I just learned about a very interesting blog: DUIblog (http://www.duiblog.com) from Monica Bay's "Blog Bytes" column in the February issue of Law Technology News, a free monthly publication that always has interesting articles. (http://www.lawtechnologynews.com) You can subscribe to the publication on its site. (Monica Bay's own blog is www.thecommonscold.com.)
In his blog, Lawrence Taylor notes that he has written over thirty articles and 14 books, including Drunk Driving Defense, 5th ed., and California Drunk Driving Defense, 3rd ed. He adds that he limits the practice of his 8-attorney Southern California DUI Law Firm to drunk driving defense exclusively, and in 2004, he was voted one of Southern California's "Super Lawyers."
This was the first time that I have come across Taylor's blog, and I found some fascinating material there regarding "Driving Under the Influence" (DUI) and "Driving While Intoxicated" (DWI) charges.
Topics in his blog include:
Breathalyzers -- and Why They Don't Work (http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/17#a6)
"Field Sobriety Tests": Designed for Failure? (http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/21)
Alcohol on the Breath: Evidence of DUI? (http://www.duiblog.com/2004/12/11#a63)
But, by far, the most interesting out-of-the-box posting that I saw was entitled "How do I know the blood they tested was mine?" (http://www.duiblog.com/2004/10/27). In it, Taylor tells of a client who kept claiming that he was sober even though the Los Angeles Police said its analysis of his blood alcohol level was .15% -- almost twice the drunk driving limit of .08%. Taylor, according to a December 15, 2002 article in the Los Angeles Times, assigned the case to Lane Scherer, one of the attorneys in his firm. (http://www.latimes.com - - $2.95 to download the article.)
To check the crime lab's analysis. Scherer sent a portion of the LAPD sample to an independent lab. But the result was .13%, still over .08%. They even checked for a preservative and an anticoagulent, but that check, too, was negative.
So what else could be done? Scherer even had a comparison made of the client's blood type, which was "O," with the LAPD sample, but that was also "O," so that didn't help.
The client said he was innocent. And "O" is the most common blood type.
What else could be done?
What would you have done?
Here's a real out-of-the-box solution: They got another portion of the LAPD blood sample and sent that to another lab along with a sample of the client's blood for a DNA test comparison. And guess what? The LAPD sample and the client's own blood sample didn't match. Ultimately, the charges were dismissed.
To me, this is an incredible example of "out-of-the-box lawyering." It was the result of being persistent, in believing in your client, and being willing to come up with an out-of-the-box solution.
Taylor explains that this type of mix-up "probably happens far more commonly that we suppose." He then goes on to explain how that mix-up may have occurred.
If you're involved in a DUI or DWI case and want to find information on defending the charge, this is a site to review.
In addition to his own articles, Taylor also has links to other potentially helpful DWI/DUI sites.
Do you want to know how much to bid for the best placement of your ads on Yahoo's Overture? According to the December 27 issue of Forbes, the top bids for a click-through include: For mesothelioma it's $160 and for Vioxx it's $15.03. And it's only ten cents for a listing for "clergy abuse."
You can go on Yahoo's site to find out how much you need to bid to get the best listing position there. Unfortunately, Google doesn't have the same transparency to determine how much you need to pay for a top listing on its site.
You can also go to Yahoo for an overview of its click-through services, including its Precision Match, Local Match, Content Match and Site Match.
Danny Sullivan, on his SearchEngineWatch has a series of in-depth articles on how sites can utilize search engines. One of those articles is "Submitting Via Paid Listings: Overture & Google AdWords."