Comments on: Escambia Commission: Barry And May Win, Robertson Race Close

By: JustMe

JustMe — Sat, 18 Aug 2012 01:43:58 +0000

Because I don’t make it a habbit to not like people for no reason. Too many haters in the world as it is. I have a very valid reason to not like him for commisioner but I will refrain from posting it here due to the rules of the website. good luck living inside your little bubble and with your commisioner who will probably turn out to be worse than what we have been stuck with the last 4 years.

By: Nodogintherace

Nodogintherace — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:48:59 +0000

I don’t know if a breathalizer test was administered. It would sure seem to me that if he had, it would be in the notes. I can assure you this though, that prosecutors thrive on conviction rates. It is more important to convict on a lesser charge than to have an acquital and enforce nothing. I don’t think for a minute that the prosecutors office would reduce a charge for something as serious as DUI for no reason but “it was his first offense” and I think you are naive if you believe that. If the evidence was that strong, they would not plea to reckless driving, they would convict him of DUI. Also, if you do research as you claim to, you would see that since they reduced the charge to reckless driving, that if he were to get charged and convicted of DUI in the future, it would be considered his first offense, not his second. Knowing that, I can probably say with certainty that it was reduced due to lack of evidence.

Also, a law enforcement office would not be in “deep crap” for arresting someone for DUI if they did not blow over the limit because a person can be under the influence of a substance other than alcohol. Let me give you an example. Perhaps Mr. Barry was prescribed medicine which had an adverse effect on him. And perhaps this medicine caused him to swerve while driving, and perhaps this medicine also caused him to slur his speech. If I was a cop, I would think immediately that he was under the influence. I would do my job and arrest him and let the prosecutors office settle it. During the legal process, the defense attorney could provide evidence showing that the defendant was prescribed medicine which did not come with a warning to not operate a motor vehicle. They could show that while the defendant did ingest medicine and operate a motor vehicle, he/she was only impaired because the medicine had an unusual/adverse reaction. Perhaps after reviewing this in conjunction with no breathalizer result which shows no B.A.C. It would be in the best interest of the prosecution to take some action to protect the public and make the defendant attend a class to inform them on the risks of driving unde the influence. Furthermore reducing the unconvictable charge of DUI and taking the charge of reckless driving.

There literally are hundreds of reasons a charge could be reduced. Breathalizer machine not calibrated correctly, cop did not show for court, etc. etc. You just do not know.

Now I do not know the details of Mr. Barry’s case but to just assume he got off due to paying money or because it was his first offense is naive. Why don’t you just come out and say you don’t like the guy for no reason.

By: Patsy

Patsy — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 18:29:35 +0000

You can refuse a breathalyzer which is probably what he did because if you read the report correctly you’d see he absolutely does not have a DUI

By: JustMe

JustMe — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 15:53:00 +0000

I do research before I get on here posting unlike most people. Tell me this..if Barry was arrested for DUI which he was, along with that arrest comes a breathalizer test I am sure..I know that is the way it is where I work. So how in your mind do you think they dropped the charge due to insufficient evidence? If he got arrested for DUI but didn’t blow over the limit then that leo would be in deep crap. According to all the case notes on the clerks site, looks like to me due to his first major offense they reduced it and allowed him to attend Drunk driver school. Or either all of the money he has he payed his way out of it. Either way he was arrested for DUI which imho there should be know first offense school for that.

By: Nodogintherace

Nodogintherace — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:25:32 +0000

No, I didn’t miss the point, I did my research to see why a DUI charge would be reduced to a wreckless driving charge rather than spout off on something I have no idea about. This excerpt is just one of many I found on why a charge would be reduced.

If your attorney determines that this is the right decision for you, he or she will enter into a plea bargain with the prosecution. But why would the prosecution agree to this? There may be several reasons. For one, they may not have enough evidence against you or the evidence they do have may be questionable. Rather than facing an acquittal at trial, they’re likely to accept a reckless driving charge. As part of the agreement to amending the charge, the prosecution may demand that you pay a fee and attend DUI-related classes.

Do some research, tell me if I am wrong.

By: JustMe

JustMe — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 03:16:28 +0000

You missed the point obviously. Click on the DUI case. You will see he had to compete drunk driving school he was a first offender so that was his way out. Doesnt say they dropped it due to not enough evidence. If he wasnt guilty then why go to drunk driving school? And yeah I have had one speeding ticket when I was 19 or 20. If the dui wasnt on there I wouldnt have a problem. But it is.

By: Nodogintherace

Nodogintherace — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 01:44:29 +0000

@justme, I looked it up. I didn’t see anything criminal. I think your grasping at straws to call speeding and parking tickets criminal. I do not see a “conviction” of DUI. I see a “charge” of DUI, which was later reduced to wreckless driving. Probably because they had insufficient evidence. So, technically itis not a DUI. I agree with you on people being locked up for drunk driving but that is if they are convicted of drunk driving.

Have you ever had a speeding or parking ticket? My guess is that you will probably say no.

By: JustMe

JustMe — Thu, 16 Aug 2012 20:41:35 +0000

@nodogintherace. Look it up for yourself. Rap sheet is defined as a criminal record which he has! Never once said he was a murderer! A conviction of DUI but lowered because he attended drunk driving school. Yeah thats the kind of commisioner I want! Lol NOT. I despise drunk drivers with a passion. Actually I personally think drunk driving should carry a mandatory 5 years locked up then maybe the innocent families that are killed from people like this Barry guy could be reduced. And the one that commented that said glad the christians turned out, I would not group christians in a blanket statement like that because some christians wouldnt want themselves classified as a supporter for Barry.

By: JustMe

JustMe — Thu, 16 Aug 2012 17:36:27 +0000

Rick sorry I didn’t know that did that. Was on my phone but it had gotten wet and auto correct was adding words.
And I never invest ANY monety in politicians. Because at the end of the day they are a politician. And I do not even know Mr Barry ”

By: Rick

Rick — Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:45:18 +0000

JustMe wrote: ” And Iyou never investlike ANY monety in politicians. Because atI the end of theyou day theyto are ayou politician. And Iyou donever not evento know Mr Barry ” What the heck kind of keyboard are you using?? I might agree with you if I knew what the heck you said.