As noted in another post, I backed away from
routinely as its popular definition suggests more often than not, and backed it down to
common, meaning frequent enough not to be unusual.
I used to spend a lot of time in court, and still routinely visit my sister to watch her in action as a PD. Allowing that most DUIs plea-out in advance of trial, leaving the marginal ones being contested, it is pure agony watching the performance of cops on the stand. DUI reports are often nothing more than a cut-and-paste from one to another. Testimony is by rote recitation - no doubt the product of "training" in mock courtrooms.
But this a thread for another day. Anyone who wants to see how
common this is can simply google "falsified dui."
Perhaps you can blame Google in your next post.
Google "falsified DUIs" and google "DUI Convictions" and compare the numbers. Actually, since there are much fewer stories on actual impaired drivers, your "falsified DUIs" would probably win. Here is some interesting reading out of my state.
http://www.tntrafficsafety.org/htm/newsdui.html
I used to spend a lot of time in court, and still routinely visit my sister to watch her in action as a PD. Allowing that most DUIs plea-out in advance of trial, leaving the marginal ones being contested, it is pure agony watching the performance of cops on the stand. DUI reports are often nothing more than a cut-and-paste from one to another. Testimony is by rote recitation - no doubt the product of "training" in mock courtrooms.
I am not sure which court rooms you attend, but feel free to enter courtrooms where specialized DUI unit officers or DREs (Drug Recognition Experts) are testifying.
As far as cut & paste, I hardly even attend a preliminary hearing until at least 2 months have gone by. Do you expect me to remember a specific DUI from months ago and all the notes I took down regarding the arrest?
There are very specific guidelines outlined by NHTSA in DUI Detection and the SFSTs. Deviation from these guidelines is what gets officers in trouble, so don't be surprised if they remain consistent in their DUI testimony about specific facts regarding the clues of impairment exhibited during their observation of the vehicle, observation of the driver, and the clues in the FSTs. It may sound repetitive, but it's what keeps the offenders/killers off the road.