Reports of Hines Ward's DUI Arrest Suggest the Former Georgia Bulldogs Star Is Innocent
by T Kyle King on Jul 10, 2011 9:43 AM EDT
in Georgia Bulldogs Football
Email
PrintAccording to reports, Ward was polite to his arresting officers, was allowed to drive himself to the police station, had a passenger who hadn't been drinking and claimed he'd only had two drinks. He failed a field sobriety test before refusing a breathalyzer test, which equals an automatic booking.
Can't imagine how the reigning Dancing With The Stars champion could fail a field sobriety test if he wasn't actually intoxicated, but that's the claim.
Jason Kirk (July 10, 2011)
That’s a fair question, and all the facts are not known, so I can’t give a complete answer, but I am able to offer a reasonable surmise, the gist of which boils down to this: it depends on the type of field sobriety test he was administered.
Frankly, some of these tests are tough to do, even when you’re sober. Hines Ward is a Super Bowl MVP and dancing champion, so it’s hard to believe he couldn’t do any of the walking-a-straight-line/balancing-on-one-leg tricks, but have you ever tried reciting the alphabet backwards or starting with 100 and continuing to subtract seven continuously? These are not simple tasks, particularly in a tense situation at 2:30 in the morning. That’s not to say I know for sure that Ward wasn’t impaired, just that Ward’s reported failure to pass a field sobriety test---note the reported number: a field sobriety test, singular---isn’t proof that he was.
You know what does suggest his lack of impairment? The fact that he drove while there was someone in the car who hadn’t been drinking, who presumably could have driven if Ward had had too much to drink. The fact that his booking on a misdemeanor charge appears to have been automatic, due to his refusal to take a breathalyzer test, rather than due to the actual circumstances surrounding his case. Oh, also, the fact that the police allowed him to drive the damned car to the station!
I don’t do criminal defense work, so this isn’t an informed legal opinion or anything, but it seems to me that, if the cops let you drive your own car after arresting you for DUI, either they didn’t think you were drunk or they’re some damned incompetent cops.
Ward’s initial offense, by the way, was failing to maintain his lane and hitting a curb in his Aston Martin. (That’s right, he was driving a James Bond car. Even when getting arrested for DUI, Hines Ward is just cool.) He acknowledged on Facebook on Friday that he has a problem with "texting, tweeting, or facebook while driving." (That’s right, Hines Ward uses the Oxford comma. Whether he should’ve written "facebooking" instead of "facebook" is a separate conversation.)
Once again, we don’t know all the facts, but, at this point, the surrounding circumstances suggest to me---an admittedly biased observer---that Hines Ward, while doing something he shouldn’t have been doing, did not drive under the influence of alcohol. I know not what course others may take, but, as for me and my house, we will believe Hines Ward is innocent until and unless he is proven guilty.
I still don’t rule out throwing a virgin into a volcano, just to be on the safe side, though.
Go ‘Dawgs!
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
A tremendous explanation, as always.
I’ll also note I’ve presumed Ward’s innocence since yesterday morning:
I am proud to be a Kennesaw State Fighting Owl. -- Vince Dooley
Fair enough.
Thanks for the clarification; it wasn’t my intention to imply that you were presuming guilt—-you have been remarkably fair toward Georgia in general at SB Nation Atlanta, even more so than Year2 and cocknfire at Team Speed Kills, and they do a good job of it themselves—-merely that you had asked the question, which I thought was worthy of an answer. It’s all good.
One thing I neglected to mention: Hines looks ticked, but not toasted, in his mug shot. That’s only anecdotal evidence, but, after Damon Evans’s mug shot a year ago essentially removed all doubt as to his impairment in the public mind, it’s worth noting that Ward didn’t look drunk.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jul 10, 2011 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
I've never driven while intoxicated or had to take a field sobriety test
But I can tell you right now… I’d fail them stone cold sober.
"If there's one thing worse than chlamydia, it's Florida." ~ Emma Stone
by RedCrake on Jul 10, 2011 11:03 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Ok... so I could do the subtraction
I am a math teacher after all… but I have terrible balance (and that was before the reconstructive surgery on my ankle).
"If there's one thing worse than chlamydia, it's Florida." ~ Emma Stone
by RedCrake on Jul 10, 2011 11:05 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I underwent a field sobriety test once.
