Pilot sues Cops over failed Breathalyzer
10-14-2019, 12:21 PM
#21
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 116
Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
I hope he wins. Breathalyzers are notoriously unreliable.
Assuming the timing above is accurate, if he had a .015 at the blood test 2 hours after the breathalyzer, his BAC at the breathalyzer should have been around .03... well below the .04 limit.
Assuming the timing above is accurate, if he had a .015 at the blood test 2 hours after the breathalyzer, his BAC at the breathalyzer should have been around .03... well below the .04 limit.
10-14-2019, 01:13 PM
#23
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,482
Originally Posted by Ciceda
Interesting, I figured they would try to use time difference to say that he was close to the brethalizer values at the time. If the above is true, he may have a case.
But regardless, when he - on his lawyer’s advice - refused an earlier BAC, he screwed himself legally.
He probably ought to be suing the lawyer for malpractice that told him to refuse the test until they got a court order. That move put the final nail in the coffin.
10-14-2019, 02:41 PM
#24
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,232
Originally Posted by Dixie320
Well, the arrest occurred 3 years ago, and the pilot in question did lose his certificates despite the fact that the case was thrown out. It looks like he is trying to make an attempt at recovering his career.
He should have tried HIMS. But that's a cooperate to graduate system, lawyering up is counter-productive.
10-28-2019, 10:22 AM
#25
New Hire
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 8
As others have said, the PBT is not as reliable as blood analysis, but probable cause is not the same standard as beyond reasonable doubt either. This guy is lucky the DA pussied out and dropped the case. Plenty of DWI convictions occur even when the blood comes back below the legal limit. That's what expert testimony is for. Based on the contents of the officer's report, they did exactly as they were trained and a reasonable person would've concluded that Duszak was operating the aircraft while intoxicated. The fact that they even consulted the attorney's office before the arrest makes me think these guys are going to be fine. As someone else said, Mr. Duszak is being taken for a ride by an unscrupulous attorney.
10-30-2019, 06:10 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2019
Position: baller, shot caller
Posts: 958
I could be mistaken but toxicology results are extremely accurate, and even though the test was administered several hours later on, they can still provide an accurate value of what his BAC would have been several hours earlier at his report time. However the article is extremely vague and just says that the results put his BAC at .015, but fails to mention at what point his BAC was .015.
I don't know the policy for that particular airline, but if it was proven that was his BAC was .015 at the report time then he should have a solid case.
I don't know the policy for that particular airline, but if it was proven that was his BAC was .015 at the report time then he should have a solid case.
10-30-2019, 06:53 AM
#27
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,482
Originally Posted by SSlow
I could be mistaken but toxicology results are extremely accurate, and even though the test was administered several hours later on, they can still provide an accurate value of what his BAC would have been several hours earlier at his report time. However the article is extremely vague and just says that the results put his BAC at .015, but fails to mention at what point his BAC was .015.
I don't know the policy for that particular airline, but if it was proven that was his BAC was .015 at the report time then he should have a solid case.
I don't know the policy for that particular airline, but if it was proven that was his BAC was .015 at the report time then he should have a solid case.
Read the above:
Not hardly. The breathalyzer itself was two and a half hours after he was removed from the cockpit so you need to add .016 x 2.5 to his .046 breathalyzer reading to get what his level was when he was arrested. That gives him a .086.
But regardless, when he - on his lawyer’s advice - refused an earlier BAC, he screwed himself legally.
But regardless, when he - on his lawyer’s advice - refused an earlier BAC, he screwed himself legally.
At that point his career became a roadkill. And suing a couple of cops who were merely doing their jobs won’t get his career back or any serious money from the cops.
10-30-2019, 11:29 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2019
Position: baller, shot caller
Posts: 958
Originally Posted by Excargodog
No.
Read the above:
If you calculate back to when he was in the cockpit - even from the BAC - he was indeed over the limit - not merely over the limit for the FAA but over the limit for a motor vehicle on the road. But even if he hadn’t been, when he took his lawyer’s advice and refused the BAT, forcing them to go to a judge to get permission, that was a refusal that under FAA and company rules was the equivalent of an admission of guilt.
At that point his career became a roadkill. And suing a couple of cops who were merely doing their jobs won’t get his career back or any serious money from the cops.
Read the above:
If you calculate back to when he was in the cockpit - even from the BAC - he was indeed over the limit - not merely over the limit for the FAA but over the limit for a motor vehicle on the road. But even if he hadn’t been, when he took his lawyer’s advice and refused the BAT, forcing them to go to a judge to get permission, that was a refusal that under FAA and company rules was the equivalent of an admission of guilt.
At that point his career became a roadkill. And suing a couple of cops who were merely doing their jobs won’t get his career back or any serious money from the cops.
Ahhh...the original article posted had conveniently left out that minor detail that he initially refused the blood test. Yeah this guy is hosed.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
