Bradley Roby Takes to Twitter to Clear the Air About His Arrest

By DJ Byrnes on April 25, 2014 at 11:37a
92 Comments

As is well known now, former OSU cornerback Bradley Roby was arrested on Sunday for suspicion of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

As our Kyle Rowland reported, Roby blew a blood-alcohol content of  .008, well below the legal limit of .08. At his arraignment Friday morning, the case was continued for April 29.

Naturally, Roby is a bit miffed by the "Roby arrested for drunk driving" headlines without clarifying the fact he blew a .008. (Sources within the Columbus Police Department and the prosecutors office have told Eleven Warriors they expect the case to be dropped.)

Today, however, Roby took to Twitter to clear the air surrounding his arrest:

92 Comments

Comments

hit_the_couch's picture

What?

And then I told her...i'm no weatherman, but tonight's forecast is calling for several inches!

+8 HS
OSUBias's picture

Yeah, you tell that stupid number!

Shitter's full

+21 HS
jamesrbrown322's picture

This guy agrees

12! HA HA HA!
 

 

"Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts." - Winston Churchill

+14 HS
HighBallAce's picture

He only had ONE BEER....ugh ugh ugh......No TWO BEERS......ugh ugh ugh......TWO BEERS!!!!!

+1 HS
tGW's picture

I hate you 1b!

"Have a nice trip...Michaelllll."

urbz4prez's picture

Maybe he had something else in his system; hence the date of the occurrence.

"And Urban Meyer said "Let there be light, and it was so."

+2 HS
HighBallAce's picture

Not being a smart ass I think from the days I was in the academy, you have like 2 hours to test someone or the blood alcohol evidence is thrown out of the court. Not sure on the time cause it's been so long sense I worked in law enforcement but I think it's 2 hours?

charles's picture

What is that, papyrus?

Get to the 21st Century CPD!

+21 HS
buckskin's picture

Agreed with the false headlines about being drunk; many just want to be the 1st to report a story. IF he had another illegal substance in his body; wow; does he not realize the NFL draft is coming up?  This could potentially cost him a lot of money. 

+1 HS
RedStorm45's picture

Calling out Aaron Slomovitz via his tweet.

 

Could get nasty for CPD if there's nothing else to the story.  Though Roby does own up to his "part in it," but I'm not sure what that is?  Sitting in his car in a parking lot?

osu07asu10's picture

Could get nasty for CPD if there's nothing else to the story. 

Sigh...

The reality of it is that Roby is just one of numerous individuals this happens to daily, weekly, monthly, etc with OVI and the CPD. The CPD is not going to get into any sort of trouble for this because a former buckeye was charged with a (suspect) OVI.

There was reason for CPD to visit the area (based on a call to police regarding a passed out occupant of a vehicle, and also the fact it is routinely patrolled because it is basically a parking lot for bars in the Arena district). Roby smelled of alcohol and failed a field sobriety test. That's enough for them to charge Roby. OVI is not just for alcohol.

The presence of alcohol in his system is important because even if trace amounts of Marijuana, muscle relaxors, pain medication, or anything else would show up in Roby's urine test the combination of both alcohol and a drug that impairs driving is enough to charge with OVI if they failed the field sobriety test.

He'll have his day in court and potentially be victorious.

He was at worst asleep in his car (in the drivers seat), in a public parking lot that serves a block of bars, at 2:30am in the morning. 

Not the best decision to make...

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+6 HS
IGotAWoody's picture

The fact that he agreed to a urine sample, common sense would tell you he's confident they will find nothing. If he was on any other substance, there's no way he would've agreed to a piss sample.

 - License to kill gophers (wolverines, badgers, etc) by the government of the United Nations

+3 HS
osu07asu10's picture

You don't get to speak with an attorney prior to submitting to chemical test. In Ohio, you give implied consent to a chemical test simply by driving. If you fail a field sobriety test the officer can choose blood, urine, or breath test. You do have the right of refusal (for your first 2 OVI/DUIs, then they'll forcible take the sample).

If you refuse, you are automatically arrested and jailed for OVI with refusal, which carries a year long suspension if you don't have a great attorney. 

However, Roby's grandstanding on twitter probably lends itself to the fact that his urine will show up clean, and if it doesn't, well then Roby deserves what is coming to him.

 

 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+3 HS
IGotAWoody's picture

Meh?

