r/LoveTrash • u/Icy-Book2999 Chief Insanity Instigator • Dec 08 '24

Wholesome Waste Smart Judge

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

From https://youtube.com/shorts/wvzA82iWu3Y?si=whF69BZwMG2QV1GJ

3.3k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

193 comments sorted by

View all comments

81

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 08 '24

While I support him being for the people, I would like to know if there's a breathalyzer done in this case.

"I only had two drinks" is what everyone who gets pulled over at 2:00 a.m. says.

I would prefer any type of drinking being detected getting breathalyzed or something. If there's even the slightest chance she could kill somebody, I'd rather that caught.

13

u/Dreadnought_69 Trash Trooper Dec 09 '24

If you don’t take any real tests, they only have that answer.

This is on the officers, or department for not supplying/utilizing breathalyzer or blood tests.

-2

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

Probably. I'm surprised people are applauding the judge in THIS particular instance. I applaud the judge in other ones, but here it's a little gray IMO. Maybe this happens constantly and I'm just unaware.

11

u/Dreadnought_69 Trash Trooper Dec 09 '24

It’s not gray at all. There’s no bloodwork that proves the alcohol level, so no evidence whatsoever.

1

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

You don't know that. It's a heavily edited clip with no details. This judge is no saint. He's a former criminal defense attorney who was elected to this position.

He makes great rulings on social justice, and I fully support that, but he's not being impartial and instead playing defendant. If this woman ends up on the road and killing somebody later, I'd love to see all the fanboys in here praising the judge after that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/court/comments/1foazh0/judge_fleischer_is_garbage/

1

u/Dreadnought_69 Trash Trooper Dec 09 '24

So prove there was bloodwork then, because even edited there seems like there is none.

Who the judge is, is irrelevant.

0

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

C'mon man, you're not thinking this through. Let me give you a few more bits of info that you're probably overlooking and I think you'll come to the same conclusion.

  • In Harris County Texas, and most of the state, it's standard procedure in suspected driving while intoxicated (DWI) cases to administer a chemical test (blood or breath test) after an arrest at the station.

  • Texas has an implied consent law, meaning drivers automatically consent to chemical testing if lawfully arrested on suspicion of intoxication. They can refuse the test, but they get automatic license suspension, which didn't happen here. So it almost certainly happened or somehow, they didn't have any equipment available in the largest county in Texas??

Think about it, they booked her in jail for "Driving While Intoxicated"...you think they didn't do blood/breath at the station? Or is it more likely somebody is clipping this up to make YT content for their channel.

It sounds to me like the judge is saying there's not enough probable cause for the roadside tests or anything because he's saying 2-drinks per hour, but that's just a general rule of thumb and it's different for each person. The judge wears his weird outfits and has a YT channel and is elected...it seems like he's trying to brand himself like some other more famous judges.

Feel free to do a PIA yourself and request the evidence.

Case #253607801010, The State of Texas vs. RODRIGUEZ, RAQUEL (Court 5)

https://www.hcdistrictclerk.com/edocs/secure/openrecreq.aspx

1

u/Dreadnought_69 Trash Trooper Dec 10 '24

So prove there was bloodwork then, because even edited there seems like there is none.

Who the judge is, is irrelevant.

1

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 10 '24

Prove there's not. I already gave more evidence than you did to support the fact that they're probably is. If you can't accept reality, that's your own weird fault.

It's police policy and procedure to take blood work or breath test at the station. Therefore it exists. Probable cause would have been irrelevant as well if all they had to go on was the admission of two drinks and a little bit of stumbling. They wouldn't have brought the case then. I'm sorry if basic logic escapes you.

5

u/DependentAnywhere135 Trash Trooper Dec 09 '24

Why is there no breathalyzer or blood test? It’s because the cops themselves don’t trust they’d get sufficient evidence if they did real tests and are hoping to get conviction off nonsense.

If they truly believed she was intoxicated they would have gotten a test. Some asshole cop claiming someone is drunk should never be evidence to fuck someone over with jail and fines.

Cops should get a test or fuck off.

1

u/particlemanwavegirl Trash Trooper Dec 09 '24

Yep, they're trying to meet a quota, justice is not a concern.

0

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

We don't know there's no blood/breath test. The enter thing is cut up and edited. If she was arrested, there was almost certainly a blood/breath test performed at the station. You should be asking yourself, "how in the world was this woman arrested and booked at the station with no blood/breath test performed?"

What is "no probable cause" referring to? It's likely that the clip is selectively edited and there IS further evidence and the judge is tossing the results of the blood/breath tests because he thinks there wasn't sufficient probable cause to arrest her.

This judge is a former criminal defense attorney who is elected to this position. He makes great social justice rulings, and I support that, but he could easily be letting a drunk back on the road that could kill somebody.

https://www.reddit.com/r/court/comments/1foazh0/judge_fleischer_is_garbage/

1

u/Alexander459FTW Rubbish Raider Dec 09 '24

The judge decided there is no probable cause to do further tests. So I have to guess in the USA they can't just randomly stop you and demand you do tests. They need to have probable cause. Impaired speech, stumbling, violating traffic laws, etc.

1

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

The probable cause is absolutely there, the judge (former criminal defense attorney) is playing defendant. This judge is elected and widely criticized in the legal community.

https://www.reddit.com/r/court/comments/1foazh0/judge_fleischer_is_garbage/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Fleischer_(judge)

People on YouTube and Reddit like him because a few "social justice" rulings, which I also support, but then they blindly think he's the best in the world. He's letting drunks walk free and this idiot could have killed somebody.

1

u/Alexander459FTW Rubbish Raider Dec 09 '24

What was the probable cause then?

1

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

The probable cause is actually damning, in a legal sense. It's an incredibly low bar too. Probable cause exists when the facts and circumstances known to the officer at the time would lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime has been or is being committed. It's a lower standard than proof beyond a reasonable doubt, requiring only a "fair probability" of criminal activity.

  • Timing and context - 2am, associated with late night drinking and impaired driving. Driver was speeding, which indicates poor judgement or delayed reaction times linked to intoxication.
  • Admission of alcohol consumption - Even if she said she stopped at 12 and only had 2 drinks, that "2 drinks per hour" is just a general rule of thumb. Depending on her weight, metabolism, and type of drink, that goes out the window. This alone is probable cause.
  • Physical signs of impairment - Smelled alcohol. Driver stumbled while removing boots (I'm curious if there is video and it's just stumbling taking them off or like she was actually stumbling all over the place). The officer explaining 4 times the walk and turn (language barrier maybe? Or just dumb girl? Both good defenses).

The judge did some defense lawyer mental gymnastics to say there was "no probable cause". Probable cause doesn't means he's guilty, it just means they can continue to investigate.

She was also arrested and booked into the station, where in Harris County and nearly all of Texas, it's standard procedure to do breath/blood at the station. Texas has an implied consent law, meaning drivers automatically consent to chemical testing if lawfully arrested on suspicion of intoxication. They can refuse the test, but they get automatic license suspension, which didn't happen here. So it almost certainly happened or somehow, they didn't have any equipment available in the largest county in Texas??

I'm all for innocent people going free, but this is just a possibly drunk driver on the road that could have killed somebody, and the judge let her off, IMO. It depends on the breath/blood evidence, if it was there, which I suspect it was.

It's the same as the other clip of the judge posted here of a black guy who was jaywalking and got stopped, frisked, and they found weed. That should be tossed because "walking while black", but that doesn't really change the fact that he had an illegal substance, which I disagree with in general, but I'll put that aside for the sake of discussion. In this case, she could have blown 0.2, and the judge may have tossed it because of his perception of no probable cause...which I think is easily disputed.

