Texas Judge Disagrees With Jury's Verdict

[WildBill]

The defense attorney is a Certified Field Sobriety Test Practitioner, so maybe he has insight about the deficiencies of the Intoxilyzer and presented that evidence to the jury. There was a case in Houston where the company that was contracted by HPD to calibrate their meters did not perform the required calibrations. It appears that the defense attorney earned his fee.

From his website:
Q: Should I submit to a breath test?
A: The reliability of the instruments used to measure breath specimens to determine body alcohol concentration is doubtful. While state-paid experts routinely testify that the Intoxilizer 5000 is accurate and reliable, several independent experts have expressed contrary opinions. Consequently, the results may be inaccurately high or inaccurately low. In my experience, unless you have only had one drink, you ought not to submit to the breath test.

[Fangs]

The kid blew .92 so it wasn't that they wanted to give a little slack or were concerned about the accuracy of the test, they just wanted to find the guy not guilty.

...and he was still alive?

[C-dub]

The kid blew .92 so it wasn't that they wanted to give a little slack or were concerned about the accuracy of the test, they just wanted to find the guy not guilty.

...and he was still alive?

Typo. I think I read one article that said 0.092 BAC.

[mgood]

The kid blew .92 so it wasn't that they wanted to give a little slack or were concerned about the accuracy of the test, they just wanted to find the guy not guilty.

...and he was still alive?

Too much blood in my alcohol.

[DEB]

He's already retired and was probably just helping out with the case load. He probably doesn't care what anyone thinks if he spouts off.

Yep, Judges can spout off all they please, but when one of us commoners do so, it is disrespecting the court and we get fined/jailed. I understand Judges are needed and are Human too, but they aint God, no matter what they believe. Jury Nullification is there for a reason...

[WildBill]

The kid blew .92 so it wasn't that they wanted to give a little slack or were concerned about the accuracy of the test, they just wanted to find the guy not guilty.

...and he was still alive?

Typo. I think I read one article that said 0.092 BAC.

So it could be that the defense was saying that the alcohol level reading that was close to the legal limit could have been inaccurate?

[C-dub]

The kid blew .92 so it wasn't that they wanted to give a little slack or were concerned about the accuracy of the test, they just wanted to find the guy not guilty.

...and he was still alive?

Typo. I think I read one article that said 0.092 BAC.

So it could be that the defense was saying that the alcohol level reading that was close to the legal limit could have been inaccurate?

I don't know if they challenged that or not. It just sounds like the jury didn't want to convict him for whatever reason.

[WildBill]

The kid blew .92 so it wasn't that they wanted to give a little slack or were concerned about the accuracy of the test, they just wanted to find the guy not guilty.

...and he was still alive?

Typo. I think I read one article that said 0.092 BAC.

So it could be that the defense was saying that the alcohol level reading that was close to the legal limit could have been inaccurate?

I don't know if they challenged that or not. It just sounds like the jury didn't want to convict him for whatever reason.

Since I haven't seen the trial transcript, so I can't say for sure, but I would think that any experienced/competent DWI attorney would challenge the results. Whether or not that was the [main] reason for the acquittal I can't say. I also can't say if the results would have been the same with another DA or defense attorney. Both the DA and defense do their best to win

Sometimes jury select is like going to Las Vegas - you roll the dice. Jurors have their own particular prejudices. They swear that they can be impartial and only consider the evidence. But people are people.