 - License to kill gophers (wolverines, badgers, etc) by the government of the United Nations

AndyVance's picture

He was at worst asleep in his car (in the drivers seat), in a public parking lot that serves a block of bars, at 2:30am in the morning. 

Not the best decision to make...

I'll plead ignorance for a moment: why should someone asleep in their car be cited for operating under the influence? If they were asleep in a parked car, they were by definition NOT operating the vehicle. Let's think about this logically - if someone went to a bar, got totally slobberknockered and then was turned out at last call, they have two options: pay a cab to take them home (or ride home with a sober friend), or, if they drove themselves to the bar, they can go sleep it off in the car. Wouldn't the police want to encourage someone sleeping it off rather than trying to pilot a vehicle under the influence?

Okay, put be back on the straight and narrow if I'm missing something about why it's wrong to be asleep in a parked car.

EDIT: I posted this before I read the rest of the thread below. Shame on me. Regardless, OVI apparently has an overly broad definition, and one that as a law-abiding citizen I am not at all comfortable with. Sleeping it off in the car should not be illegal. Sleeping it off on the street is loitering, so where's a law-abiding drinker supposed to go if he can't sleep on the sidewalk and he can't sleep in his car?

+2 HS
allinosu's picture

If you have the keys in your possession and in your own driveway, you can be arrested. Not agreeing just stating it.

+2 HS
osu07asu10's picture

All of my responses here are trying to interpret, or bring to light, how the law is interpreted and enforced by law enforcement.

I agree completely with you AV. If you want my own personal opinion (and I've been on the receiving end of two serious drunk driving accidents) I think OVI/DUI "investigations" or enforcement is total bullshit. I think the advancement of police rights and the disintegration of individual rights is ridiculous in America.

However, ignorance is not an excuse. Roby could have slept it off in the passengers seat, backseat, (somewhat more out there) keys in the truck or underneath the car. It is truly sad that a complete technicality would change his charges even though it wouldn't change his level of intoxication but that is what we live in today.

I've said it in a few other posts on these topics but, it pays to know the law and your rights. 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+6 HS
brandonbauer87's picture

I think you should just write up a nice ten page essay on DUI/OVI law with nice subsections on how it relates to Roby's case.

I'm overwhelmingly amazed at how little most people know about this very important subject. Anyone who ever goes out for dinner and drinks a beer should know these laws inside out. A burnt out license plate light and the smell of beer on your breath can really put you in a bad situation if you don't understand the laws. You can be within the law and still be cited. Right or wrong, police make judgment calls in these situations a lot. DUI is a popular issue right now, so police err on the side of caution. Just remember, if a cop smells alcohol (or anything illegal), he can't assume you've had one not ten. 

+2 HS
Will in Arizona's picture

When they ask, "How much have you had to drink tonight?", don't answer.  Don't be a dick about it, just politely state that you prefer not to answer that question.  Decline all field sobriety tests, but volunteer for a blood/urine test (you can't turn these down without losing your license in most states).  I was once pulled over and did this and the police gave me a hard time but ultimately let me go.  They typically don't want to go through the hassle of taking you in and the paperwork unless you they know you are really drunk.

+1 HS
osu07asu10's picture

Decline all field sobriety tests, but volunteer for a blood/urine test (you can't turn these down without losing your license in most states).  I was once pulled over and did this and the police gave me a hard time but ultimately let me go.

Agreed but, (In Ohio) IF you have been drinking are intoxicated/under the influence/impaired or just have alcohol in your system, I would decline the chemical test and go to court with a lawyer with no chemical evidence to support an OVI/DUI.

In states such as North Carolina, where if you decline they will forcibly take your blood, just take the breathalyzer and be done.

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

AndyVance's picture

However, ignorance is not an excuse. Roby could have slept it off in the passengers seat, backseat, (somewhat more out there) keys in the truck or underneath the car. It is truly sad that a complete technicality would change his charges even though it wouldn't change his level of intoxication but that is what we live in today.

I've said it in a few other posts on these topics but, it pays to know the law and your rights. 

It sounds like you and I agree 100% on this situation and the sad reality of our personal rights and liberties. And btw, major kudos to you for helping guide us all through this madness. The one area where you and I might have a slight difference of opinion, though perhaps it's only semantics, is on the fact that "ignorance is not a defense." While legally/technically you are absolutely correct, the fact that I did not know this asinine facet of statute as an intelligent, civically-aware 32-year-old tells me that no college student out drinking on a Friday night should be expected to know this either.

Any of our friends in the legislature who frequent this site, it's darn well time you fix this bit of statutory overreach. The Fourth Amendment, as others here have said, is every bit as important as the First, Second or Fifth.

+1 HS
osu07asu10's picture

Yeah, I only meant that in the letter of the law in regard to the ignorance not being an excuse.

The best thing the common man and society has against over zealous enforcement of laws is the knowledge of your rights AND your willingness to assert them. There are good cops and bad cops, good citizens and bad citizens. The best situation is if both LEOs and citizens understand the laws.

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+1 HS
AndyVance's picture

Definitely agree on everything you just said - and I really have no beef with law enforcement officials whatsoever. They're working stiffs like you and me, and while there are definitely those who let the badge go to their head, or who do not uphold their oaths (I'm looking at you Tallahassee PD), my beef is with the fact that this law is so overly broad that a person sleeping off a bender in their car is cited for what is essentially doing the right thing.

+1 HS
brandonbauer87's picture

Unfortunately, the law is broad for a reason. If no one ever escaped justice through technicalities, the law would be much simpler. Law is just like anything else in life: a select few ruin things for the overwhelming majority. 

+1 HS
DCNick's picture

I once slept in my truck outside New Bern, North Carolina. A friend and I were at a party and planned to crash there but the cops broke it up and made everyone leave. We found a field nearby, had some beers and went to sleep. I slept in the cab and put the keys in the tool box in the back just in case a police officer stopped bye. I figured that was enough to avoid and charge or operating a vehicle.

UrbanPirate's picture

That's insane

Just... Go Bucks.

    

BPOSU's picture

So let me get this straight...They gave him the test at 4:20...on 4/20....

 

"Terrelle, are you coming back next year?" ..."Ahight"

+19 HS
DJ Byrnes's picture

No contraband was found, and if his car reeked of weed, it would've been in police records.

Californian by birth, Marionaire by the Grace of President Warren G. Harding.

USMC11917's picture

Why would it be in police records if it reeked of weed but none was located? Your vehicle reeking of weed isn't against the law, only possessing it. The odor gives probable cause to search. That is all. That in itself isn't necessary to be documented unless it is in their specific SOP to do so.

-1 HS
osu07asu10's picture

Why would it be in police records if it reeked of weed but none was located? Your vehicle reeking of weed isn't against the law, only possessing it. The odor gives probable cause to search. That is all. That in itself isn't necessary to be documented unless it is in their specific SOP to do so.

If the car smelled like weed, as you stated it does provide the officer probable cause to search the vehicle. If the smell of marijuana is in fact the reason an officer established probable cause to search a vehicle, they better damn well list it in the report.

The funny thing about marijuana is once you smoke it, it disappears..and even no marijuana physically remained in the vehicle it is possible that Roby was under the influence of marijuana which impacted his ability to operate a motor vehicle. It is likely that if it does smell like marijuana that would factor into the officer choosing to have Roby submit a urine test and not just a breathalyzer as breathalyzers do not detect THC in blood levels.

OVI isn't just for alcohol, it is for any number of drugs both legal and illegal and a combination of any of them that can impair your ability to operate a motor vehicle.

 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

-1 HS
ibuck's picture

Years ago, when I lived in Nebraska, I was riding with a native Nebraskan, and we noticed a strong smell of marijuana. Well, that's what I thought.  He claimed it was smoke from a farmer burning his alfalfa field. I noticed this smell on numerous other occasions too.  Would that smell in the car give the police probable cause?

Our honor defend, we will fight to the end !

If you can't win your conference, just quietly accept your non-playoff bowl game.

osu07asu10's picture

Potentially yes it could give an officer probably cause to search a vehicle. I have no idea what Nebraska laws are, or what burning alf alfa smells like though. 

However, I would certainly hope that a police officer could localize the smell of marijuana to the car and not an ambient (albeit similar) smell in the environment.

 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

MichiganBuckeye222's picture

I'm sure that was what it was...Roby was burning alfalfa sprouts in his car.

Representing the Buckeyes in the Mitten State since 1987.

www.septemberheisman.com

 

+1 HS
tussey's picture

My question is what is the point of having a legal limit of .08 if you are going to be cited for something 10x (.008) less than that?

+3 HS
BPOSU's picture

If you look at the date of the occurrence then it seems like it had more to do with perceived narcotics use than having a tiny bit of alcohol in the system

"Terrelle, are you coming back next year?" ..."Ahight"

+4 HS
osu07asu10's picture

I think it had more to do with the fact that somebody called to report a man passed out in a vehicle, after 2:20am in the morning in a parking lot outside of the Arena district bar area.

