Get a storm door. Always keep the front locked. I opened my front door and this cop tried to open the screen door as I did. I told him to get off my property. He said I was strange for not wanting to talk. I said bye and shut the door.
I’m a 61 year old single lady that lives on the edge of town/country. I NEVER answer a door knock. Even my 36 year old son lets me know when coming by. He actually likes that I don’t answer door.
NEVER answer your door to the police. Let them break your door down if they have the right. Cops will often lie about having a warrant and then try to claim that you consented to letting them in.
I definitely challenge this video's claim that a homeowner is obligated to answer a door simply because the police have an ARREST warrant. An arrest warrant is NOT a search warrant. An arrest warrant does not give cops the right to force their way into a home.
@@interestedparty00 Actually, the arrest warrant does give them the right to obtain the person, and they can enter the domicile to get the person. If the person comes outside the home, then they can't go in to get the person since that person isn't inside.
How could he be convicted of drunk driving, for drinking inside his home? The smell of alcohol could be the beer he has right now, while in the house. There is no way to know if he was drinking before coming home, and no way to know if he was even driving.
You might want to reconsider the Ring doorbell product.... I heard on another Lawyer channel that Police were asking Ring for the video footage of the cameras of people who didn't consent to giving their footage to authorities. The homeowners didn't even know that their video footage was being given to authorities. The police didn't have a warrant, just asked nicely and ring just handed it over. Ring claimed that they handed it over without a warrant if the police claimed that there was an imminent danger in the area... I can't remember what the cops were responding to, but they got doorbell camera footage for an entire neighborhood simply by asking. So if the DUI officer in this story had a Ring doorbell, they'd use the footage of him arriving home as evidence to convict him on DUI as well.
That’s exactly why I built a wall with locking gates. The judge ruled since the gate wasn’t locked, anyone would be able to come in and I was not being clear enough, despite the no trespassing signs. Wall around property, check Cameras recording 360 of my property, check.
But how can they charge him with DUI if they didn't actually apprehend him driving a car? All they really have is a person intoxicated at their own home don't they?
@@suedenim9208 One of the witnesses is not the the police themselves though... Multiple can say you were speeding but if the police don't witness it themselves they can't ticket you for it. How can they arrest him for DUI if they didn't actually apprehend him doing so?
@@suedenim9208 I'm not a lawyer, but everything you mentioned is circumstantial....if the police didn't see the man till he was home...the odor of alcohol is irrelevant because he could start drinking when he GOT INTO the house....and the witnesses only know a VEHICLE was driving erratically....they'd not know who was driving or under what circumstances caused the erratic driving. That why cops pull you over and want to test the driver (while he's behind the wheel).....Not defending drinking and driving by any means....but THIS story just seems like something a good lawyer wouldn't have a problem getting you out of.
I saw that video from Lackluster good video. This one too it clearly makes the point of not answering the door for police even if you are the police. To me it really stands out.
If this reenactment is even close to how it went down, I see no way to get a conviction. They need to prove he was the person driving the vehicle, and they have to prove that he was drinking before he arrived at his home, in as much as this shows him answering the door while drinking. Just because the vehicle is registered to him does not prove he was the driver.
Yeah. A good defense for a positive blood alcohol content would be, "Of course I had blood alcohol. When I got home I opened a beer and began drinking. You can see me drinking on the body cam, but no one can prove that I was drinking while or even before driving because I wasn't."
Only way he would get convicted is if they had proof that his blood alcohol was too high to have just been drinking since he got home. And the lack of timing in the scenario tells me that he could have been home for a while
@@waroftheworlds2008 No, they don't. They simply have to prove no one else could have and that he was drunk. In addition, if he admitted to any of these things, that would relieve their burden. That's likely why they wanted the door knock evidence excluded.
If he didn't admit to drinking and driving the smell of alcohol doesn't mean anything. It's not illigal to drink at home. They would have to prove intoxication while driving.
That's my question, if they didn't actually pull him over driving a car how are they going to actually prove that he was driving while intoxicated? All that have is an intoxicated person on their own property.
Depends upon the state. Virginia DOES require that they prove you were drunk at the time of the driving. But usually in cases like this that's proven by the defendant's admission that their last drink was at X time. Some states don't require proof of the time. Some states just penalize DUI if you blow .08 when tested and the driving can be proven of course.
@@friedchicken1 If he was visibly intoxicated, it would be pretty obvious. If he had just started drinking, he shouldn't be showing signs of intoxication.
The fact that he was not seen operating his car by the police and the only evidence that the police have against him is from the call to complain about his driving skills and the fact that he was in his house and was drunk doesn't matter at all because of the simple fact that the police didn't see him in his car at any time so he actually has a very good chance of getting the case dismissed
Had police show up at my door last fall. They did have a warrant for a previous resident. Telling them that the previous resident moved a few months earlier was good enough for them. I've also received court summons for that same resident and had to return it to sender as undeliverable.
WE DID IT! At 7am this morning the police rang our door bell. We did NOT answer it. On the cameras we saw them talking to our neighbor. Come to find out, our poor neighbor had their catalytic converter stolen and the police wanted to see if our cameras got their license plate. We gladly made a copy of the footage to help the neighbor and glad we had enough self control not to answer the door.
I mean really why? I'm not fond of most police or the system but I have no problem talking to them real quick. Unless they start asking me stuff that has no purpose or trying to incriminate myself (for example if I just drove drunk and crashed).
@@Kremithefrog1 If you don't answer the door, then it is impossible for them to incriminate you nor put their foot in the door and make you talk to them. This is why Andrew recommends not answering the door to the police.
Your videos are awesome, Mr. Flusche. Although I'm in California and the laws are slightly different, your scenarios are informative and can still provide good guidance. I've shown my college age sons a couple of your videos in the hope it will protect them if they have any encounters with police.
I hope you included things like ‘don’t break the law and don’t dabble in drugs.’ In my sphere of friends, which isn’t huge, five young adults have died from fentanyl laced drugs. The drug dealers are now manufacturing fake prescription pills and lacing with fentanyl. I hope your children stay safe.
@@glasshalffull8625 Fentanyl has nothing to do with this. I did not include 'don't break the law and don't dabble in drugs' in the 'don't talk to cops' discussion because I have re-affirmed the the law and drugs message many times since they were young children. Kids need different lessons as young adults than they get as children. A few years ago, cops came to one of my son's college roommates to ask questions about a missing gun from the home of a high school friend of the roommate's - in a city 400 miles away. The kid knew nothing about it and could even prove that he was at school taking final exams when the gun was stolen - again, in a city 400 miles away. (The kid was of good character.) The cops insisted that he knew about the gun and really put the screws to him threatening all sorts of made-up charges that they would hit him with if he didn't "come clean" about the whereabouts of the gun. He truly knew nothing about it and - scared of these bogus charges he'd have to face - told the cops as much as he know about the friend in order to "help" the cops solve the case and find the gun. The cops twisted his words and cleverly re-interpreted his statements to incriminate him more deeply in the missing gun caper. The case was never solved. The gun was never found, and the cops ended up not hassling the kid with bogus charges. But, if the kid said nothing to the cops and got a lawyer from the start he'd probably have avoided being threatened by the cops and suffering through the 2 months or so of uncertainty and "don't leave town" threats.
