|
Originally Posted by billyho
(Post 2232055)
Know your limit and if the stars are lined up perfect with the hottest chick you ever met then go for it and call out sick the next day.
I'd say you might NOT want to get too blasted if you meet the hottest chick ever. Ya might have, um, performance, um issues... Just sayin' |
Originally Posted by WesternSkies
(Post 2236167)
Blood test yet to come back?
From a week ago? The blood test will just serve as more reliable evidence at trial, if it goes there. |
Originally Posted by WesternSkies
(Post 2236167)
Blood test yet to come back?
From a week ago? He is a large male with a large lung capacity, more importantly a higher than average lung tissue surface area. Therefore the concentration of alcohol in breath may be artificially higher. The handheld alcotests is notoriously inaccurate. The blood test probably occurred hours after the initial breath test due to getting a search warrent, allowing for the ethanol to metabolize. The average person is able to metabolize 0.02% BAC/hr. My guess is with a favorable blood test a decent lawyer will get the court case dismissed.. Dealing with the company is a different story. |
Originally Posted by MKUltra
(Post 2237115)
I suspect the blood test will be below 0.04...
He is a large male with a large lung capacity, more importantly a higher than average lung tissue surface area. Therefore the concentration of alcohol in breath may be artificially higher. The handheld alcotests is notoriously inaccurate. The blood test probably occurred hours after the initial breath test due to getting a search warrent, allowing for the ethanol to metabolize. The average person is able to metabolize 0.02% BAC/hr. My guess is with a favorable blood test a decent lawyer will get the court case dismissed.. If they can show how much he had to drink and when, based on credit card receipts, etc. they can reasonably extrapolate his BAC backwards. The usual defense against extrapolation is that recently consumed alcohol had not yet reached the bloodstream at the time of the arrest, but caused BAC to rise after the arrest before the blood test. The defendant can claim that after a short drive home (if the cops hadn't stopped him), he would have been asleep in bed before his BAC exceeded legal levels. But in this case he can't really claim that the alcohol hadn't reached his blood without admitting to drinking well inside of eight hours!
Originally Posted by MKUltra
(Post 2237115)
Dealing with the company is a different story.
|
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 2237223)
Maybe.
If they can show how much he had to drink and when, based on credit card receipts, etc. they can reasonably extrapolate his BAC backwards. The usual defense against extrapolation is that recently consumed alcohol had not yet reached the bloodstream at the time of the arrest, but caused BAC to rise after the arrest before the blood test. The defendant can claim that after a short drive home (if the cops hadn't stopped him), he would have been asleep in bed before his BAC exceeded legal levels. But in this case he can't really claim that the alcohol hadn't reached his blood without admitting to drinking well inside of eight hours! Company standard is 0.02, so yeah that's going to be hard. |
Originally Posted by CAirBear
(Post 2235933)
Both pilots from the Northwest flight back in the 90s are flying again. Although the CA is over 65 now. The FO is at AA (both figuratively and at the airline).
The FO - Joe Balzer - Wrote a book - Flying Drunk The CA - Lyle Prouse's book is - Final Approach Northwest Airline Flt 650 Both were terrific reads. The FO from that flight is currently a 747 Captain approaching retirement. |
The article stated he had a BAC of .046 and that he had refused to provide a blood sample until forced to by warrant. Isn't a refusal to submit to a drug/alcohol test grounds for an automatic revocation of certificates? I'm too damn lazy to take a look in the FARs at the moment, but my company has posters all over our crew rooms about drug/alcohol abuse.
|
Yep.....
§61.16 Refusal to submit to an alcohol test or to furnish test results. A refusal to submit to a test to indicate the percentage by weight of alcohol in the blood, when requested by a law enforcement officer in accordance with §91.17(c) of this chapter, or a refusal to furnish or authorize the release of the test results requested by the Administrator in accordance with §91.17(c) or (d) of this chapter, is grounds for: (a) Denial of an application for any certificate, rating, or authorization issued under this part for a period of up to 1 year after the date of that refusal; or (b) Suspension or revocation of any certificate, rating, or authorization issued under this part |
Originally Posted by MKUltra
(Post 2237416)
I agree, but in pre trial, if the blood drawn is less than .04, there is no case.. if it goes to trial, than yes extrapolation and evidence will be used against him. All depends on the blood. Hopefully he is already checked into a rehabilitation program.
Feds may not get him,but individual states have DUI airplane laws. |
Originally Posted by Rahlifer
(Post 2237476)
The article stated he had a BAC of .046 and that he had refused to provide a blood sample until forced to by warrant. Isn't a refusal to submit to a drug/alcohol test grounds for an automatic revocation of certificates? I'm too damn lazy to take a look in the FARs at the moment, but my company has posters all over our crew rooms about drug/alcohol abuse.
Originally Posted by TiredSoul
(Post 2237483)
Yep.....
......... Could be a problem for him, but the stars kind of have to line up for the fed to employ that reg, since it depends on how the state law in question is worded. Or they could just shred his certs and let him try to appeal... |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:46 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands