Radley Balko Takes DUI Arrest and Turns It Into a Case of Cops Who Break Into a Guy’s Home for Having Words with Them
Radley Balko specializes in those stories that make you think: “Wow! I can’t believe it!” Often, it’s because you shouldn’t. Here is his latest, from today:
Via the comments, police break into Pennsylvania man’s home, arrest and jail him after he exchanges words with an off-duty state trooper. The man says he was confronting the trooper about parking in a no-parking zone. Even if the guy was drunk and cursing, as the cops allege, that isn’t cause to break into his home. The refusal to release the 911 recording certainly inclines one to think the cops are lying, here.
(Italics in original.) That’s his entire entry on the story.
Well. First of all, the cops aren’t the ones who didn’t release the tape. From the story linked by Balko:
Public Opinion filed a Freedom of Information request on Tuesday for that tape, and was notified on Wednesday by County Clerk Jean Byers, who is the county’s appointed open records officer, that “the public interest in disclosure does not outweigh the interest in nondisclosure.”
Moreover, if the guy “was drunk and cursing” then he drove drunk — because right after he mouthed off to the cop, he got in his car and drove home.
Doyle said he went to the store after watching one of the NFL playoff games and he walked to get there. He was there earlier in the day and his car wouldn’t start for the trip home, so Doyle walked home to Scotland Avenue and walked back later to get some things at Staples and Giant, and bring home his car.
The man in the pickup truck flashed a badge from his wallet, saying that badge entitled him to park there.
Doyle replied that the man was “special” since he was not in a patrol car, or in uniform, and had a child with him.
Doyle said he walked away, and the off-duty officer, Trooper Craig Finkle, called him back. Doyle said he walked part way back to Finkle and heard the off-duty officer ask on his cell phone for “units that can roll now.”
Doyle went to his car, it started, and he went home.
Balko didn’t mention that part.
If he had just been driving drunk, police may well have had exigent circumstances to make a warrantless entry into his home to preserve the evidence.
Apparently he got a blood alcohol test and was subsequently booked for DUI:
Doyle was taken to Chambersburg Hospital for a blood-alcohol test and then booked into Franklin County Jail on two charges of driving under the influence and one charge of disorderly conduct.
Balko didn’t mention that part.
What will his likely defense be? That he had a high BAC because he drank at home:
At home where he lives alone with two bulldogs, Doyle said he put away his groceries, let his dogs out of the kitchen area, and had a martini he’d prepared earlier and left on the counter. He said he’d had the same kind of drink earlier in the day.
A martini he had prepared earlier and left on the counter? Before he went out for a walk and got some groceries?
Bullshit.
My guess: the cops were right on his ass, and came in just after he got home. Meaning he didn’t have time to prepare a martini. So: he claims that he prepared one earlier, which allowed him to toss it down really quickly after he got home.
Oh — and it was really strong, ossifer! So if my BAC is high, it’s because of that really strong martini I drank after I got home.
It’s a convenient (and absurd) story that reads to me like an attempt to explain away a BAC reading over the legal limit.
Balko didn’t mention that part.
Look: I don’t know the facts here. I don’t know what his BAC was. Is it absolutely impossible that cops acted nefariously? No, it’s not absolutely impossible.
But, once you get past the spin of the linked story, this appears to be a drunk driving arrest, pure and simple.
At the very least, Balko should have told people that the guy was given a blood alcohol test, was arrested for DUI, and had a really stupid-sounding story about preparing a martini and leaving it on the counter to walk off and shop for groceries.
But Radley Balko will swallow any old line of crap that takes an anti-cop stance. And he will hide the facts from you that go against his pro-defense spin.
Par for the course from this guy.
UPDATE 1-16-10 10:26 a.m.: Some commenters appear to be missing the point. Balko’s major and inexcusable omission is that the guy admits he drove after the confrontation with the cop. So if the guy was drunk, it does potentially give the cops the right to break into his home. In most jurisdictions where DUI is a jailable offense, courts have allowed cops to break into homes without a warrant to preserve blood alcohol evidence. (It’s different if DUI is not a jailable offense, as in Wisconsin.)
How can Balko possibly justify making this about whether the cops had the right to break into the guy’s home . . . yet conceal the ONE FACT that arguably DID give them that right?