@@jacobholland3370 I added the “fentanyl” because the greater threat to your sons and ‘everybody else’s kids’ is a drug overdose and I hope other parents and adults would take heed. As for the kid and the gun, it sounds like he was the ‘prime suspect’ and the cops were trying to solve the case before the gun ended up in an armed robbery or murder.
@@Andrewflusche I would do research on what is better with the UA-cam algorithm if you're interested in growth. I suspect it's quantity over quality if you want your channel to be recommended. Good content -- but just like you know the law, other's know tech jurisprudence.
very good lawyer, I live in NJ but travel to North Carolina on my way back to NJ I got a speeding ticket in Virginia..Was doing 90 on 65 so it was a ticket and same time a criminal offensive in state of Virginia..I hired this lawyer, he took me through every step and got the ticket reduced to something else..Thank you
It’s amazing how one small simple action-turning a door knob, can have life altering consequences! 3 seconds of wrist movement will affect him for the rest of his life!
He should be able to beat the DUI charge if he has been home for 5 mins or more. He could of been under the legal limit but came home and downed a few shots, pounded a beer or two. It should be argued that it is impossible for them to know what his BAC was before he got home.
Many years ago when I was in driver's ed a CHP came in & talked about a man who had killed a man on the side of the road who was changing his tire. The driver just kept on driving. When the Chippies caught up with him he was sitting outside his car, surrounded by "a dozen" empty beer cans. They arrested him for vehicular manslaughter & DUI. The DUI charges were later dropped because the driver claimed he drank them on the side of the road where he was arrested, & the state couldn't prove exactly when he'd been drinking.
Officer Andy wasn't caught behind the wheel of his auto so they can't prove he was DWI unless he admitted to it. Any competent attorney would have those charges dismissed by the DA before any court appearance. Andy could've got home and slammed a couple of shots of Jack like most Cops do after their shift.
Several years ago I rent a third floor room in a Manhasset, NY. The owner was an older women who was a serious alcoholic. One night she let the dog out into the yard at 2 a.m. in the morning and then went back to sleep. The neighbors called the police who then knocked on the front door. When nobody answered they entered the home calling out. I just hunkered down and pretended I didn't exist so I didn't get mixed up in anyting. The police officers are not allowed to enter your home it just goes to show police officers really don't care what the law is they just do whatever they want.
I fail to understand how officer Andy’s reckless driving charge became a DUI because he was found with alcohol in his system in the privacy of his own home and after the fact. There is no proof he was intoxicated behind the wheel, the same as there is no reason to believe he didn’t drive home (recklessly) and opened a beer from his kitchen. Sounds like an easy DUI dismissal due to lack of evidence. The reckless driving could still stand due to eye witness testimony, but unless they saw him with an open container, he’s ok.
Agreed. He opened the door with a beer in his hand. If they didn't smell alcohol on his breath it'd be weird. I used to live in Reno NV and there was a cop that was leaving for his shift sober but returning each day a bit on the tipsy side. Turns out he was taking a couple bottles of Scope with him and drinking it because of the alcohol content.
I agree, the fact that he was drinking, at home, is not evidence that he had been driving while drunk. What law says that you cannot drink in your home!
The video says that "he answered questions" - which implies that he might have admitted to having just driven home after drinking a few. Such admission would have been stupid, but we all know that cops are stupid.
It’s interesting how my experience was one of the few times police at your door isn’t wrong. I was getting water at 330 am and they knocked didn’t say they were police than when I opened they said someone called about a suspicious person near the back pool and since I was awake they thought I might know where he was. I asked them which side of the complex. They actually didn’t know there were 4 pools and left.
I also had an experience where they weren't wrong at 3:30am. They were there to tell me to turn my music down. Which I turned off before opening the door, opened it and without them saying anything I said 'I gotcha' and closed the door.
How any intake DA would take a case without being able to prove Andy didn't drink after he got home is beyond me. It's the burden of the state to prove that andy was driving on the public roadway and above the legal limit of intoxication at the time he was driving.
How can there be a DUI arrest when the LEOs only encountered him when he was at home relaxing? To me it just sounds like they just were talking to a guy who was at home enjoying a few drinks. Sure they were responding to a call for reckless driving but couldn’t he have been driving that way without drinking then went home and consumed a few drinks? Regardless, your advice of never opening the door to LEOs is well-said.
100% agree with having the camera. I too have a ring and many other cameras. The problem with the ring is is required the internet to work plus it only records a few seconds before the motion (if wired) and the motion plus a bit of lead out time. My other cameras record 24/7 . I think police regularly overstep their bounds. I know here they lie, give minor false charges and back each other up with the lies.
Got what he helped support, it's only a problem when it happens to few officers, not law abiding citizens that don't protect them from the consequences of their tyranny and cowardice.
Few months ago my doorbell rings and I look and there are two cops standing there, I opted not to go to the door and after a few rings they walked off. I found out from my neighbor later that they were looking for video of a red pickup truck that had hit a parked car and left without a note. They never came back and I never heard the outcome of their search. I looked at my video and there was nothing.
My brother in Kansas was on a DUI and property damage case where a 17 yr old crashed into a fence and tree a block from his house. Neighbors saw him run into his/parent's house. When the police came, they knocked, and the kid admitted he was drunk and responsible for the crash. Was arrested. At trial, half the jury members voted acquittal since the kid was a minor and wasn't read Miranda before the police asked him about the driving and accident. SMH. My brother was Pissed
If Officer Andy had a RING, it would have shown him arriving home in his car. That footage could have been subpoenaed by the POLICE as well. DON'T DRINK & DRIVE - PERIOD. Funny how the FL Commissioner wasn't arrested at wreck site (tree)
The Ring is "Owned" by the occupant and therefore should be considered as property that would require a warrant to get. In the mean time, all the data gets overridden.
@@shannonp4037 Pretty sure Ring stores all video on their cloud for 60 days. The actual camera is yours, but is the video stored on the Ring cloud yours? Somewhere in that Ring privacy statement it probably says they will turn over video records to police if served with a warrant.
@@shannonp4037 As already pointed out, it's unlikely that the owner actually has an option to delete the video. Even if there's an option that seems to let you delete the video the date is probably backed up and/or mirrored elsewhere and will stick around for a while. If there is an option to delete the video any backup that's not deleted also becomes the proof for the charges of destroying evidence.
I was just going to poo poo your Ring camera with regards to being in cahoots with the police and Jeff Bezos but then you mentioned it in the video. Well done. We went with a self-hosted Ubiquiti system and are happy with it. Self-hosted systems are definitely more work, but then you know exactly who has access to video footage of the inside and outside of your home.
Exactly. I want to be the only one who has control of my security systems. I know I was severely pissed off when I fould the Emerson wifi thermostat I bought no longer had API support (they changed their systems). My intent had been to set up my own management on a Raspberry Pi.
I have a steel clad front door with steel reinforced striker plate and hinges, no nearby windows, and a door mat on my front porch that says, "COME BACK WITH A WARRANT".
Tell them to read it starting with the signature of a local judge. Check goggle if its local and what court they preside over. It has to be in their hand and signed to be legal.
That is also true. I am sure it's not that difficult to find a uniform closely matching the uniforms of your local police agencies (if not an actual uniform). Convincing enough badges and they could probably fool even regular police officers.
But if you put up No Trespassing signs, that means you can't receive Amazon or DoorDash deliveries to your door, right? They have to leave your delivery on the curb, right?
The prosecution will not be able to prove the timing of Officer Andy's alcohol level. "No sir, I did not have a beer until I got home. Hey fellas, can I get you one?"
Bad choice of words. They were not allowed to go in but they were able to enter. Technically speaking placing their foot in the door to block it is still an illegal entry into the house but tap that foot trying to close the door and now your ass is getting beat and arrested for battery of an officer
My latest interaction with the police. I'm at a job site, the owner is a police officer. I told him I'd be there for two days by myself then I'll have help. The job will be done on Friday or else I would work the weekend. He calls the Builder stating the exact same thing I said but using everything I said against me. " don't talk to the police"
Lawyer here (bar admissions attorney). Officer Andy, if he was going to answer the door, should have done so with a beer in his hand. Then could claim he started drinking when he got home. But I agree don’t answer door at all
What I don't understand is he was still on his property and could have claimed he wasn't drinking until he got home which is legal . He wasn't drinking out in public when the police saw him. The people reporting erratic driving couldn't tell if he was drunk or not and most likely couldn't even say for sure who was driving. He was home behind a door in his house. I'm missing how they could arrest him even if he did open the door.
As with so many thing there will be variation from state to state until there's a definitive SC ruling (probably in favor of the police), but for now the safe assumption is that the cops can knock on your door unless you have a fence (with no open gate) *and* signs. In Arizona v. Lohse the AZ court of appeals ruled that a fence and sign together revoked the implied consent to enter property in an effort to make contact. OTOH, in Christensen v. Tennessee the TN SC ruled that signs alone did not revoke the implied consent, and SCOTUS denied the appeal.
When you do an ad Andrew, I don't fast forward because you show why the product is important and why you should have it. Bravo and keep up the good work. Oh and I'm from Kanada so consider helping me and sponsoring me to move to a country that actually has civil rights please. :)
They must have a bond attached to the warrant or they still can't enter a private home . What a man does in his home cannot be construed to be a crime .
As a police officer he has different obligations to his agency though. A lot of agencies work on a reasonable suspicion when it comes to investigating other cops. Hopefully even if he didn’t open the door he’d be investigated and scrutinized further and lose his job.
What about extrajudicially appointed state agencies that ignore purple paint, ignore signs, enter property from a complaint that is never shown and they leave a business card along with your now dead dogs. Or when the leave a ‘violation’ notice under a water jug at your legal camper as they continue to enter property. Or when you catch them and throw them off and then two weeks later return with a DNR officer who threatens arrest and detains you in place for trying to video the agents on the property and feet away from your home.
How could they possibly prove he was drunk driving if he was drunk at home? Is it not common for people to drive home and then drink? And, if they could somehow prove that, why wouldn't they do that even if he didn't open the door?
Depending on the location it is sometimes in the police employment contract that warrants are not required for certain disciplinary and safety concerns involving police officers. If however he answered the door with a beer in hand in his off duty time and was not on call they would have been hard pressed to arrest him based on anything other than any admissions he made while they spoke to him.
There in the problem, most people cannot shut their mouth to save their soul. What they likely did is chat him up and he made several statements that could reasonably be construed that he had been driving while intoxicated.
Knew someone who was high as a kite, smashed into another vehicle basically totalling it, and they followed the trail of coolant the vehicle being driven was leaking. They could only get them for a hit and run, not a DUI, because even tho it was pretty obvious, they couldn't prove without a doubt that they were high when the wreck occurred. Know another guy who left a wreck while drunk and just turned himself in the next day so no DUI and just a hit and run.
The best defenses from DUI is: - Never drink and drive. - Never get into 'a totally not a DUI and is really a safety' checkpoint. The first thing you can prevent, the second you can't.
Great videos, AF. Been following for a long time. Could you possibly structure into your videos when the laws you state are in your state or federal, etc? I live in Florida and I always wonder when a lawyer says, "You don't have to do" this or that, if that only applies in the state where that lawyer has a practice. Thanks. Great stuff. Keep it up!
Without a field sobriety test after being caught red handed, how can the State prove he was actually drunk while he was driving and not drunk from drinking after he got home? Erratic driving could be explained driving while texting or dropped something in the car.
In the case referenced at 4:08, would it have been better for the father to announce "I'm done with this conversation, please leave my property," before going back into his home? I could see the police arguing "we thought he was going to get a weapon, he rushed back in, etc" if he just turns and runs into the house, while saying the conversation is over and he wants the officers to leave because he's going back in the house gives them less of a grey area to play around in.
If you aren’t the one they are looking for but a potential witness in an emergency situation I am assuming I should still answer the door since I don’t have the ability for a storm door. What happened when I first had police show up was an emergency. Let’s just say I do not live in a safe neighborhood.
New Video- Could you do a video on what to do if the cops lie about having a warrant? Do they have to show it? How do I learn these rules for my state?
The instance you spoke about where the police followed the man in his home was allowed due to exigent circumstances. The caller reported he had a weapon, and the police will NOT just let you run back into your home if the believe you have a weapon readily available. The full story matters.
I love the information about the no trespassing sign, I actually do have a no trespassing sign on the on my deck and it is clearly visible don't know if that's important or not but I do have a no trespassing sign on my deck and one is sufficient correct.
I live in Johannesburg South Africa and if the police wish to knock on my front door they would have to climb the 2M high garden wall or steel driveway gate, negotiate the razor wire on top of those and avoid the electric fence. Then they have to get past the steel security gate in the entrance and knock on the door. They cant use the intercom as it has been stolen three times so I no longer replace it.
