Here we go again; let is rest. Obviously, this man is extremely sick and has a serious addiction to alcohol. Ture, he could have killed himself and others, but thank God he didn't. The end result will be determined by a higher power than all of us. We all have the right to our opinions, but in the end they mean nothing. My hope is that he will seek help and resume his life, or atleast return to the man that a lot of us knew. Trust me, there will be something else we can comment on tomorrow as that is why it's called "News." After all, if he had not retired this month, the story would have never would have never made the news. Regarding the above referenced comment, "Would this be a story if it were a "former plumber arrested for DWI"? You are absolutely correct, it wouldn't. The news isn't interested in Plumber's that drink and drive. Only the folks that are identified as those above the common folk. Remember, most news isn't about your ordinary Joe Blow.

"Your theories are fundamentally wrong in terms of how all of this applies in the court."

The blood to breath ratio is why you see your read out in grams per 210liters. That's the point I was trying to make. The read out is meaningful because it equates it to blood alcohol content based on that ratio. If I blow a .07 will you arrest me? Unless I am very obviously impaired probably not. Why not? Because you know that the breathalyzer gives a pretty good estimation of my blood alcohol concentration. That's all I'm saying - that there IS a correlation.

Either way, I concede. I'm neither a lawyer nor LEO. Stay safe out there.

"So, we're splitting hairs. You're right, it does not test the blood itself. It makes an estimation based on the breath. However - and this is the important part - it's the estimation of the blood alcohol concentration that gives you the probable cause to make the arrest."---

Once again, incorrect. Looks like you went around to Wiki and got your information about some math. The fact is that the instrument does not give an "estimation" and BLOOD alcohol content is not what gives probable cause for arrest. What gives me probable cause is red bloodshot glassy eyes, slurred speed, a person being unsteady on their feet and having a strong odor of alcohol on their person. I can choose to use a PBT or not. I can convict you with an EC/IR II reading or not. So again, this isn't just semantics. Your theories are fundamentally wrong in terms of how all of this applies in the court.

I live out in this area...glad they got another drunk off the roads. I don't care who he is employed with or retired from -whatever - makes no difference... He was drunk and on the road...just one less drunk I have to meet out there...

Would this be staory if were..."former plumber arrested for DWI" ?