their own group, which is easiest described as SADD. The confusing part is what SADD actually stands for… It started out as Students Against Driving Drunk, then morphed into Students Against Destructive Decisions, and most people think it stands for Students Against Drunk Driving. However, even though it is not exactly straight forward on what SADD actually initials stand for, it has turned into a very successful organization.

SADD’s primary goal is the prevention of substance and alcohol abuse in the United States. It has well over 10,000 chapters that exist in our middle schools, high schools, and colleges. It was founded at Wayland High School in Wayland, Massachusetts back in 1981. The reason for its formation was that two hockey player at the high school were killed in unrelated car accidents where alcohol was involved. Their initial mission was to encourage youths to say “No” to drinking and driving drunk.

As SADD grew in numbers, so did their message. In the year 1997 they added illegal drugs to the list of substances to say “No” to, and took active roles in subject matters such as violence and suicide. So now that their mission had expanded past just driving drunk, their name no longer fit. They decided to keep the SADD name, just change what it stood for. The new name would be Students Against Destructive Decisions. Being that this name is completely generic, they won’t likely face the same problems in the future as this should encompass just about anything you could think of.

In order to aid in accomplishing their mission, SADD came up with the Contract for Life. This is a “contract” that both the students and parents sign that states that the student (and parents) will make their best effort to avoid destructive behaviors such as drinking and driving or using illegal drugs. Stipulations were added to ensure that if a child saw destructive acts occurring at a party or function, the parents would pick them up and not ask any questions. They would then have a discussion with the students the following day.

Taylor Dayne Arrested for DUI

After failing a field sobriety test in Los Angeles, California back on March 6 Taylor Dayne was arrested and charged with one count of misdemeanor DUI.

However, Dayne has hired a DUI attorney to help her get the DUI charges removed, and it looks like there is a good chance the cops may have made mistakes on this one. The DUI lawyer on the case here is Scott Spindel.

She blew a .07 into the breathalyzer, which is under the legal limit in California Law (.08). And what is she being charged with? Well, she is charged with blowing above the legal limit. Seems pretty cut and dry… To quote DUI atorney Scott Spindel, they “intend to vigorously fight this case.” We shall soon see as she is due back in a California court on June 2.

Cedric Benson Arrested for Boating While Intoxicated

Cedric Bensen, running back for the Chicago Bears, was arrested for intoxicated boating in Austin, Texas while operating a boat with around 15 people aboard. Consistent with his play on the NFL football field, Bensen would not go down easy…

Drinking it up on Lake Travis on Saturday night, Bensen was first given a field sobriety test by the Lower Colorado River Authority. He became a little out of control after failing the test on the officer’s boat (which seems like it might be a challenge in itself).

“When Benson did not pass the test, he presented himself as a threat to the officer and argued about whether or not he would be taken to land to have a follow-up field sobriety test performed on land and refused to put on a life jacket,” the authority said in a statement.

Bensen was then pepper sprayed, and then wouldn’t leave the officer’s boat. So as he turned himself into dead weight and put on his tantrum face, he was dragged to the Travis County jail in Austin, Texas.

Wrestler Bodyslammed for Suspicion of DUI

Anthony “Santino” Morella, who was a former WWE Intercontinental Champion, was arrested early yesterday morning on suspicion of DUI in Tampa, Florida.

Consistent with normal patterns of drunk drivers, Florida police pulled Marella over. After noticing that he had “bloodshot, watery and glassy eyes”, and he failed two field sobriety tests, he was arrested. So what all did the wrestler tell the cops that he had to drink that night? Well, instead of using the standard two or three beers line, he tried to make it a little bit more believable at least and said he had three Miller Lights and one Kamikaze. Not a bad try…

He did catch a break on his blood alcohol content though. The Hillsborough County jail reported that his BAC was around .061, under the legal limit in Florida (.08).

The former WWE star isn’t out of the woods yet though. This is because retrograde extrapolation. Basically, from the time he was behind the wheel to the time he took the blood test took about two hours. Retrograde extrapolation can be used to estimate what his BAC was at the actual time of driving.

We will soon see how this plays out. But for now, Morella was released on $500 bail.

The Effectiveness of Ignition Interlock Devices in California

There is an interesting study on IID’s done in California by the California Department of Motor Vehicles that raises several issues regarding if using IID’s is actually effective.

The primary goal of ignition interlock devices is safety. This is supposedly accomplished by preventing the car’s ignition from working if the driver’s blood alcohol concentration is not only under the state’s defined legal limit (usually .08), but in most cases alcohol free. Or, in many cases, one the passenger’s BAC is 0.0…

So what were some of the conclusions from California’s study? Is it effectively keeping drunk individuals off of the road? Basically, are we all safer now? Here is some of the conclusions provided in the report entitled AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF IGNITION INTERLOCK IN CALIFORNIA:

• 1. The expected effect that an IID order/restriction issued by the court would result in a lower rate of subsequent DUI convictions was not observed
  
  
• 2. The risk of a subsequent crash was higher for drivers installing an IID, compared to drivers not installing a device
  
  
• 3. Drivers installing an IID had a risk of a subsequent crash that was 84% higher than drivers not installing an IID
  
  
• 4. The results of this outcome study clearly show that IIDs are not effective in reducing DUI convictions or incidents for first DUI offenders
  
  
• 5. Because there is no evidence that interlocks are an effective traffic safety measure for first DUI offenders, the use of the devices should not be emphasized
  
  

Not exactly a ringing endorcement of ignition interlock devices in California…

Richie Sambora DUI Update

Continuing on with the Richie Sambora DUI situation, he has now officially plea bargained his DUI case.