Andy had a beer in his hand when he opened the front door. Now how can that charge hold up in court? He was out of his car, law enforcement did not see him operating his vehicle and Andy may have just took the first sip when he got home.
I remember when lawyers were advising folks to get the ring camera. But since *Ring* is giving footage without a warrant, I can imagine that they'll do near the business they were
And why does his condition (i.e., drunk) _in his home_ mean a DUI? They didn't find him _in his car_ soused to the gills, they discovered him in his house, which unless it is a recreational vehicle, is not his car. The report he was driving erratically is suspect, because are they sure Andy was even the driver? Is it _possible_ someone else could have been driving? Could he have gone to the bar, gotten drunk, then had a friend at the bar drive him home in his own car? And that trip was "erratic" because the guy who drove him home was just a really bad driver? Not "did this happen", but "is it possible?", as unless they have positive id that Andy was at the wheel and was drunk at that time, THEY GOT NUTHIN'! It's not illegal to be drunk in your home. He just may get drunk really fast. It isn't illegal to be a lightweight. Now, logic might say Andy was driving, and was pretty much hard boiled, but logic is tweeting bird singing in meadow. Logic is a beautiful flower -- that smells BAD. A chain of logic _is not evidence._ So unless Andy says "yeah, I hit the Blue Oyster Bar after my shift and chugged a pint or two of Jaegermeister, then hopped in my car and drove home to get down to some serious drinkin'", then how do they _legally_ get to a DUI? He could have been stone cold sober in his car, and the reason he drove erratically for a short distance was that a wasp flew in his window, and he has mortal terrors of the creatures. Unless he screwed himself sideways with his own fool mouth, I don't see a way to convict him for DUI with the evidence we've seen. The lawyer who can't get him off at that point is probably new, or a certifiable cretin.
A warrant to search your house is much different than a warrant to arrest someone they think is in the house. A warrant to search for somebody has additional burden that the police must have evidence that the person is actually in the house not that the address was just listed in one of their documents. You should refuse a warrant to search for people.
How can they arrest him without proof that he was driving? He answered the door with a beer which could be argued he drank beer after he got home. I seriously doubt he will be convicted.
How could they arrest him for something they didn’t see themselves. And how could the cops know he didn’t start drinking after he got home? Seems like a lot of holes that a halfway decent attorney could exploit in this case. That being said I don’t know what he told officers on the porch so he could have confessed or something. Who knows
At least those officers aren't so corrupt that they let the officer off just because he's an officer. In fact, they used their tricks against him to get him.
They said it was hot pursuit with the father and son where they entered the home. Problem was, they were having a consensual conversation and were in no way pursuing anyone...
I agree that they shouldn't have opened the door, but how do they prove he was drunk at the time of the report and simply didn't start drinking once he got home?
All they have to do is convince one judge that they golf with, and they win the case. It has nothing to do with actual law. We are talking about cops here. They just do whatever they want. But I call BS on the whole story, because I don't believe events that were not in the news, resulted a cop charging another cop with a crime. Not buying that at all, even a little bit.
Witnesses, security camera footage, and whatever dumb statements he made when he answered the door. I doubt they arrested him just because he looked drunk. They had the timing of events sorted out and just needed him to make statements that proved their timeline correct.
How do the officers know when he began drinking? Could a case not be made that he just started drinking right before the officers showed up? How is it proven that he was intoxicated while driving if he was questioned at his home without the officers observing him driving?
Get a storm door. Always keep the front locked. I opened my front door and this cop tried to open the screen door as I did. I told him to get off my property. He said I was strange for not wanting to talk. I said bye and shut the door.
Storm doors don't protect from bullets as well as a solid door.
@@ryanjones7681 find me a modern house with a door that would stop a 9mm round.
Good advice! I like the storm door approach, but that still lets the officer see you and observe through it.
@@generic_white_male6261 Construct one yourself
@@Andrewflusche True, but if there is no screen, there is no claim of smelling anything on your breath.
I’m a 61 year old single lady that lives on the edge of town/country.
I NEVER answer a door knock.
Even my 36 year old son lets me know when coming by.
He actually likes that I don’t answer door.
100% my mother as well.
NEVER answer your door to the police. Let them break your door down if they have the right. Cops will often lie about having a warrant and then try to claim that you consented to letting them in.
I definitely challenge this video's claim that a homeowner is obligated to answer a door simply because the police have an ARREST warrant. An arrest warrant is NOT a search warrant. An arrest warrant does not give cops the right to force their way into a home.
keep it up! its good you are staying safe
@@interestedparty00 Actually, the arrest warrant does give them the right to obtain the person, and they can enter the domicile to get the person. If the person comes outside the home, then they can't go in to get the person since that person isn't inside.
How could he be convicted of drunk driving, for drinking inside his home? The smell of alcohol could be the beer he has right now, while in the house. There is no way to know if he was drinking before coming home, and no way to know if he was even driving.
You might want to reconsider the Ring doorbell product.... I heard on another Lawyer channel that Police were asking Ring for the video footage of the cameras of people who didn't consent to giving their footage to authorities. The homeowners didn't even know that their video footage was being given to authorities. The police didn't have a warrant, just asked nicely and ring just handed it over. Ring claimed that they handed it over without a warrant if the police claimed that there was an imminent danger in the area... I can't remember what the cops were responding to, but they got doorbell camera footage for an entire neighborhood simply by asking. So if the DUI officer in this story had a Ring doorbell, they'd use the footage of him arriving home as evidence to convict him on DUI as well.
That’s exactly why I built a wall with locking gates. The judge ruled since the gate wasn’t locked, anyone would be able to come in and I was not being clear enough, despite the no trespassing signs.
Wall around property, check
Cameras recording 360 of my property, check.
But how can they charge him with DUI if they didn't actually apprehend him driving a car? All they really have is a person intoxicated at their own home don't they?
They've got multiple witnesses, the car, and a lack of anyone else to drive it.
@@suedenim9208
One of the witnesses is not the the police themselves though... Multiple can say you were speeding but if the police don't witness it themselves they can't ticket you for it. How can they arrest him for DUI if they didn't actually apprehend him doing so?
It's a fake story anyway. Obviously no cop ever charged a fellow cop with a crime, unless it was in the news somehow.
@@BillySBC They've got multiple witnesses, the car, and a lack of anyone else to drive it.
@@suedenim9208 I'm not a lawyer, but everything you mentioned is circumstantial....if the police didn't see the man till he was home...the odor of alcohol is irrelevant because he could start drinking when he GOT INTO the house....and the witnesses only know a VEHICLE was driving erratically....they'd not know who was driving or under what circumstances caused the erratic driving. That why cops pull you over and want to test the driver (while he's behind the wheel).....Not defending drinking and driving by any means....but THIS story just seems like something a good lawyer wouldn't have a problem getting you out of.