It was spring of my third year in law school, and I had one of those life-flashing-before-my-eyes moments that only those with a relatively sheltered existence might have (because most of the world has to endure much worse, after all). I was on my way downtown from a St. Patrick’s Day party where I’d had exactly one drink. It was on Oconee Street just north of the bridge over the river (not too far from what now is the Blind Pig). I remember it very clearly. I was nervous as hell. I’d taken the bar exam a month earlier. I was certain that I was not impaired but not certain I could demonstrate it adequately. I had my Aaron Bonding T-shirt in the glove box, but I swear I’d done that just as a joke and to spark conversation: I never thought I’d use it. My performance satisfied the police officer, and I proceeded to go downtown and get drunk (leaving my car downtown until morning).
I imagine that Hines has better composure under pressure than I did at 24, but I also believe that there are factors that impede field sobriety test performance other than impairment from ingestion of intoxicants.
Fulmer Cup
Speaking of virgins into the volcano, current UGA players have done pretty darn good this offseason staying out of trouble haven’t they? The new AD must be laying down the law.
100-93-86…my head hurts.
"We don't see eye to eye on everything. I say to-may-to, my wife says 'Oh shut the F*** Up!" - Dennis Miller
by Georgia Sports Guy on Jul 10, 2011 11:58 AM EDT reply actions
In most states, refusual to blow is an automatic suspension of license.
What I really and truly don’t get is that they let him drive. Yes, he will walk clean and free because his lawyer will clean house with this. You are suspected of drinking and driving and they let him drive? Du Huh? I am not sure why he didn’t blow, however, I am willing to bet he had a few, and maybe wasn’t completely hammered, but unsure if he would be over .08 or not. By the way, it doesnt take a lot to be over .08.
The field sobriety test is just CYA for a cop to say you appeared drunk to demand a breathalyzer. It is usually incorrectly administered and anything you do, even for a second, like bobble while standing on one leg, can be grounds to say you failed. The only true test is the eye test, which again, most cops do not truly know how to administer and then they can just say you failed it. They get away with all this because once you take the breathalyzer, you either pass and are let go or fail and they go “told you so.” The purpose of the field sobriety test is not to say, “Yea, you are ok.” It’s to provide reason to go to what they want to do which is the breathalyzer.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
I'm not sure of the current laws....
But my dad, a former police officer, always said if you are stupid enough to drive drunk, be smart enough to demand a blood test. Barring that demand a urine test. Barring that take a breath test at the police station. If you’re borderline, that extra time can make quite a difference.
"If there's one thing worse than chlamydia, it's Florida." ~ Emma Stone
by RedCrake on Jul 10, 2011 2:35 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
This is all true.
In Kansas, they just went to mandatory blow and go’s if you are over .08. So, let’s say you are sitting the fence of .08. The extra hour may get you below that.
Disclaimer – I am not advocating drinking and driving. However, I do feel the .08 limit was pushed by political factors and DUIs have now become a source of revenue rather than a safety concern in many cities (like Wichita). Some people can’t drive sober, some people drive just fine at .08. I think it should have never gone below .10 myself. I also feel the field sobriety test is a joke, not one person in wichita ever “passes” it, regardless if they are over the limit or not. I also find the laws that are based on “was going to drive” basically unconstitutional, but they get away with that to. That’s when you are in the driver’s seat but not driving.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
Yes.
In Georgia, the limit used to be .15 (dating myself again).
And while there’s nothing more tragic than people being killed by hammered drivers, .08 is a nearly Draconian cutoff point, IMO. There are some people that will hit that point after one drink or glass of wine, while others need a good sousing to reach it.
Perhaps better technology will balance things out.
Then don’t drive. Or don’t drink.
Acting like you are entitled to have a few drinks and drive is what’s draconian.
Well, by law,
you are entitled to have a few drinks and then drive (generally between two to three, for most folks). The complaint isn’t with the law itself, it’s with the idea that a 100 pound college freshman is equally impaired at .08 as a 215 pound 25 year old. That’s just not the case.
by hailtogeorgia on Jul 11, 2011 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions
better technology
how about building a breathalyzer into a car’s ignition system? you blow to start – if you’re over the limit, the car won’t start. Weight calibration systems in the seat can detect that a new person has entered the driver’s seat (the DD) and said new person then blows to start the car.
I’ve got a better idea.
If you have even one sip of alcohol, don’t drive.
Its not like you need alcohol to live.
A sip?
A beer or glass of wine when I’m out to dinner is my self-imposed limit. I think a sip is a bit unrealistic.
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
Good assessments, tankertoad and RedCrake.