 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+2 HS
jeremytwoface's picture

Better than driving drunk... Is it illegal to sit in your car and sober up before you drive home?

The first man gets the ((((Oyster)))), the second man gets the shell.

+3 HS
imex99's picture

It's illegal because you have physical control of the vehicle...

+5 HS
Jason Gruber's picture

It's only illegal if the keys are in the ignition and the car is running. Otherwise you can drink inside of your car, as long as the keys are not in the ignition

 

"You win with people." Woody Hayes

"If winning isn't everything, why do we keep score?" Vince Lombardi

"¯\_(ツ)_/¯" Joey Bosa

-1 HS
brandonbauer87's picture

False. The keys only need to be in the vehicle. Having them in the back seat is treated the same as in the ignition. 

+6 HS
allinosu's picture

In your possession, unless they have change the law.

osu07asu10's picture

Better than driving drunk... Is it illegal to sit in your car and sober up before you drive home?

Actually it is, if you are in the drivers seat and in a parking lot or public roadway.

It's only illegal if the keys are in the ignition and the car is running. Otherwise you can drink inside of your car, as long as the keys are not in the ignition

That is actually incorrect. OVI requires that you

1.) have physical control of your vehicle (physical control is defined as being in the drivers seat AND being in possession of the car keys, but they do not have to be in the ignition)

2.) That you are impaired

3.) That the car has moved or did move while you were impaired. They do not actually have to witness the car moving but that it was reasonable the car HAD moved (IE, it is sitting in a ditch...it HAD to get there somewhere)

If they cannot prove that the car moved, like in Roby's case they may not be able to. They next thing they try to prove is Physical Control. As stated earlier, Physical Control requires that you are in the drivers seat and in possession of the keys.  If you meet those requirements and are found to be impaired they can cite you for Loss of Physical Control.

Loss of Physical Control is very similar to an OVI but there are no minimum penalties so most sentences/punishments are less severe than an OVI.

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+4 HS
brandonbauer87's picture

OSU07, are you a lawyer? You seem to be one of the few around here that really understand the law in regards to this.  

+1 HS
osu07asu10's picture

No not practicing but hail from a long line of attorneys and have lost count of the number of friends I have who I have had to help with OVI/DUI cases.

End of the day, as citizens in today's society it is important to understand the laws that you are governed by and potentially breaking so that you don't trip yourself up.

EDIT: You also seem well versed in the law yourself BB87

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+5 HS
brandonbauer87's picture

That makes sense. I took an interest in law a couple years after high school. I also believe you should have a good knowledge of the law. There's no one to protect you but yourself. I also enjoy giving over zealous cops a little hassle if the right situation arises. I once sat 2 hours while a cop tried to get a warrant to search my car. I had nothing to hide but I was being hassled because I was young and had a loud car. The officer gave up and let me go. 

+2 HS
osu07asu10's picture

I was a Town Manager for a small town in Western NC for awhile (technically had "authority" over the police department) and I was pulled over for "speeding" on main street two blocks from town hall, and the officer didn't recognize or know who I was.

I refused to answer his questions, sat in the back of the cop car, rode down to the station with him and asked him to get Chief Gibson for me and as soon as the Chief showed up steam started pouring out of his ears. The guy was new so no harm no foul but the scarlet color of his face from embarrassment would have made any buckeye fan proud and the tail tucking was epic!

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+2 HS
brandonbauer87's picture

It's really a great feeling keeping officers of the law in check. It's a fine line to walk between being right and being disrespectful. 

+2 HS
osu07asu10's picture

It's a fine line to walk between being right and being disrespectful. 

Bingo.

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+2 HS
Hayesedandconfused's picture

What town in western nc

MichiganBuckeye222's picture

im not a lawyer, but i stayed at a holiday inn express last night.

Representing the Buckeyes in the Mitten State since 1987.

www.septemberheisman.com

 

+3 HS
Go1Bucks's picture

Take the keys and toss them under the car or place in the trunk, and you no longer have the ability to operate the vehicle.  Know for fact it works.

Go Bucks!

+1 HS
Buckeye in Illini country's picture

I don't know about Ohio, but yes it is often illegal to do so since you have the "possibility" of operating the vehicle, even if the keys aren't in the ignition (for the non-push button starters).  

http://www.lawqa.com/news/sleeping-in-a-car-while-drunk-counts-as-dui-ma...