How can you get arrested on private property based on a phone call to an offense not witnessed by the police? Sounds like they violated rights
I saw that video from Lackluster good video. This one too it clearly makes the point of not answering the door for police even if you are the police. To me it really stands out.
Lackluster has a great 👍 channel
Props for actually having a well thought out and helpful product placement in your video. Seamless integration.
Thanks! I'm trying not to shill junk just to sell it. But if something is relevant and helpful, I want folks to know.
If this reenactment is even close to how it went down, I see no way to get a conviction. They need to prove he was the person driving the vehicle, and they have to prove that he was drinking before he arrived at his home, in as much as this shows him answering the door while drinking. Just because the vehicle is registered to him does not prove he was the driver.
Yeah. A good defense for a positive blood alcohol content would be,
"Of course I had blood alcohol. When I got home I opened a beer and began drinking. You can see me drinking on the body cam, but no one can prove that I was drinking while or even before driving because I wasn't."
Only way he would get convicted is if they had proof that his blood alcohol was too high to have just been drinking since he got home. And the lack of timing in the scenario tells me that he could have been home for a while
@@waroftheworlds2008 No, the lack of timing and the fact the lawyer says he will likely lose this should tell you the time table was very close.
@@razorbeard6970 okay, but they still need to prove he was driving and they don't have any witnesses that saw who was driving.
@@waroftheworlds2008 No, they don't. They simply have to prove no one else could have and that he was drunk. In addition, if he admitted to any of these things, that would relieve their burden. That's likely why they wanted the door knock evidence excluded.
If he didn't admit to drinking and driving the smell of alcohol doesn't mean anything. It's not illigal to drink at home. They would have to prove intoxication while driving.
That's my question, if they didn't actually pull him over driving a car how are they going to actually prove that he was driving while intoxicated? All that have is an intoxicated person on their own property.
Depends upon the state. Virginia DOES require that they prove you were drunk at the time of the driving. But usually in cases like this that's proven by the defendant's admission that their last drink was at X time.
Some states don't require proof of the time. Some states just penalize DUI if you blow .08 when tested and the driving can be proven of course.
@@Andrewflusche I also live in VA, and that is good info to know.
@@Andrewflusche yeah but what if he drank as soon as he got home and not before driving? Even if he drove 10 minutes before he was at home drinking
@@friedchicken1 If he was visibly intoxicated, it would be pretty obvious. If he had just started drinking, he shouldn't be showing signs of intoxication.
The fact that he was not seen operating his car by the police and the only evidence that the police have against him is from the call to complain about his driving skills and the fact that he was in his house and was drunk doesn't matter at all because of the simple fact that the police didn't see him in his car at any time so he actually has a very good chance of getting the case dismissed
This officer was apparently not in the in-crowd of wife beaters and tyrants at the local PD.
Had police show up at my door last fall. They did have a warrant for a previous resident. Telling them that the previous resident moved a few months earlier was good enough for them. I've also received court summons for that same resident and had to return it to sender as undeliverable.
WE DID IT! At 7am this morning the police rang our door bell. We did NOT answer it. On the cameras we saw them talking to our neighbor. Come to find out, our poor neighbor had their catalytic converter stolen and the police wanted to see if our cameras got their license plate. We gladly made a copy of the footage to help the neighbor and glad we had enough self control not to answer the door.
Why?
I mean really why? I'm not fond of most police or the system but I have no problem talking to them real quick. Unless they start asking me stuff that has no purpose or trying to incriminate myself (for example if I just drove drunk and crashed).
@@Kremithefrog1 If you don't answer the door, then it is impossible for them to incriminate you nor put their foot in the door and make you talk to them. This is why Andrew recommends not answering the door to the police.
@@TheDenisedrake I get that but I also get being neighborly. Everyone can make their own decisions tho so not knocking anyone.
@@Kremithefrog1 Have you been watching this channel or any other law channel? Don't open the door to the police.
Your videos are awesome, Mr. Flusche. Although I'm in California and the laws are slightly different, your scenarios are informative and can still provide good guidance. I've shown my college age sons a couple of your videos in the hope it will protect them if they have any encounters with police.
I hope you included things like ‘don’t break the law and don’t dabble in drugs.’ In my sphere of friends, which isn’t huge, five young adults have died from fentanyl laced drugs. The drug dealers are now manufacturing fake prescription pills and lacing with fentanyl. I hope your children stay safe.
@@glasshalffull8625 Fentanyl has nothing to do with this. I did not include 'don't break the law and don't dabble in drugs' in the 'don't talk to cops' discussion because I have re-affirmed the the law and drugs message many times since they were young children. Kids need different lessons as young adults than they get as children. A few years ago, cops came to one of my son's college roommates to ask questions about a missing gun from the home of a high school friend of the roommate's - in a city 400 miles away. The kid knew nothing about it and could even prove that he was at school taking final exams when the gun was stolen - again, in a city 400 miles away. (The kid was of good character.) The cops insisted that he knew about the gun and really put the screws to him threatening all sorts of made-up charges that they would hit him with if he didn't "come clean" about the whereabouts of the gun. He truly knew nothing about it and - scared of these bogus charges he'd have to face - told the cops as much as he know about the friend in order to "help" the cops solve the case and find the gun. The cops twisted his words and cleverly re-interpreted his statements to incriminate him more deeply in the missing gun caper. The case was never solved. The gun was never found, and the cops ended up not hassling the kid with bogus charges. But, if the kid said nothing to the cops and got a lawyer from the start he'd probably have avoided being threatened by the cops and suffering through the 2 months or so of uncertainty and "don't leave town" threats.
@@jacobholland3370 I added the “fentanyl” because the greater threat to your sons and ‘everybody else’s kids’ is a drug overdose and I hope other parents and adults would take heed. As for the kid and the gun, it sounds like he was the ‘prime suspect’ and the cops were trying to solve the case before the gun ended up in an armed robbery or murder.
Always good to see a new video.
Thanks! I'm trying to stick with every other Tuesday for a little bit so I can try to make each one better. Quality over quantity!
@@Andrewflusche I would do research on what is better with the UA-cam algorithm if you're interested in growth. I suspect it's quantity over quality if you want your channel to be recommended. Good content -- but just like you know the law, other's know tech jurisprudence.
Audience loves "Officer Andy" and thoroughly enjoys his appearances. Cheers!
very good lawyer, I live in NJ but travel to North Carolina on my way back to NJ I got a speeding ticket in Virginia..Was doing 90 on 65 so it was a ticket and same time a criminal offensive in state of Virginia..I hired this lawyer, he took me through every step and got the ticket reduced to something else..Thank you
It is really amazing how all of the police in Mr. Flusche's video's look a lot like him.
Clone wars?
in some states, walking away from the police, is a form of resisting arrest. do not open the door, do not go outside.
