Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Byfuglien Passed Breathalyzer but Charges Still Likely

From Gary Lawless at the Winnipeg Free Press:

A police report, expected to be released in the next 48 hours will state Winnipeg Jets defenceman Dustin Byfuglien passed a breathalyzer test administered by Hennepin County Sheriff’s department police officers.

Byfuglien submitted to a breathalyzer test but refused to provide a urine sample when asked, according his lawyer Mitch Robinson.

Byfuglien was arrested on suspicion of boating while impaired and refusing a test.

continued…

Despite the clean breathalyzer, charges are still likely to be laid, as per Mike MacIntyre in yesterday’s Winnipeg Free Press.

Filed in: NHL Teams, Winnipeg Jets, | KK Hockey | Permalink
  Tags: dustin+byfuglien

Comments

HockeytownOverhaul's avatar

I don’t like talking politics at all on here.. but I gotta say it sounds like BS that he’s asked to take a breathalizer and does, passes.. so then they ask him for a urine sample?!?!! and because he says no (since, by now, there’s evidence that he’s NOT impaired) he’s arrest, on suspicion…. SUSPICION!  wtf?  So essentialy it’s “you do everything we ask and if you don’t do something, even if it’s after you’ve taken other FSB’s and passed, then we’re still going to arrest you.  Whole things sounds like BS to me, hope Buff gets off.

Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 09/13/11 at 06:47 PM ET

Alanah McGinley's avatar

I’ll admit, I’m pretty confused by it, too. If you pass a breathalyzer, then what is the justification for the additional test? It’s like they’re saying their own breathalyzer isn’t accurate, which seems like a foolish position to take.

Posted by Alanah McGinley from British Columbia on 09/13/11 at 06:51 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 09/13/11 at 04:47 PM ET
Posted by Alanah McGinley from British Columbia on 09/13/11 at 04:51 PM ET

A breathalyzer doesn’t test for other drugs like marijuana, oxycodone,  cocaine, etc.

His lawyer said “For whatever reason the officer felt he needed further chemical tests from Dustin.” It’s quite possible he seemed to be under the influence of something.

Posted by NathanBC on 09/13/11 at 07:58 PM ET

HockeytownOverhaul's avatar

from someone who has done all three of those and one point or another, it’s pretty evident and they all do very different things to you.  If that was the case then he shouldn’t have opted for the breathalizer at all.  You put people in a catch 22.  You agree to request after request and once it shows you’re good to go then it’s you’ll do what we ask until we say ok, even if you keep passing.  So you punish the good with the bad instead of being thorough in the beginning.. if you talk to someone coked out vs. drunk you have two COMPLETELY different indicators of intoxication.  But if you’re dehydrated from being in the sun all day, you’re still in the same boat (pardon the pun)..  I just don’t think it’s right to say, well you have to do every test we can think of to prove to us that you aren’t on something.  I get what you’re saying though, just don’t think it’s right, a lot of authority for someone to have, I’d be affraid to look at them crosseyed for fear they’d arrest me on suspicion of “being on… something”,  sounds shady

Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 09/13/11 at 09:49 PM ET

Alanah McGinley's avatar

Nathan - To be honest, I completely forgot to consider non-alcohol factors. Thanks for the reminder.

Posted by Alanah McGinley from British Columbia on 09/13/11 at 09:58 PM ET

RedMenace's avatar

Ah, don’t you love how our legal system has moved on to “Guilty until proven innocent?”

Posted by RedMenace from the Church of Jesus Lashoff on 09/14/11 at 01:48 AM ET

Avatar

A breathalyzer doesn’t test for other drugs like marijuana, oxycodone,  cocaine, etc.

His lawyer said “For whatever reason the officer felt he needed further chemical tests from Dustin.” It’s quite possible he seemed to be under the influence of something.

Posted by NathanBC on 09/13/11 at 05:58 PM ET

And I expect police officers to be pretty adept at judging wether someone is under the influence. If they believed Byfuglien was under the influence, of course they should go further and investigate. It’s their job!

Furthermore, take into consideration that police will likely be carrying with them at all times breathalyzer equipment, but probably not equipment for taking urine samples (and blood samples can likely only be taken by a nurse), meaning that they likely breath-tested Byfuglien on the spot, and then tried to take a urine sample down at the nick. I’m surprised he could legally refuse further tests, actually.

Of course, if I was an NHL player I would refuse to take blood/urine samples too. There’s a reason why the NHL does not test its players for steroids (at least not in the offseason, which would be the most sensible time for someone to use them).

Posted by Mr. Fnytelhatt on 09/14/11 at 10:45 AM ET

Avatar

(so having actually READ the article I see he couldn’t legally reguse the test at all…my bad)

Posted by Mr. Fnytelhatt on 09/14/11 at 02:29 PM ET

Hippy Dave's avatar

Legalize it.

Posted by Hippy Dave from Portland by way of Detroit on 09/14/11 at 03:25 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at pk@kuklaskorner.com

 

image

image