Busted with a blood alcohol level of .13, his DUI attorney wisely advised him to plead no contest to driving with a blood alcohol contentration of .08 or higher. In doing so, his driving under the influence charge was dismissed, and the prosecutors agreed not to file child endangerment charges.

Just to recap the situation, he was arrested on DUI charges in Laguna Beach, California last month while driving with his 10-year-old daughter Ava in the car. Because of the fact that his BAC was .13, the Laguna Beach, California Police Department recommended that child endangerment charges were filed. Later on the prosecutors decided there was not enough evidence for this.

So the DUI penalties must be outrageous to get off with so little consequence right? Well, Sambora will pay a fine of $390 in addition to DUI penalties totaling around $1600. In addition to this he will face three years of probation — showing the absolute necessity of hiring a California DUI attorney!

Breath Testing Errors

Breath testing techniques such as a breathalyzer are definetely not an exact science. There are many factors that can cause inaccurate results, such as temperature, breathing patterns, and hematocrit (cell volume of blood). All are described below.

Temperature - A breathalyzer reading is often incorrect due to the fact that it can be sensitive to the temperature. In order for the reading to be accurate, the device must be recalibrated to adjust for the current air temperature. In addition to this, the body temperature of the person taking the breath test can also be a factor.

Breathing Patterns - If the breathing pattern of the subject is higher than normal, such as after running, in many cases the blood alcohol content reading is lower. For example, if the subject is hyperventilating, the BAC will read an amazing 32% lower (approximate). In contrast to this, breathing less than normal (like holding your breath) will cause an increase in the BAC reading.

Hematocrit (Cell Volume of Blood) - Most breathalyzers are configured to assume a hematocrit of around 47%, and within the range of 42% to 52% for men and 37% to 47% for women. In the scenerio that the subjects cell volume of blood does not fall within these ranges, then the results of the breath test might be inaccurate.

Was Richie Sambora Drunk When Arrested For DUI?

Earlier in the week, Richie Sambora was pulled over for driving erratically and suspicion of DUI. But was he actually over the legal limit? That question is under dispute now.

After being arrested in Laguna Beach, California, he volunteerly submitted to having a blood alcohol test. The results from this should be known in about a week from now. It is now coming out that several witnesses are stating that he really didn’t drink very much, and it is unlikely that his blood alcohol content will register above the legal limit in California, which is .08.

As this is certainly good news for Sambora, there is plenty of bad news on the way. It is being reported that his ex-wife Heather Locklear is going to try and gain more child custody of Ava as a result of this situation. But to Richie’s defense, Heather’s issues are right up there with his, so losing child custody is probably not in the cards.

Richie Sambora Arrested for DUI

Last night around 11:00 PM Richie Sambora (guitarist for Bon Jovi) was arrested for DUI while driving drunk in Laguna Beach, California. Driving in his black Hummer, police officers noticed that he was driving erratically and decided to pull him over.

He was given several field sobriety tests, and failed them all miserably… He found that it was in his best interet to refuse the breathalyzer, so the police had no chance but to take him into the station. After being detained for DUI by law enforcement, Samboro was given a blood test.

Sadly, it was later learned that Samboro’s daughter, 10-year-old Ava, was in the car while he was driving drunk, as well as another child and another woman. Ava’s mother is Heather Locklear. This could lead to criminal charges of child endangerment for Sambora.

Retrograde Extrapolation

To explain what retrograde extrapolation is and why it is needed, imagine that you have been pulled over for drunken driving. Knowing that you are drunk, you decide that it is in your best interest to refuse the breathalyzer test. In doing so, the police officer then puts you in the back of the car and takes you into the station. In the police station you are then administered a blood test to see what your blood alcohol content is.

From the police’s perspective, although the blood alcohol test has been proven to be very accurate, it does not take into consideration factors that effect the results from the time you were driving to the time the blood test was done. This is where retrograde extrapolation comes into play.

Retrograde extrapolation is basically a mathematical formula that is used to estimate what one’s blood alcohol concentration was at the actual time of driving. Generally, it is believed that someone’s blood alcohol level will decrease by .015 to .020 percent a hour. This is not always accurate though given factors such as body temperature, alcohol type, and amount of food consumed.

Surprisingly, more and more states are allowing this sort of evidence to be permissible in court, even though it is very speculative. To deal the speculative problems, most of the time limits are put on this presumption, which is usually somewhere around two to three hours. If the defendant has evidence to rebut the presumption, it is usually permitted as well.