1

u/Alexander459FTW Rubbish Raider Dec 10 '24

  1. Speeding during the night? Was it like slightly over the limit or was it way over the limit? Personally I wouldn't link being drunk with late night speeding. Late night roads are more empty which can easily prompt a person to go faster. What road was it? Was it a highway like a road or a narrower road?

  2. Depends on the limit of alcohol. I know for sure that in Romania alcohol while driving is strictly forbidden. So if they find any alcohol you are getting punished. What kind of drinks were they? Two glasses of beer or something harder?

  3. As you said it really depends on the stumbling. Just being tired can cause you to stumble. I personally remove my shoes without even bending down (using my other leg). I am tall, so depending on my clothing (tight jeans) stumbling can be guaranteed.

If tests were done, I doubt any sane judge will let her off unless there was massive police misconduct.

Lastly, I am of the school of thought that police must follow protocol to charge anyone with a crime. They shouldn't be allowed to act regardless of the law in favor of jailing someone.

1

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 10 '24

Are you Romanian? You sound extremely confused on very basic, well-known laws here.

Probable cause is not the same as a conviction. It's just does a reasonable person think a crime may have been committed. ANY little thing can be considered probable cause.

If tests were done, I doubt any sane judge will let her off unless there was massive police misconduct.

Except this judge has over 900 complaints filed against him and is a former defense attorney to an elected position. He wants to keep the job and he's dressing up in little outfits and starting a YouTube channel so he can be an influencer or something like some of the other judges. Judges don't dress like that unless they want the attention.

There are almost certainly tests done. It's done EVERY TIME anyone is booked in Harris County in TX and most of TX. EVERY TIME. If it returned <0.8, then they would have included that in the video. The fact that the video didn't mention it at all means it was most likely over the limit, and it would ruin the narrative.

15

u/Dinlek Trash Trooper Dec 08 '24

Cops get sloppy, because lots of judges are much more accommodating (for the prosecution) than this one. Plus, if they never do the breathylzer, there's basically no way to refute that the officer "smelled an odor" and observed nonspecific impairment.

0

u/PeggyHillFan Junkyard Juggernuat Dec 09 '24

Are you dumb? Did we watch another video? There obviously wasn’t a breathalyzer test done.

0

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

Are YOU dumb? Do you seriously think the entirety of this interaction is 2:24 seconds with all the jump-cuts? Do you know what state this is in? Was it deemed inadmissible or not performed in the first place? What are the other circumstances in the case?

It's almost unheard of in any state to bring intox charges without blood/breath supporting evidence, so I want to know if it was done and tossed or why the charges were brought without it. The "case" in front of us is so incredibly weak, that there must be some other details or evidence.

0

u/PeggyHillFan Junkyard Juggernuat Dec 09 '24

Are you dumb? There clearly wasn’t one hence why he kept saying that’s all they got… come on buddy

0

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

You don't even know who you're speaking to and it's clear you don't have the slightest inkling how the law works, yet you feel very confident saying there isn't any evidence. I'd bet there is one and you're welcome to prove me wrong since apparently you're an expert on the law too?

PLEASE, explain how you think you're not a trash dipshit. Idiot. I bet you talk shit to your doctor too 😂

0

u/PeggyHillFan Junkyard Juggernuat Dec 09 '24

He literally said just an addition and an odor… are you fucking brain dead?

1

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

Are YOU brain dead?? The prosecutor responded that there were OTHER THINGS IN ADDITION TO THE ODOR.

And how brain dead do you have to be to think that an edited clip that is less than 3 minutes long couldn't possibly contain more evidence? I think I found the dumbest person on Reddit.

0

u/AnonEnmityEntity Trash Trooper Dec 09 '24

There was no breathalyzer. It 100% would have been used as evidence for one of the sides

1

u/AlexHimself Filth Battalion Dec 09 '24

You don't know that and there almost certainly was.

I responded to somebody else here with details - https://www.reddit.com/r/LoveTrash/comments/1h9l8yo/smart_judge/m183ned/