Solid advice! I don't even mind the advertisement for the Ring camera.
If Andy claims he just now started drinking after he got home. The cops still can't prove he was DUI.
Very educational about real life stuff.
It’s amazing how one small simple action-turning a door knob, can have life altering consequences! 3 seconds of wrist movement will affect him for the rest of his life!
Actually, it was the simple act of driving drunk that had the consequences.
Thank you it’s always nice to see a good karma story
I know right! The officer that got arrested probably has done that very same thing to someone else.
He should be able to beat the DUI charge if he has been home for 5 mins or more. He could of been under the legal limit but came home and downed a few shots, pounded a beer or two. It should be argued that it is impossible for them to know what his BAC was before he got home.
The irony that a cop who likely did this to citizens arguing that it couldn't be done to him is rich.
And that's why I have no pity for him. Although .. if precedent is set in this case it will affect all in the future..
Many years ago when I was in driver's ed a CHP came in & talked about a man who had killed a man on the side of the road who was changing his tire. The driver just kept on driving. When the Chippies caught up with him he was sitting outside his car, surrounded by "a dozen" empty beer cans. They arrested him for vehicular manslaughter & DUI. The DUI charges were later dropped because the driver claimed he drank them on the side of the road where he was arrested, & the state couldn't prove exactly when he'd been drinking.
Officer Andy wasn't caught behind the wheel of his auto so they can't prove he was DWI unless he admitted to it. Any competent attorney would have those charges dismissed by the DA before any court appearance. Andy could've got home and slammed a couple of shots of Jack like most Cops do after their shift.
Several years ago I rent a third floor room in a Manhasset, NY. The owner was an older women who was a serious alcoholic. One night she let the dog out into the yard at 2 a.m. in the morning and then went back to sleep. The neighbors called the police who then knocked on the front door. When nobody answered they entered the home calling out. I just hunkered down and pretended I didn't exist so I didn't get mixed up in anyting. The police officers are not allowed to enter your home it just goes to show police officers really don't care what the law is they just do whatever they want.
I fail to understand how officer Andy’s reckless driving charge became a DUI because he was found with alcohol in his system in the privacy of his own home and after the fact. There is no proof he was intoxicated behind the wheel, the same as there is no reason to believe he didn’t drive home (recklessly) and opened a beer from his kitchen. Sounds like an easy DUI dismissal due to lack of evidence. The reckless driving could still stand due to eye witness testimony, but unless they saw him with an open container, he’s ok.
There isn't even evidence that he was the driver. Someone else could have been driving.
Agreed. He opened the door with a beer in his hand. If they didn't smell alcohol on his breath it'd be weird. I used to live in Reno NV and there was a cop that was leaving for his shift sober but returning each day a bit on the tipsy side. Turns out he was taking a couple bottles of Scope with him and drinking it because of the alcohol content.
I agree, the fact that he was drinking, at home, is not evidence that he had been driving while drunk. What law says that you cannot drink in your home!
The video says that "he answered questions" - which implies that he might have admitted to having just driven home after drinking a few. Such admission would have been stupid, but we all know that cops are stupid.
@@Brightstarlivesteam prohibition laws would. But the only places I'm finding that still have them are parts of Africa and Asia.
Andy, I really enjoy your content and pick up good information every time you post.
It’s interesting how my experience was one of the few times police at your door isn’t wrong. I was getting water at 330 am and they knocked didn’t say they were police than when I opened they said someone called about a suspicious person near the back pool and since I was awake they thought I might know where he was. I asked them which side of the complex. They actually didn’t know there were 4 pools and left.
...oops... 😁
I also had an experience where they weren't wrong at 3:30am. They were there to tell me to turn my music down. Which I turned off before opening the door, opened it and without them saying anything I said 'I gotcha' and closed the door.
that wasn't the cops bud, you almost got mugged
330 am rando knocking on the door and you answered.... Smh
How any intake DA would take a case without being able to prove Andy didn't drink after he got home is beyond me. It's the burden of the state to prove that andy was driving on the public roadway and above the legal limit of intoxication at the time he was driving.
I opened the door to watch this video thinking it was about my rights, but it was a commercial instead. You tricked me. Lawyers are sneaky!
Hahaha. It IS about your rights.
@@Andrewflusche I know, but you know I had to, couldn't resist since you kind of snuck it in there! 🤣
How can there be a DUI arrest when the LEOs only encountered him when he was at home relaxing? To me it just sounds like they just were talking to a guy who was at home enjoying a few drinks. Sure they were responding to a call for reckless driving but couldn’t he have been driving that way without drinking then went home and consumed a few drinks? Regardless, your advice of never opening the door to LEOs is well-said.
Some places have enacted laws that say that you are liable for DUI if you drink at home within 2 hours of finishing your driving for the day.
@@bergmanoswell879 Really? Never heard of that. Sounds like the potential for several wrongly-accused DUIs
@@bergmanoswell879 I need to see proof of that. I don't believe it.
@@bergmanoswell879 That's not true.
@@bergmanoswell879 that is illegal and pure bullshit!
Sir, you're a plethora of excellent advice.
100% agree with having the camera. I too have a ring and many other cameras. The problem with the ring is is required the internet to work plus it only records a few seconds before the motion (if wired) and the motion plus a bit of lead out time. My other cameras record 24/7 . I think police regularly overstep their bounds. I know here they lie, give minor false charges and back each other up with the lies.
T-Mobile now offers a network based camera. 🙌🙌
Got what he helped support, it's only a problem when it happens to few officers, not law abiding citizens that don't protect them from the consequences of their tyranny and cowardice.
Few months ago my doorbell rings and I look and there are two cops standing there, I opted not to go to the door and after a few rings they walked off. I found out from my neighbor later that they were looking for video of a red pickup truck that had hit a parked car and left without a note. They never came back and I never heard the outcome of their search. I looked at my video and there was nothing.
My brother in Kansas was on a DUI and property damage case where a 17 yr old crashed into a fence and tree a block from his house. Neighbors saw him run into his/parent's house. When the police came, they knocked, and the kid admitted he was drunk and responsible for the crash. Was arrested. At trial, half the jury members voted acquittal since the kid was a minor and wasn't read Miranda before the police asked him about the driving and accident. SMH. My brother was Pissed
What do you mean "on a DUI"? Was he one of those cops?
@@7F0X7 Sorry. He was on the jury.
If Officer Andy had a RING, it would have shown him arriving home in his car.
That footage could have been subpoenaed by the POLICE as well.
DON'T DRINK & DRIVE - PERIOD. Funny how the FL Commissioner wasn't arrested at wreck site (tree)
The Ring is "Owned" by the occupant and therefore should be considered as property that would require a warrant to get. In the mean time, all the data gets overridden.
Wow never thought of that. Your Ring camera doesn't only work against other people, it can work against you as well.
@@shannonp4037
Pretty sure Ring stores all video on their cloud for 60 days. The actual camera is yours, but is the video stored on the Ring cloud yours? Somewhere in that Ring privacy statement it probably says they will turn over video records to police if served with a warrant.
Manatee County Commissioner George Kruse just slipped out of their fingers .
@@shannonp4037 As already pointed out, it's unlikely that the owner actually has an option to delete the video. Even if there's an option that seems to let you delete the video the date is probably backed up and/or mirrored elsewhere and will stick around for a while. If there is an option to delete the video any backup that's not deleted also becomes the proof for the charges of destroying evidence.
I was just going to poo poo your Ring camera with regards to being in cahoots with the police and Jeff Bezos but then you mentioned it in the video. Well done. We went with a self-hosted Ubiquiti system and are happy with it.
Self-hosted systems are definitely more work, but then you know exactly who has access to video footage of the inside and outside of your home.
But do you really know who else has access 🤷♂️
@@RustyZipper yes, it's on our own server in our house
Exactly. I want to be the only one who has control of my security systems. I know I was severely pissed off when I fould the Emerson wifi thermostat I bought no longer had API support (they changed their systems). My intent had been to set up my own management on a Raspberry Pi.
I have a steel clad front door with steel reinforced striker plate and hinges, no nearby windows, and a door mat on my front porch that says, "COME BACK WITH A WARRANT".
If somebody's banging on my door saying they're the cops and they have a warrant I'm not answering it. Why would I believe them?
Tell them to read it starting with the signature of a local judge. Check goggle if its local and what court they preside over. It has to be in their hand and signed to be legal.
That is also true. I am sure it's not that difficult to find a uniform closely matching the uniforms of your local police agencies (if not an actual uniform). Convincing enough badges and they could probably fool even regular police officers.
If they do have a warrant, they will come in whether or not you answer the door.
But if you put up No Trespassing signs, that means you can't receive Amazon or DoorDash deliveries to your door, right? They have to leave your delivery on the curb, right?
The prosecution will not be able to prove the timing of Officer Andy's alcohol level. "No sir, I did not have a beer until I got home. Hey fellas, can I get you one?"
Love your informative and humorous videos Andrew! Stafford Class of 1966 here!
If the cops are allowed to come in they will, leave the door closed.
Bad choice of words. They were not allowed to go in but they were able to enter. Technically speaking placing their foot in the door to block it is still an illegal entry into the house but tap that foot trying to close the door and now your ass is getting beat and arrested for battery of an officer
My latest interaction with the police.
I'm at a job site, the owner is a police officer. I told him I'd be there for two days by myself then I'll have help. The job will be done on Friday or else I would work the weekend. He calls the Builder stating the exact same thing I said but using everything I said against me. " don't talk to the police"
Lawyer here (bar admissions attorney). Officer Andy, if he was going to answer the door, should have done so with a beer in his hand. Then could claim he started drinking when he got home. But I agree don’t answer door at all
What I don't understand is he was still on his property and could have claimed he wasn't drinking until he got home which is legal . He wasn't drinking out in public when the police saw him. The people reporting erratic driving couldn't tell if he was drunk or not and most likely couldn't even say for sure who was driving. He was home behind a door in his house. I'm missing how they could arrest him even if he did open the door.
If a cops smells alcohol on your breath while you are standing in your home, there is now way to say you were drinking and driving
As with so many thing there will be variation from state to state until there's a definitive SC ruling (probably in favor of the police), but for now the safe assumption is that the cops can knock on your door unless you have a fence (with no open gate) *and* signs. In Arizona v. Lohse the AZ court of appeals ruled that a fence and sign together revoked the implied consent to enter property in an effort to make contact. OTOH, in Christensen v. Tennessee the TN SC ruled that signs alone did not revoke the implied consent, and SCOTUS denied the appeal.
When you do an ad Andrew, I don't fast forward because you show why the product is important and why you should have it. Bravo and keep up the good work. Oh and I'm from Kanada so consider helping me and sponsoring me to move to a country that actually has civil rights please. :)
They must have a bond attached to the warrant or they still can't enter a private home . What a man does in his home cannot be construed to be a crime .
Guess the only thing it takes to break the thin blue line is an anonymous tip
As a police officer he has different obligations to his agency though. A lot of agencies work on a reasonable suspicion when it comes to investigating other cops. Hopefully even if he didn’t open the door he’d be investigated and scrutinized further and lose his job.
I love it when they do it to themselves.
5:25 One of the best ads I've ever seen ! That's storytelling right there!
Love You Man.Keep up tha knowledge.
Amazingly entertaining & educational, if only you were in every high school teaching civics.
He was putting his faith in the thin blue line -gladly in this one instance it did not work for him.
What about extrajudicially appointed state agencies that ignore purple paint, ignore signs, enter property from a complaint that is never shown and they leave a business card along with your now dead dogs. Or when the leave a ‘violation’ notice under a water jug at your legal camper as they continue to enter property. Or when you catch them and throw them off and then two weeks later return with a DNR officer who threatens arrest and detains you in place for trying to video the agents on the property and feet away from your home.
How could they possibly prove he was drunk driving if he was drunk at home? Is it not common for people to drive home and then drink? And, if they could somehow prove that, why wouldn't they do that even if he didn't open the door?
Depending on the location it is sometimes in the police employment contract that warrants are not required for certain disciplinary and safety concerns involving police officers.
If however he answered the door with a beer in hand in his off duty time and was not on call they would have been hard pressed to arrest him based on anything other than any admissions he made while they spoke to him.
There in the problem, most people cannot shut their mouth to save their soul. What they likely did is chat him up and he made several statements that could reasonably be construed that he had been driving while intoxicated.
Knew someone who was high as a kite, smashed into another vehicle basically totalling it, and they followed the trail of coolant the vehicle being driven was leaking. They could only get them for a hit and run, not a DUI, because even tho it was pretty obvious, they couldn't prove without a doubt that they were high when the wreck occurred. Know another guy who left a wreck while drunk and just turned himself in the next day so no DUI and just a hit and run.
I stopped drinking 8 years ago. Life is stupendously good.
The best defenses from DUI is:
- Never drink and drive.
- Never get into 'a totally not a DUI and is really a safety' checkpoint.
The first thing you can prevent, the second you can't.
Great videos, AF. Been following for a long time. Could you possibly structure into your videos when the laws you state are in your state or federal, etc?
I live in Florida and I always wonder when a lawyer says, "You don't have to do" this or that, if that only applies in the state where that lawyer has a practice.
Thanks. Great stuff. Keep it up!