Columbus to Pasadena: 35 hours.  We're on a road trip through the desert looking for strippers and cocaine... and Rose Bowl wins!

charles's picture

This seems like a catch-all, separate from a drunk driving charge:

ORC 2917.11 B2 - No person, while voluntarily intoxicated, Engage in conduct or create a condition that presents a risk of physical harm to the offender or another, or to the property of another.

aka drunk/intoxicated in public or disorderly conduct

Edit - but i guess if it was OVI, then I dunno.

USMC11917's picture

What? Someone called this in as a complaint and the officer was responding to that complaint and doing his job? I thought he was investigated specifically because he was black or DWB!?? That is what the community ran with yesterday. That is why it pays to get the full details before jumping to conclusions. It is easier to just hate the authority figures because the mob mentality rules.

-5 HS
USMC11917's picture

Where am I wrong in speaking the truth?

+2 HS
osu07asu10's picture

(I don't feel this way, it is just so fitting...)

 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+1 HS
USMC11917's picture
+1 HS
hit_the_couch's picture

My understanding is that .08 is the current standard that 'the man' believes one is drunk and can't function. Not to get into a debate, but I believe this to be complete b.s. and where one would get an OVI

My other understanding is that one can be cited for driving even if only 1 drink was consumed and this would be a DUI.

 

During my FMC clerk search I noticed that he and Corey Brown had an eviction from Olentangy Commons 2 years ago. That place is awfully expensive for 2 kids on scholarship. 2 bedrooms start at like $810 /mo.

And then I told her...i'm no weatherman, but tonight's forecast is calling for several inches!

+3 HS
FROMTHE18's picture

I completely agree with him…bit unfair he was presumed to have done something horrendous (admittedly, I jumped the gun with my judgement, but have since adjusted properly)

osu07asu10's picture

Seems like the county records say that Roby's fingerprints were required...

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+2 HS
buckeyepastor's picture

The Police owe it to this young man, if there is nothing more to it than an allowable amount of alcohol in his system, to make it clear before the draft that no charges will be filed.   For there to be ANY question mark going into this weekend is horrible for him, especially if he did nothing wrong.   

"Woody would have wanted it that way" 

osu07asu10's picture

He was already given a citation for a 1st degree misdemeanor for OVI so charges have already been filed. They can dismiss the case against him and according to reports most likely will.

It looks like he got a continuance on his arraignment until 4/29 (next Tuesday) presumably to wait for the analysis of his urine test. If that shows up clear then the case will most likely be dismissed.

If it doesn't show up clear, I would expect the case to continue based on the physical evidence (failed field sobriety test) and chemical evidence (alcohol + whatever is in his system) to prove OVI.

 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

Scarlet-Gray's picture

The police don't owe him anything, they did their job. The media are the one's who took this story and ran with it, and continue to run with it even after Roby's response (just saw it again on ABC 6 at around 6 pm).

+4 HS
Ethos's picture

We have now dedicated 3 articles to this silliness. (i'm including the skull session)

"What do you need water for, Sunshine?!" - Coach Coombs, if you don't love this man, you have no soul.

+4 HS
Patriot4098's picture

Because the off season is full of silliness.

"Evil shenanigans!"     - Mac

+1 HS
Buckeye_in_SEC_country's picture

Glad he cleared the air, but he also tweeted a pic of his SS# yesterday.  Not a very smart move.  

+1 HS
headina's picture

I know I tweeted him 50 seconds after it was posted that he was an idiot. He took it down shortly after. Not smart. 

GO BUCKS

livinthedream's picture

Just read the law:  4511.19 Operating vehicle under the influence of alcohol or drugs - OVI.  Do not see anywhere in there that says I can't sleep in my car - even IF i had been drinking.  Sounds like they'll have to reduce this to loitering, illegal parking or littering.

The fish stinks from the head down.

 

 

-1 HS
Furious George 27's picture

So when do we start hearing about how Urban is losing control of his program?

Yeah, well…that’s just like, your opinion, man.

+1 HS
Hovenaut's picture

Jadeveon Clowney and his heavy feet seem to pose more of threat on the roads than our man Roby.

$.02...

Hate Week runneth over

+6 HS
Klytus21's picture

A buddy of mine was driving back from TeeJays one night and got pulled over for "erractic driving."  He passed the field test and blew a 0.0.  They still took him in anyway and he spent over a year  and a lot of money fighting the charge.  So basically CPD will use any reading against you, but it sure won't exonerate you if you pass. 

NJBuck

+2 HS
Osurrt's picture

Seems like a lot to do about nothing pending a clean urine test results......a field sobriety test is purely of subjective nature---my word against yours, unless it was filmed on a dash cam......Some profiling going on maybe?

-2 HS
TLeeUpInThisJ's picture

A coincidence that it was 4/20?

Go1Bucks's picture

CPD is well known for harassing people for little or no reason.  If sleeping in the car was better than getting behind the wheel and driving, then I am glad he was snoozin'.  If there is nothing more to the story, then this will be tossed and CPD will look stupid but come out clean anyway.  They love putting the rookies on duty around campus and the Arena district.  

I once was busted for OVI, (knocked down to reckless after  2 years in the courts cause I got tired of fighting and spending money) when I went (straight from work) to pick up a drunk buddy so he wouldnt drive.  All BS.

Go Bucks!

-1 HS
osu07asu10's picture

They love putting the rookies on duty around campus and the Arena district.  

Quite the contrary. Those are cushy districts to be working in compared to Hilltop, Olde Town East, the SE side, etc. CPD puts officers who have put their time in on the force on campus or the arena district.

Think about it, dealing with drunk college kids or patrolling for murders, crack dealers, prostitution, and violent crimes in those neighborhoods

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+1 HS
Scarlet-Gray's picture

That's actually wrong, CPD doesn't put anyone anywhere. Jobs become open as officers move around the department and the officers who "apply" (for lack of better term) to the open position on a precinct are chosen based on their seniority within the department. Seniority is based off when you were hired.  So you will usually find older officers (think 10+ years on the department) on 1st shift jobs and the younger officers will have 2nd and 3rd shifts.

Go1Bucks's picture

And yes, they are assigned.

Go Bucks!

D-Day0043's picture

If it is illegal to drink and drive then why do bars have parking lots? Is everyone that visits the bar supposed to leave their car overnight to call a cab unless they have a designated driver?

If drinking and driving is illegal, then why do they give citations for public intoxication if you are walking home drunk?

So they don't want you to drink and drive, they don't want you to drink and walk, so someone explain to me why do bars still exist? It sounds like a big hustle to me. 

 

I am D-Day0043 and I approve this message.

-2 HS
Larrinator's picture

You can even get an OVI if you try to ride a bicycle after drinking too. Some laws can be a little ridiculous. 

Larson

+1 HS
osu07asu10's picture

You can even get an OVI if you try to ride a bicycle after drinking too. Some laws can be a little ridiculous. 

It is actually not that ridiculous. I live in the Short North where bike traffic is heavy. If someone on a bike is drunk and causes an accident with other vehicles, potentially injury those passengers, the OVI is well warranted.

That is above and beyond the fact that if you're swerving around on a 15lb piece of metal and get clipped by 2,300lb car you're done for.

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+1 HS
AngryWoody's picture

ROBY WAS FRAMED
 

 

Our Honor Defend!

DefendYoungstown's picture

Last time I checked he is no longer part of the team, does anybody really care either way?

What we can't do in the air we'll do on the ground.

-1 HS
clogan1032's picture

Whatever they accuse, he wasn't really drunk just had a frew brews. 

-2 HS
Jonnferrell's picture

The whole DUI law thing is to keep people safe.  So many people's lives have been destroyed by alcohol/drugs and driving.  It would be nice if the officer could have just made sure that the guys friend comes and picks him up and everyone is home safe.  No harm, no foul.  They have been at the scene of OMVI accidents and know the terrible things that can happen.  I am still haunted every Christmas when I drive by an intersection in town where an entire family was broadsided and killed by a drunk driver, and I didn't even see the carnage.  In the case in question, were there some extenuating circumstances or behavior that caused the charge?  Could be.  If so, then I really don't blame the police.  One should be respectful at all times of law enforcement.  If there was no aggravation on his part, then get the guy off the street separate from his car (that he wasn't driving) and mark that off as doing your job safeguarding people for the night.  

"I'm still hungry." --Brady Hoke

+1 HS
BucksFan2000's picture

I hope he does well in the NFL, but drama just seems to follow this guy around.  As a Steelers fan who knows we need CB's, I hope we take someone else.

+2 HS
tGW's picture

"That's not how you do it!"

Kevin Grady

 

"Have a nice trip...Michaelllll."