Utah Attorney Recommends That All DUI Arrests be Videotaped

It has become increasingly common over the past several years for police officers to utilize pre-written DUI arrest reports in order to document drunk driving cases. Reasons for this dishonesty range from the officer's desire to save time to the need to present convincing evidence that an individual was driving under the influence, even in situations where such evidence is not available. Additionally, these acts of deceitfulness are not isolated incidents. Such acts have been recorded across the country.

For example, in 2001, Illinois State Police trooper Joan Blomenkamp was charged for filing dozens of false DUI reports. Blomenkamp's actions were only discovered after her police reports were compared to videotape evidence which had been collected in several of her cases. These tapes directly contradicted Blomenkamp's written description of events.

More recently, in Florida, a local news station uncovered dozens of DUI cases where pre-written arrest reports were blatantly utilized. In one case, investigators discovered that a local law enforcement officer had used the same exact phrase in at least ten different arrest reports written during a six month period, regardless of the individual's blood alcohol concentration.

Attorneys have begun to recognize the increasing commonality of this occurrence and have suggested that videotape evidence would help to cut down on the number of false police reports filed and would also prevent individuals from being wrongly convicted of driving under the influence.

Utah criminal defense attorney Jason Schatz has been a voracious supporter of requiring dashboard cameras in police vehicles, arguing that videotaping DUI arrests is a matter of fairness. In an effort to encourage Utah legislators to adopt mandatory videotaping of DUI arrests, Schatz stated, "You look at the police report and you'd think this person is falling down drunk, then you see the tape and you say, 'Wait a minute, that doesn't look the way it was described on paper.'"

Schatz says that in his years of experience as a criminal defense attorney, he has tried numerous cases where videotape evidence shot during the field sobriety testing of a client directly contradicts what an officer wrote down in the police report. Because of the severe repercussions for individuals convicted of driving under the influence, Schatz argues that requiring the installation of dashboard cameras is a necessary precaution that must be taken in order to prevent the prosecution of individuals who may have be charged with DUI based on the whims of an overzealous police officer. Schatz points out that, "It is a huge problem if it's your license at stake and that could mean your job or going to jail."

However, not everyone agrees that videotaping DUI arrests is a worthwhile use of money. Chief Prosecutor for Salt Lake City, Utah, Sim Gill, feels that videotape evidence most often does not make or break pending DUI cases. Gill would rather see money spent on other divisions of law enforcement, like increasing funding for domestic violence shelters and providing medical attention to mentally ill prison inmates.

Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers