What if someone gets leandreas' law but...

What if someone gets leandreas' law but the children were never in the car & the court believed the witnesses? Is there any way to do something? If there's not, thanks anyways... it's not me who got i

1. If there are witnesses that will testify in court that children were in the car, AND

2. There are no witnesses and/or no evidence (such as video, security cameras, etc) to refute that children were in the cars, THEN

3. The suspect will most likely lose the case (aka is up the creek without a paddle).


If I were a defense attorney, my questions would be:

> Who were these children?

> What were their names?

> What did they look like? (If they exist, they should be identifiable.)

> Is there any other evidence, besides witness testimony, that the children were in the car? (photos, video, etc)


> Can these children be/or where these children interviewed (most likely by a child services counselor) to verify whether or not they were in the car or not?

Prosecutors don't typically like to take cases to court when they don't have strong evidence.

Based on the nature of the crime ( Leandra's Law (Child Passenger Protection Act) is a New York State law making it an automatic felony on the first offense to drive drunk with a person age 15 or younger inside the vehicle, and setting the blood alcohol content, or BAC, at 0.08. ) it seems highly unlikely that a prosecutor would want to prosecute this case without pretty solid evidence that children were in the vehicle.

My question is this:

If a case like this is hinged solely on witness testimony, where is the proof that the driver of the vehicle was intoxicated? And if the police determined the driver of the vehicle was intoxicated, wouldn't there be a police report stating that there were children in the vehicle also (that answer, as you know, is yes)?

Agreed.

As a starting point....

Witness(es):

> One or more police officer(s).... who presumably saw and testify about the children.

> Possibly bystanders (?).... there may or may not be bystanders.

> Other adults in the vehicle... there may or may not have been one or more adults in the vehicle..

> The children in the vehicle... if there were, their identities would most likely have been recorded.

> If there were not other adults in the vehicle, and the driver was arrested (which is highly likely) Social Services would probably have been called to take care of the children for a period of time.

> If there were other adult family members of the children, those adult family members would have been called to pick up the children, and would also be witnesses.

Evidence (aside from witness testimony):

> The officer's vehicle camera

> The officer's body camera

> Speed Radar (if applicable)

> Breath Test results

> Alcohol Blood test

> Social Services' reports.

> etc


Is seems highly unlikely that someone would be wrongfully charged with this crime...with one exception: The officers mistook Diabetic ketoacidosis for intoxication. It happens. Even EMT/Paramedics make this mistake on occasion. However, the mistake quickly becomes identified and resolved. AND this sort of mistake is unrelated to whether or not there are children in the vehicle.

Oh for the days when you could tuck a Coors between your legs while the chiren swung from the roll-bar.

"Go faster Daddy!"

"Mom watch this! Weee!!"