Yeah, not agreeing to the breathalyzer looks bad, but the blood test is the way to go. Ward said he’d had a couple of drinks, which is the common answer in that situation. “Sir, have you been drinking?” “Just a couple of beers.” I suspect tankertoad is right that he’d had a little, but not a lot; just looking at that mug shot, you can tell Ward wasn’t Damon Evans hammered, but he may not have been sure, which is understandable. I’ve never been administered a breathalyzer test, so I don’t know what .08 “feels” like.
There are other considerations besides how much he had to drink, as well. Ward is listed at 205 pounds, and he was pulled over around 2:30 a.m. before being booked at 3:41 a.m. Based on the BAC chart, four drinks—-twice what Ward claimed—-would get a 200-pound man only to .075, not counting the .015 his BAC would drop for each hour after he started drinking.
If Ward had consumed six drinks starting at 10:30 p.m., his BAC at 2:30 a.m. would have been .053 (.113 – [.015 × 4]). Unless Hines drank a heck of a lot more than he claimed, and was a heck of a lot drunker than his mug shot makes him look, it’s hard to believe Ward was impaired by alcohol . . . and it wouldn’t be the first time Ward was arrested erroneously.
Go 'Dawgs!
You did the math for me, which was my next step, thanks. And this is all correct.
But the real deal is they let him drive. His lawyer is going to clean house with that.
I am going to say it, he got pulled over and booked for SODWB, or however that acronym goes.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
Given Ward's eclectic ethnic heritage, I think that acronym would have to be a little longer! :)
Maybe he was arrested for DWDWTS: “Driving While Dancing With The Stars!”
In any case, you’re correct. You don’t arrest a guy for unlawful possession of a firearm, then give him the gun back to carry it down to the property room for you. If he was too drunk to drive, they wouldn’t have let him drive; put another way, if Hines Ward was drunk, those cops need to be fired for putting a drunk driver behind the wheel and ordering him to drive drunk. There’s a Ron White joke waiting to be made here.
Go 'Dawgs!
Buford Hwy in an Aston Martin at 2:30 am might make you "stick out" somewhat
Let me think what is going on around Buford Highway at that time……
Ive never heard of a DUI suspect being allowed to drive to the police station
I have heard that sometimes the police will let you go and follow … hoping to get some more video evidence of impairment. I’m not particularly convinced “field sobriety tests” are fair, and “failing” one means zip to me since they’re entirely subjective. I think he’ll be exonerated and he probably has been told by friends and lawyers never to blow if you think its even close – even if you get an administrative suspension.
But it’s still a bit of a mess and ask a cop and you’ll hear that no one ever admits to more than two drinks, even when they’ve downed the equivalent of a 12 pack. I hope this ends well for Hines, but his off-the-field reputation as a good guy is so strong, I think this willl be a blip on the radar screen so long as he doesn’t have another one.
Here's a health, Carolina, forever to thee! UNIVERSITAS CAROLIN MERID. 1801 Emollit mores nec sinit esse feros (Ovid)
Not to be a contrarian or anything ...
… but the story this post is based on appears to be based on an AJC story, which doesn’t appear to suggest in any way at all that Ward was allowed to drive himself.
It says this: According to police, a passenger in Ward’s car had not been drinking, and he was allowed to drive the car instead of it being impounded.
Which I interpret to mean that the passenger, not Ward, was allowed to drive the car, so that it wasn’t towed and impounded.
That would be a major difference obviously.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
Hmm, I think you're right.
Kind of a tricky sentence I guess, and others have cited it the same way as I did. But yeah, you’re probably right.
I am proud to be a Kennesaw State Fighting Owl. -- Vince Dooley
Yeah, it's a poorly edited sentence
But then that’s rather par for the course at the AJC any more.
Well, crap.
This is why I don’t do criminal defense work.
Thanks for the correction, RJohn. Obviously, your reading makes more sense, and severely undercuts my argument, though the Journal-Constitution could’ve worded that sentence much more clearly. For obvious reasons, it never occurred to me that the passenger in a car driven by a Ray Goff-era Georgia player arrested for driving under the influence would be a “he.”
As an aside, when I was covering the police beat for The Campus Observer 20 years ago, I wrote a story about an international student who had been the victim of a crime. He was Asian, and his last name was “He,” so I was constantly alternating between the pronoun “he” and the proper name “He.” My editor initially corrected what he thought was a capitalization error before I pointed the oddity out to him.
Go 'Dawgs!
