Sorry if you feel that what i said was inaccurate. If a LEO (law enforcement officer) can SMELL alcohol on someone then he has probable cause. Maybe you should do your homework a little bit more and get ALL the facts straight. Keep in mind that the only side of the story that you are hearing is from the lawyer and his wife. To me it sounds like Trooper Wyrick did his job accurately and this big shot lawyer and his wife thought that they were above the law. Well guess what, to not raise confusion and discrimination accusations against oneself everyone gets treated with the same amount of respect. Whether you're a lawyer or a sheriffs wife. The law is the law. No if, and's or buts about it. And do you really think that this trooper set Tessener up to get pulled over? Tessener would not have gotten pulled over if he wasn't doing something that rectified him getting pulled over to begin with. The lawyer "cleverly" left that little bit of information out, didn't he? Lay off the trooper bashing. Wait until all the facts come out. Then you can see who is on a power trip. This lawyer is just dropping names to make himself sound even more powerful. Well, good for him, but when he tells constant lies in the complaint how well is that going to look on him? All he is doing right now is ruining his reputation, and that's fine. but he doesn't have to drag this trooper down with him. Don't you think that if this Trooper Wyrick was as awful as they are making him sound then hundreds of other dui "victims" of his would have come forward with complaints? Use some common sense. Not all officers you may come in contact with are on a power trip, and this one in particular surely was not. Everything would have been avoided if she had swallowed her pride and submitted to a road side test. She could have taken her heels off and performed the test with ease. And the reason that she had to blow into the toximeter twice is because they HAVE to do two separate readings. They blow once and then they reset the toximeter and the person has to blow again. As soon as Gina refused the road side sobriety test, after the trooper had probable cause to request one, she automatically relinquished her right to prove her innocence. If she hadn't been drinking, then why not submit to the road side test? It would appear that she was trying to hide something, especially if the trooper claimed he smelled alcohol. Why would he make that up? And accusing him of texting another trooper? Really? Ok, accuse him, and then pull his phone records and see if he actually did it. Prove that any of these accusations happened and i'll shut my mouth. But until then, that lawyer is a dumb ass. And has no right to slander this trooper. He didnt get his way, boo-hoo. If you're such a big shot lawyer then you should have known that your wife had two choices; submit to the road side test or get arrested. It's pretty simple. If you're innocent, then prove it. Otherwise, you're setting yourself for trouble.
GET THE FACTS RIGHT. THINK ABOUT THE TROOPERS SIDE OF THE STORY. DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU HEAR JUST BECAUSE THIS LAWYER CAN DROP A FEW NAMES.
People lie, did you ever think of that? Maybe this lawyer is LYING. Chill out with the bashing and wait for all the facts.
Oh, and have a good day. Hopefully you don't have any run-ins with the law, because you obviously have some anger towards them. And we wouldn't want someone else lying their way through a complaint just to try and prove a point. (which this lawyer is obviously trying to do, and which he is going to fail miserably at, too)
More information about formatting options