Without a field sobriety test after being caught red handed, how can the State prove he was actually drunk while he was driving and not drunk from drinking after he got home? Erratic driving could be explained driving while texting or dropped something in the car.
In the case referenced at 4:08, would it have been better for the father to announce "I'm done with this conversation, please leave my property," before going back into his home? I could see the police arguing "we thought he was going to get a weapon, he rushed back in, etc" if he just turns and runs into the house, while saying the conversation is over and he wants the officers to leave because he's going back in the house gives them less of a grey area to play around in.
If I remember right, he did just that. He told them he wasn’t talking to them anymore and tried to go back inside.
Alright... You got me. This is enough good videos for a sub. Well done.
love these videos
Have you ever been pulled over? If so, you should do a video of how that went. I always like to hear stories of police unknowingly stopping lawyers.
He has videos on being pulled over
@@AmericanNinja85 Cool! Can you link to one where he talks about himself being pulled over?
@@shadowsmirk go on his channel and search "pulled over" or something similar. so many people are reliant on others to do shit for them !
@@piffblaza I simply wanted him to supply supporting evidence of this claim. So far, he has been unable or unwilling to do so.
If you aren’t the one they are looking for but a potential witness in an emergency situation I am assuming I should still answer the door since I don’t have the ability for a storm door. What happened when I first had police show up was an emergency. Let’s just say I do not live in a safe neighborhood.
Thank you for bringing up a Lackluster video. I would LOVE to see your opinion on many of the videos from that channel.
New Video-
Could you do a video on what to do if the cops lie about having a warrant? Do they have to show it? How do I learn these rules for my state?
If the cops gain access to your home by lying about having a warrant, any evidence they obtain would be suppressible, no question about it.
@@toobiasj But if they do in fact have a warrant, you're going to have to hire a contractor to repair the door and door jamb.
The instance you spoke about where the police followed the man in his home was allowed due to exigent circumstances. The caller reported he had a weapon, and the police will NOT just let you run back into your home if the believe you have a weapon readily available. The full story matters.
I love the information about the no trespassing sign, I actually do have a no trespassing sign on the on my deck and it is clearly visible don't know if that's important or not but I do have a no trespassing sign on my deck and one is sufficient correct.
I live in Johannesburg South Africa and if the police wish to knock on my front door they would have to climb the 2M high garden wall or steel driveway gate, negotiate the razor wire on top of those and avoid the electric fence. Then they have to get past the steel security gate in the entrance and knock on the door. They cant use the intercom as it has been stolen three times so I no longer replace it.
I enjoy hearing about the Blue Gestapo getting even a tiny bit of the anguish they so lovingly dish out to the pesky citizens they extort.
Andy had a beer in his hand when he opened the front door. Now how can that charge hold up in court? He was out of his car, law enforcement did not see him operating his vehicle and Andy may have just took the first sip when he got home.
Nice to see you getting sponsors
I remember when lawyers were advising folks to get the ring camera. But since *Ring* is giving footage without a warrant, I can imagine that they'll do near the business they were
And why does his condition (i.e., drunk) _in his home_ mean a DUI? They didn't find him _in his car_ soused to the gills, they discovered him in his house, which unless it is a recreational vehicle, is not his car. The report he was driving erratically is suspect, because are they sure Andy was even the driver? Is it _possible_ someone else could have been driving? Could he have gone to the bar, gotten drunk, then had a friend at the bar drive him home in his own car? And that trip was "erratic" because the guy who drove him home was just a really bad driver? Not "did this happen", but "is it possible?", as unless they have positive id that Andy was at the wheel and was drunk at that time, THEY GOT NUTHIN'!
It's not illegal to be drunk in your home. He just may get drunk really fast. It isn't illegal to be a lightweight.
Now, logic might say Andy was driving, and was pretty much hard boiled, but logic is tweeting bird singing in meadow. Logic is a beautiful flower -- that smells BAD. A chain of logic _is not evidence._
So unless Andy says "yeah, I hit the Blue Oyster Bar after my shift and chugged a pint or two of Jaegermeister, then hopped in my car and drove home to get down to some serious drinkin'", then how do they _legally_ get to a DUI?
He could have been stone cold sober in his car, and the reason he drove erratically for a short distance was that a wasp flew in his window, and he has mortal terrors of the creatures.
Unless he screwed himself sideways with his own fool mouth, I don't see a way to convict him for DUI with the evidence we've seen. The lawyer who can't get him off at that point is probably new, or a certifiable cretin.
DO NOT RECOMMEND RING. Ring Doorbell is bad. They give police access to your footage without your consent or even a warrant.
A warrant to search your house is much different than a warrant to arrest someone they think is in the house. A warrant to search for somebody has additional burden that the police must have evidence that the person is actually in the house not that the address was just listed in one of their documents. You should refuse a warrant to search for people.
Besides a warrant or other documents that allow legal egress into another's home they can also barge right in and do what they want and cover it up
Rules:
1) Never answer the door for the police unless you called the police.
2) Never call the police.
How can they arrest him without proof that he was driving? He answered the door with a beer which could be argued he drank beer after he got home. I seriously doubt he will be convicted.
Good point.
I agree! How could they prove intoxication AT THE TIME he was (or was not) driving. Still, good point not to answer door.
He gave enough evidence to the cops to convict himself.
How could they arrest him for something they didn’t see themselves. And how could the cops know he didn’t start drinking after he got home? Seems like a lot of holes that a halfway decent attorney could exploit in this case. That being said I don’t know what he told officers on the porch so he could have confessed or something. Who knows
At least those officers aren't so corrupt that they let the officer off just because he's an officer. In fact, they used their tricks against him to get him.
Never open the door for cops who show up in announced. If you do have a locked security screen.
They said it was hot pursuit with the father and son where they entered the home. Problem was, they were having a consensual conversation and were in no way pursuing anyone...
I agree that they shouldn't have opened the door, but how do they prove he was drunk at the time of the report and simply didn't start drinking once he got home?
All they have to do is convince one judge that they golf with, and they win the case. It has nothing to do with actual law. We are talking about cops here. They just do whatever they want. But I call BS on the whole story, because I don't believe events that were not in the news, resulted a cop charging another cop with a crime. Not buying that at all, even a little bit.
the witnesses
Witnesses, security camera footage, and whatever dumb statements he made when he answered the door. I doubt they arrested him just because he looked drunk. They had the timing of events sorted out and just needed him to make statements that proved their timeline correct.
@@TerryProthero burden of proof is BEYOND reasonable doubt if there's any room for doubt, you lose.
I'm glad he answered. It got a bad cop off the street.
Man this Andy guy is one bad dude, breakin every law out there!
How do the officers know when he began drinking? Could a case not be made that he just started drinking right before the officers showed up? How is it proven that he was intoxicated while driving if he was questioned at his home without the officers observing him driving?