Many people get tripped up by the antecedent-precedent problem
That’s why I always default for names (or in this case a description as “the passenger was allowed”) when needed for clarity’s sake. I remember having English teachers and professors not liking that and thinking I should throw in more flowery language, or at the very least more pronouns. Well sorry, Professor I-Drink-Canned-Italian-Water. If my sentence refers to two or more people, by name, of the same gender, I am going to use names so as to make my point perfectly clear. And no I will not use flowery descriptions for the sake of purple prose; writing essays is about writing to express ideas clearly not about showing off how many ludicrous titles I can come up with for Oedipus.
/yes i’m still bitter over a class from first semester at UGA
The hardest thing to write in the English language is
a simple declarative sentence.
by Ohio-On-The-Gulf Dog on Jul 10, 2011 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I struggle mightily
Is the term m.f.er gender specific? The next time I am in Cambridge discussing issues of the day, I do not want to come off as unread if I happen to mention Casey Anthony or certain prosecuting attorneys…or jurors.
The984, I don't know if you've read . . .
. . . Joshua Foer’s Moonwalking with Einstein, but he makes a compelling case for the proposition that, in an earlier era, such descriptive terms were a useful mnemonic device for cultures in which stories were transmitted primarily verbally rather than in writing.
Foer makes an interesting literary point, one that resonates particularly well with respect to the Southern canon, from Hugh Kenner’s point that many of William Faulkner’s passages (though written) were not (strictly speaking) writing to Donald Davidson’s insistence that poetry was meant to be read aloud.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Jul 10, 2011 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions
That was in english, right?
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
I think what he meant to say...
… was that smart people can color outside the lines because it’s “artistic.”
by vineyarddawg on Jul 11, 2011 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh I have no problem with descriptive terms
I full respect their use in oral traditions and literature. I think the spoken word would lose something special if we dropped stand-in titles like The Great Emancipator, The Great Communicator, Old Hickory, etc. I could even see myself using such titles, given their establishment in the vernacular, in a scholarly essay. However, I had a problem with being told I had to make up my own titles, such as The Fallen King of Thebes, on my own because a paragraph used the name Oedipus three times. I think essays are meant to be informative or persuasive in their purpose, and unestablished, flowery titles get in the way. Purple prose obfuscates clarity of ideas. The purpose of the assignment was to show that I could develop ideas and properly back them up with citations, not show off my ability to throw adjectives and adverbs around all willy-nilly.
I will admit to having not read much Faulkner (or really anything that would be considered Southern canon off the top of my head). I did enjoy As I Lay Dying though. I remember there being a string of sentences in one of its chapters using verbs as status indicators, such as “My mother was is and is now is was.” When I have the time and clear out my current backlog, I’m sure I’ll read more. After all, how can you not enjoy an author whose works include one chapter in which all that is said is “My mother is a fish”?
I agree.
Stand in titles add so much importance to the intrinsic value of a character study, and such giants of history deserve a treatment worthy of their accomplishments, as with Lincoln, Reagan and Jackson.
The Great Cornholio
20th century post-war fictitious characters? There remains much room for debate.
(sorry The984…I couldn’t help myself)
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
Field sobriety tests are how DUI lawyers get clients off
Seriously, those tests are terrible. They’re often not administered correctly. Proper warnings aren’t given. The signs of lack of sobriety are misread.
That’s why you have administrative laws requiring a breathalyzer test. If you don’t test, then you often lose your license for a set amount of time. (This doesn’t equal a DUI; they still have to prove the DUI. It’s an administrative law matter.)
And then there are breathalyzers. They have a 50% accuracy rate in showing someone is above the limit. And to be clear, what I mean by that is 50% of the time they incorrectly show someone as above the limit.
Breathalyzers are pseudo-science mumbo-jumbo. This is how they work: light is shot through a series of mirrors in an effort to get a reading on the gases you exhale into the breathalyzer. Then, those readings go through a series of algorithms that try and predict your BAC.
Yes, predict your blood alcohol level. It’s a guess. Sure, an educated guess, but a guess.
It can’t measure you’re ACTUAL BAC because it’s not measuring anything in your blood. Only a blood test can do that.
And then there are the blood tests. The folks on the show CSI do wonderful work. Our state crime labs, in reality, do terrible work. A recent national study showed most crime labs had major failings in a number of areas.
Mixing different folks blood together, contaminating a sample, using the gas chromographer incorrectly with the blood sample, lots of things go wrong.
So, yeah, when someone pulled over for DUI is competent enough to drive himself to the station . . . proving a DUI from the totality of the evidence is going to be real, real hard.
The reason? All those problems with testing mentioned above—the only way for prosectors to overcome them is through secondary evidence (weaving, driving slow, wrong blinkers, slurred speech, etc.).
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Dawg Sports
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
