Originally Posted by madpogue
Along with that privilege, there is an implied consent to be tested (via breath) for alcohol intoxication. A driver refusing to take the test in no way equates to a citizen refusing to speak on Fifth Amendment grounds.
Very true: one consents to all kinds of things when one is granted a license to drive. But one has the RIGHT TO REFUSE a breathalyzer test. And yes, when you refuse that test, everyone assumes you 'must be drunk...' otherwise
why would you refuse? . This is exactly the same conclusion people jump to when you take the 5th. That was really the only 'constitutional' aspect I meant to introduce.
I am hoping there is a follow up article on this. Maybe the police will come out with a statement like "there was a strong smell of liquor" or "she had slurred speech" or whatever, which might make the situation more clear. Nor did the story say where the accident took place: on a straightaway, at an intersection, while turning left or right, etc.
roughstuff