Last weeks show proved to be too little time for Dillon and Bellingham DUI Attorney Jonathan Rands, to have some fun with the "what if" questions presented by the subject of ARIDE - Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement. Consequently, Jonathan Rands and Dillon use a hypothetical situation to highlight the downside of ARIDE and if this scenario were to happen, the person is wrongfully accused of a crime that did not commit.
ARIDE has a goal of bridging the gap between the standard or basic battery of standardized roadside field sobriety tests (SFSTs), and the more comprehensive Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) courses. In particular, the course objectives states that a student will learn how to observe, identify and articulate the signs of impairment related to drugs, alcohol or a combination of both. As a result the course is supposed to help the officer determine if an arrest should be made due to suspicion of impaired driving by drug. While the course objectives also state that a student will "learn of medical conditions and other situations that can produce similar signs of impairment." The reality of the course is that very little time is dedicated to this aspect. The course builds upon the foundation of the SFSTs which has a mandate of "hook and book," and let the prosecutors sort it out. Not surprisingly, the ARIDE course continues with this philosophy, so while medical conditions are briefly covered, the emphasis is to arrest but be wary of the possibility of real medical conditions. AS a result, Bellingham DUI Attorney, Jonathan Rands and Dillon talk about the ARIDE investigation of an innocent driver - hypothetically, of course.