Arrested at Foxwoods and banned for life

[TeeJayOrTJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also when I drove back to the hotel I was not that drunk. I am almost positive I would pass all DUI tests.

I am 100% sure I would have after sitting in the hotel for over an hour before driving back to the casino.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not agree with your throwing a beer at a casino and I think that is dumb at best... but I think most of us have been a little too drunk and hyped up sometime and have done some stupid things. So I wish you the best regarding that part of your story. You also seem remorseful and understand that you did something wrong.

However, the quoted sentences need to be addressed because there is very little chance that they are true. If you were downing 5oz beers at as fast as you could and got drunk enough to through chips, a beer, and cards at a casino; there is NO WAY you were sober enough to pass a sobriety test... and more importantly probably should not have been on the road.

Sitting in your hotel room for an hour will AT BEST flush one's beer's worth of alcohol out of your system. The legal BAC for a sober driver is <.08 (which is just under ONE beer an hour). I'm guessing even though the beers were 5oz., you did better than one an hour and were over the legal limit.


[/ QUOTE ]

The pounding as fast as I could was a joke of sorts, don't get what is so hard to understand. There is no way you are getting more then 3 beers an hour (which at 5oz is basically 1). So after only being there for like 5 hours I only had 5 or 6 beers. I was only slightly buzzed...but highly annoyed.

But boy did this thread go downhill. I wish my only post was the original. Would have been much more fun.

[happyhappyhappy]

back from my timeout

[Emsterdad]

Dude, If I got 'kick-banned' from a Casino that way I would totally make a A-bomb-stink about it.

Screw just taking it laying down. If you can afford it hire a lawyer and sue them right back for abuse + whatever else you can think of. A good one is always to sue them for not stopping you from drinking. Just say you blacked out!

F**k Indian casinos! Damned above the law bs!

[neuroman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you are not under arrest by an officer, they can not detain you.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S. Ct. 1968 (1967).

http://www.soc.umn.edu/~samaha/cases...0v%20ohio.html

[/ QUOTE ]
Bottom line: they cannot unreasonably detain you. A few minutes of non-cooperation and "I'm not talking to you without a lawyer present" and repeatedly asking "am I being detained, or am I free to leave now?" would get the point across.

[neuroman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just say NO, I don't want to talk to you, NO you cannot look at my cell phone. NO, I don't want you to look in my trunk. NO, you cannot come in my house. NO, I don't want to talk to you.

You see these guys on cops all the time, giving consent to search their vehicles, like complete dumb asses. The cops can be pretty darn tricky in getting the consent sometimes. It always turns out [censored] for them. I must admit it's funny to watch.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you realise that if you start saying "NO" "No" "NO" you can't look in there that it actually gives the cops reasonable grounds for suspicion. This means that they can then look in your boot wether you like it or not.

[/ QUOTE ]
Completely wrong and totally ignorant! At least in the United States. Maybe it's different in Britain but I doubt it.

Refusal to consent to a search cannot be used as reasonable suspicion. This is iron clad law. Now, it unfortunately doesn't take much to come up with reasonable suspicion... but it can't simply be a refusal to consent.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lol at trying to justify your snitching. You weren't even being charged with anything so you can't even say you were shooting for a lighter sentence (which is still incredbly lame).

[/ QUOTE ]

lol at BBV sitting here giving this guy [censored] for making one bad minor decision that he probably wasn't even really thinking about that much at the time. This thread started out retarded and is now brain-dead

[/ QUOTE ]

[the machine]

[ QUOTE ]
In one breath he is saying that he did all these things partly because he was drunk and in another breath he's insisting that he was perfectly okay to drive at pretty much the same time.



[/ QUOTE ]

first off EL OH [censored] EL at the debate on the law. who gives a [censored].

as far as the quote, sometimes when something abnormal happens, even while under the influence, if it gets your addrenaline going enough it can reverse the affects of the substance in you. try getting pulled over while having a slight buzz. you will mentally feel more sober then you ever have in your life.

[neuroman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The first time I went to jail I'll bet I would have snitched on someone if it got me out of there that night.

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yah well live and learn. Luckily(?) there was no one for me to snitch on and now I have a lot more experience with the police etc. People tend to get freaked out the first time they deal with police in a criminal matter.

[/ QUOTE ]
True story, and I hope ajml learned from this experience. When there is no upside for you, don't cooperate with the cops.

Also Fishsticks, it sucks that the cops in your area are eager to wipe their asses with the Constitution, but cooperating here was clearly the wrong play. If ajml walks away from the casino before the cops show up, which he is 100% within his rights to do, the buck probably stops there. Or maybe it doesn't, who knows? But Conn. state police are not going to spend all day looking for this guy.

Kick in the nuts to
1. TJ for getting drunk & being belligerent
2. ajml for meekly complying with the cops
3. TJ again for answering his phone, and driving drunk back to the casino
4. Old nit for being a nit

kudos to TJ and ajml for enduring a public beatdown in this thread. Y'all were stupid but I've been pretty stupid too at times in the past and I am not unsympathetic.

edit: no nut kick for drunk driving if it didn't happen.

[neuroman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just say NO, I don't want to talk to you, NO you cannot look at my cell phone. NO, I don't want you to look in my trunk. NO, you cannot come in my house. NO, I don't want to talk to you.

You see these guys on cops all the time, giving consent to search their vehicles, like complete dumb asses. The cops can be pretty darn tricky in getting the consent sometimes. It always turns out [censored] for them. I must admit it's funny to watch.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you realise that if you start saying "NO" "No" "NO" you can't look in there that it actually gives the cops reasonable grounds for suspicion. This means that they can then look in your boot wether you like it or not.

[/ QUOTE ]


I've been lurking, but I had to post so that everyone in internet-land knows how very wrong and how very stupid this sentiment is. Denial of voluntary searches and seizures is not grounds for reasonable suspicion. This is derived from The Constitution, which I hear is pretty important, and mountains of case law. Please STFU.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very naive. The probable cause to search arises when the suspect refuses the search then suddenly becomes nervous, fidgety, sweating etc etc. (Ways and means)

But we are getting off topic.

That mobile phone was an item of evidence therefore the Police had the power to seize it. End of move on.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong again. Evidence of what? The friend's cell phone is no way involved in a crime. The cops have no right whatsoever to seize it. Now, if they couldn't identify TJ and they needed the phone to get his identity, maybe.

[ QUOTE ]
What I don't get is why OP returned to the scene of the crime lol. There isn't a law about NOT making yourself available to the cops now is there.

[/ QUOTE ]
lol for sure on this one.

[neuroman]

[ QUOTE ]
What some people are omitting in this thread is that IF a police officer performs a search or confiscates personal property, etc. without consent then any "evidence" they find will be inadmissible in court due to illegal search. If your rights have been violated by police officers you are right, there's nothing you can do at the moment but keep your mouth shut and ask to speak to your lawyer. However, later (a good) lawyer will get the case dismissed because your constitutional rights will have been violated.

To sum up this thread:
[x] Friend should LEAVE EXPEDITIOUSLY after cashing out chips, imo
[x] Friend should politely refuse surrender of his phone without a warrant, imo
[x] OP should drive HOME after receiving phone call, imo
[x] Situation avoided if OP didn't act like drunk 13 year old, imo

[/ QUOTE ]
good post imo