[Husker] Niles Paul ticketed

[Kathy Jackson]

According to my undercover sources (high school kids) you come up with  
ANY amount of alcohol underage and you are MIPed.  Yes you can refuse  
a breath test but that just means you will be peeing in a cup or  
giving up some of the red stuff at the station.  Strategic move if you  
feel you are on the border line but as I say fruitless if you are  
going to show anything and are underage.

Honestly, fire up a couple of extra brain cells and drink a coke, you  
are a foot ball player for Pete's sake, seems to me that you can point  
to that if you need "manliness" points.  It never ceases to amaze me -  
Hi I have a full ride scholarship to a good University and get to play  
football for a great program.  I have a chance to make something out  
of my life, give my children the advantages I didn't have and heck  
that all seems to reasonable and boring so I think I am going to go  
out and sabotage myself because that is just the way I roll.

Heavy Sigh

Kathy Jackson
On Jun 1, 2010, at 9:06 PM, David Strong wrote:

> Yes, I understand public intoxication is a crime.  Paul was not  
> charged with public intoxication, he was charged with minor in  
> possession and public urination.  What has the "express line for the  
> breathalyzer" got to do with it?  He wasn't driving.  Are  
> breathalyzer results the same for public intoxication as for driving  
> under the influence?  Since he wasn't charged with public drunk, and  
> blew a .104, something is different.  If the breath results resulted  
> in the MIP charge as the evidence of possession, would he still have  
> been popped if he had blown a .01, since any alcohol would be been  
> illegal for a minor?  And again, why not refuse a breath test?  He  
> wasn't driving.
>
> Dave
>
> --- On Tue, 6/1/10, Anita Jackson <aj05810 at windstream.net> wrote:
>
>> From: Anita Jackson <aj05810 at windstream.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Husker] Niles Paul ticketed
>> To: "David Strong" <gbrlist at yahoo.com>, "'Husker List'" <husker at tssi.com 
>> >
>> Date: Tuesday, June 1, 2010, 9:22 PM
>> David Strong wrote:
>>> There's one thing I didn't understand when I read the
>> article.  Ok, he got a ticket for underage possession
>> of alcohol and taking a leak in public...neither a big deal
>> for a college kid.  But the article went on to say that
>> he blew a .104 on the breath test.  Why was he given a
>> breath test?  He wasn't driving, he wasn't even in a
>> car.  Was that how they determined we was in possession
>> of alcohol?  He didn't have any on him but the breath
>> results showed he "possessed" it in his system?  Can
>> you refuse a breath test if you are not driving?  I'm
>> sure it's all by the book (knowing the gestapo...err, I mean
>> LPD as I unfortunately do) but I've just never heard of this
>> before.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Public drunkenness is a crime. Taking a whiz in public is
>> probably the
>> quickest way to get caught. Niles is under age, so I'm sure
>> that gets
>> you in the express line for the breathalyzer.
>>
>> Anita
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker