Tony Vitz, TLC 99' Grad & Faculty Member. 7/19/2012
Walter trusted the breath test and the officer to get it right, but he and the jury found out that the officer and the machine were on a different team and it wasn’t a team for Justice. Walter’s breath specimen produced an alcohol concentration result of .149 on the Intoxilyzer 5000 about an hour and twenty minutes after the officer stopped him. (A .08 or higher is considered intoxicated) Walter admitted to (7) drinks and that “maybe he had two too many”. His field sobriety tests weren’t too bad, but he hopped a bit to retain his balance and wasn’t able to stand in place with one foot in front of the other. The bottom line is that Walter’s actions on the video could be explained and they were not the result of being intoxicated.
We always want to know how another lawyer won a big case. We get questions like, “How did you overcome the presumption of intoxication?” or “Who was your expert?” and others. I can share some of how we won this one, but there isn’t any one reason. Many lawyers don’t understand what it takes to win. We go into the courtroom with the culmination of life experiences that we use. It is caring about our clients, and being genuine that make the difference, not how much law or science we know. I think trials are like football games. While they aren’t games at all to most of us, every inch can be the difference. Momentum is also very important. We’ve got to grab it and keep it as much as we can until the trial is over. We begin with ourselves in jury selection.