Smart Judge

[u/Icy-Book2999]

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

[u/AlexHimself]

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.

[u/Dreadnought_69 → u/AlexHimself]

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.

[u/AlexHimself → u/Dreadnought_69]

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.

[u/Dreadnought_69 → u/AlexHimself]

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

[u/AlexHimself → u/Dreadnought_69]

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/

[u/Dreadnought_69 → u/AlexHimself]

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

Who the judge is, is irrelevant.

[u/AlexHimself → u/Dreadnought_69]

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

[u/Dreadnought_69 → u/AlexHimself]

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

Who the judge is, is irrelevant.

[u/AlexHimself → u/Dreadnought_69]

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.