[Chron] DWI trial of Rockets guard Alston to begin (UPDATE: Alston not guilty)

Chill out man. People on here aren't defending that drunk driving is good. I too believe that if he was drunk, then punish him.

BUT under no circumstance should a police officer interrogate him, trying to cause some disturbance or rift. If you suspect him being drunk, give him a freaking sobriety test (aren't they supposed to make you walk in a line or something?). Alston cooperated to his fullest extent.

 

I don't think it is a matter of defending Rafer, but I don't think he was clearly drunk in this video as some have stated. The cop didn't pull him over because of how he was driving...it was because his head lights were off. Rafer was answering all of the cops questions, but at some point the questioning became a little stupid. How many of you take account to the time you do everything. He asked what time he had his first drink....Rafer said about 12:40 (within the first few minutes of his 12:30 arrival), but the cop said he didn't answer and asked again.

After last summer it appeared Rafer knew where this was going. He could have helped himself by sucking it up and keep answering the questions instead of saying just take me in. Maybe the cop would have let him go and just tell his girlfriend in the car to drive him home.

It was kinda funny to see him lay on the car though....

 

I wasn't defending Rafer at all.

I just don't think that things like that video should be public property. It's evidence, it should be locked up just as tight as a gun would be, imho. They don't let the media inspect a gun themselves, why should they get to inspect a video.

I dunno it just bothers me.

 

Yeah, there's plenty of more important news that doesn't get reported on or it isn't given an appropriate amount of coverage.

Rafer was acting really dumb in that video, though. I know for a fact that people can turn sour towards policemen with the feeling that they're going to be mistreated anyway but he isn't helping anything by acting that way.

You can't complain about cops being a-holes if you're being an a-hole towards them.

 

thats the way it works. They ask you 10 times if they want. You can choose to answer or not, its up to you. But if you answer incorrectly, or give different info you are hooked.

 

They ask questions like time of last drink, what you ate, etc. because that information is used in extrapolating your BAC at the time of driving (if you provide a breath test)

As for the notion that Miranda warnings aren't needed for misdemeanor cases, that's just not true. You don't need to Mirandize people on the side of the road when you stop them for DWI because they aren't in custody (not for Miranda purposes anyway) - it has nothing to do with the nature or level of the offense. When you take them back to the station, even in a DWI, the officers must mirandize them before asking questions. Note, you don't have to Mirandize them before you ask them to do field sobriety tests at the station because the courts say that is non-custodial. But again, Miranda is needed for all cases, misdemeanors and felonies - but you have to be in custody and being interogated before it applies.

 

I mistyped in the last msg, they don't have to Mirandize you for field sobriety tests because its non-testimonial, not non-custodial

 

Bu why the cop doesn't insists with the test?
Is not he obligated to do so?

 

The cop asked the same question like 3 different ways. As if to try to get Rafer to implicate himself. Rafer said "take me in, your not gonna have me out here looking like some fool."

Obviously Rafer had something to hide.

Seriously, at one point Rafer said I had 3 to 4 drinks. Then the cops said "so you had 4 drinks" Its like the cop was trying to bait him.

 

http://brightcove.vo.llnwd.net/d6/u...82428_asset-1224812701784.jpg?pubId=716039752

here is what happened. IMO it's pretty funny and I don't know how rafer usually acts whens he's "sober" but I hope it's not like that!

 

my apologies that wasn't it thats just a picture lol major fail

its on the chron front page as of right now and i'm at school and the copy link button on the flash player isnt working

look under videos and you should see raw footage of the rafer arrest

 

Rafer Alston is a piece of crap person and stuff like this makes me wish guaranteed contracts didn't exist in the NBA.

 

Would have been funny if Rafer pulled a basketball out of his car and started doing And1 moves all over the place to prove he wasn't drunk

 

I don't think that cops can force you to take a field sobriety test or breathalyzer. But if you refuse (I'm assuming this is what happened), then they can take you in if they suspect you of drunk driving.

 

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Z-NqjIfxYi0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Z-NqjIfxYi0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


I guess the cop feeled like a "big guy"

 

Which is why I used the word "generally," because realistically most people busted on misdemeanors aren't interrogated by the police.

 

I really don't understand why this bothers you. You may empathize with Rafer's situation, but he's the one responsible for it, not the media or the police. If Rafer didn't want the public embarrassment he shouldn't have driven drunk. Similarly, if he was so concerned about that tape being aired in court, he could've just pleaded guilty and accepted punishment.

Sorry for repeating myself, but you're missing a key point--evidence presented at trial is public. Anyone can walk down to the courthouse on any given day, stroll into a courtroom, and watch a trial. Sure, the Chronicle isn't publicizing 99.99% of the DWI trials that take place in the Greater Houston area, but 99.99% of those cases aren't newsworthy because those defendants aren't public figures and their crimes aren't shocking enough to make the news.

Besides, what if the cop had tased Rafer without provocation? Would you think the same about the tape not being published on the Chron's website?

 

Saw the video, would the cop really not have taken Rafer in if he hadn't insisted upon it?

Not sure what DWI procedures are like, but for some reason I don't think so.

 

Depends if he would've submitted to a field sobriety test or not.

 

Yes, it would still bother me. There is something wrong with the public being allowed access to something that is part of a trial. For video and audio it bothers me.

I wouldn't get access to dna in order to process it and prove something, there is no reason why I should get full audio and video that is evidence in a case.

It has nothing to do with this particular case, I don't think it's right in any case. I don't think we should be allowed to televise court rooms in live cases either. It's just a personal belief where I disagree with the system.