Seahawks Insider

Attorney: Lynch blew 0.08 at the scene

Post by Eric Williams on July 18, 2012 at 5:48 pm with 65 Comments »
July 18, 2012 5:48 pm

I talked with Seattle Seahawks running back Marshawn Lynch’s attorney, Ivan Golde, this afternoon.

According to Golde, Lynch’s blood-alcohol content was measured at 0.08, right on the number of the California legal limit, during a preliminary alcohol screening test when he was pulled over in Emeryville, Calif., on Saturday morning at 3:40 a.m. Golde said the police officer at the scene administered a breathalyzer test.

Golde said Lynch was retested at the jail about an hour later. He took another breathalyzer test there, and his blood-alcohol content was measured at 0.10 Gold said he will argue that Lynch’s blood-alcohol content rose after the arrest, which points to the fact it was not above the legal limit while he was driving.

Golde said that Lynch does not have to be present at his Aug. 14 arraignment, and it’s likely that the case will not be resolved until after the 2012 season, unless the Alameda County district attorney’s office drops the charges.

Golde went on to say that he does not expect Lynch’s season to be affected by the ongoing case. Further, he does not expect Lynch to be suspended for any amount of time this season unless he’s convicted.

The incident is Lynch’s first DUI offense, and typically NFL commissioner Roger Goodell does not suspend first-time offenders under the league’s substance abuse program.

“The reason they have to charge him with this is they can’t make the appearance they are giving a celebrity or an athlete preferential treatment,” Golde said.

Golde talked with Jim Moore and Steve Sandmeyer of ESPN 710 Seattle about the case. And you can listen to the interview here. The conversation begins about 35 minutes in.

I also obtained a copy of the charging documents from the district attorney’s office. There’s not much to look at, but you can check it out here.

Categories:
Legal system
Leave a comment Comments → 65
  1. Thanks Eric! Appreciate the updates as quick as you are getting them out. Just one question… Can we please change the blog banner pic now? :)

  2. Why take him off the banner? He’s still a huge part of this team. Everybody makes mistakes. Of course you might argue that this isn’t his first one…

  3. SandpointHawk says:

    Because the TNT banner has become akin to the Madden Curse… I’m also voting for a T-Jack banner at this point, that was a brilliant idea…

  4. Rem1331 it’s the banner history. Hass was on it and he went away. Lofa was on it and he went away. Lynch is on it and now this… It’s your basic unfounded, fool-hearty, fan-based paranoia. (Of which I fully subscribe to!) :)

  5. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Please don’t put Baldwin or Thomas on the banner!

  6. bbnate420 says:

    I suggest everyone here listen intently to Lynch’s lawyer on the link. Good stuff. Science is better than hyperbole any day of the week.

  7. Do you think Goodell cares about the difference between 0.08 and 0.07 for a habitual offender?

  8. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Lets trust a lawyer because they have Science to make their case?

    One of the dumbest things I have heard in a while. Snicker, snicker.

    I’m sure OJs Lawyers made their case with all that Science. Lol.

  9. Soggybuc says:

    Can we put TJ on the banner maybe? Beasts Lawyer has this. other wise he would never get on the radio.

  10. Wow, habitual dui offender? Also, 0.8 or 0.7, 0.8 and 0.7 are legal so that doesn’t even make sense.

  11. Dukeshire says:

    Habitual offender? And when was the alcohol or drug related incident, prior?

    Great update Eric. Thanks

  12. “Do you think Goodell cares about the difference between 0.08 and 0.07 for a habitual offender?” -”pabuwal

    This, Marshawn also failed a field sobriety test before failing the blowing an .O8,/O.10 and the DA didn’t seem worried about her case. I’m sure the police have tape of Lynch from the dashboard cameras, and it could very well be the deciding factor, but either way it tarnishes the leagues image so I expect Goodell to pop him. 4 to 6 with a outside shot at another 3 game suspension,

  13. Off the first page on the nfl code of conduct policy

    Standard of Conduct:
    While criminal activity is clearly outside the scope of permissible conduct, and persons who engage in criminal activity will be subject to discipline, the standard of conduct for persons employed in the NFL is considerably higher. It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful. Persons who fail to live up to this standard of conduct are guilty of conduct detrimental and subject to discipline, even where the conduct itself does not result in conviction of a crime. Discipline may be imposed in any of the following circumstances:
    Criminal offenses including, but not limited to, those involving: the use or threat of violence; domestic violence and other forms of partner abuse; theft and other property crimes; sex offenses; obstruction or resisting arrest; disorderly conduct; fraud; racketeering; and money laundering;
    Criminal offenses relating to steroids and prohibited substances, or substances of abuse;

    seems like hit n run, carrying a concealed weapon, and a DUI would make him a multiple offender, maybe habitual is to harsh a word, but a pattern of him being in wrong place is forming

  14. HeinieHunter says:

    What will happen, will happen. Back to football? This Blog is turning into an episode of “Law And Order”. And not a good episode at that.

  15. Dukeshire says:

    He’s violated the personal conduct policy one more than one occasion, clearly. But when one calls him a repeat offender in context of his BAL, that suggests multiple alcohol / drug violations. Thst’s all.

  16. bbnate420 says:

    Georgia, I don’t need a different screen name. It seems you you need less beers! It’s funny how you keep attacking me even though I haven’t attacked you here at all. I would let you know how I really feel about your opinions but, you and other Sally Censors would try and report me again. I hope you like your own treatment! I will go back and report EVERY one of you negative and attacking posts and, IF you EVER post one again I will report it as well. Enjoy the pathetic blog you have encouraged!

  17. bbnate420 says:

    Field sobriety tests mean NOTHING, legally. The 3 best of them result in a 40 % failure rate of people that blow less than the legal limit of .10 when the study was done! I’m not arguing what you think about them. I’m just stating the FACT that they mean nothing unless backed up by a breathalyzer or blood test. Argue all you want, doesn’t change the facts. If you don’t have a breathalyzer or a blood test, you don’t have ANYTHING! Yes, I know, science and facts don;t mean anything! ;-)

  18. bbnate420 says:

    It’s still to be determined how a conviction would be handled, not that Lynch is anywhere close to have been convicted. NFLPA has lawyers too. That’s the last I will argue with any of you Einstein’s about it!

  19. bbnate420 says:

    BTW, by Einstein’s, I don’t mean the vast majority of posters on here.

  20. bbnate420 says:

    And SwordofPerseus, HOW DARE you involve actually facts into this argument? You should know that FACTS are ALWAYS biased towards REALITY!. What were you thinkin???????

  21. He doesn’t need to be convicted for Goodell to punish him though, and it was backed up twice by him faling to blow a legal limit twice along with failing the field sobriety test. He wasn’t taking steroids, Ricky ” Chief” Williams it up. He was potentially risking his life, and fellow drivers. Turbin starts the season as our #1 RB because Lynch made a really bad decision.

    From the state of California DMV
    Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) Limits

    It is illegal for any person to operate a vehicle with a: BAC of 0.08% or higher, if the person is age 21 or older.

  22. Pabs, Does your constant negativity ever become a heavy cross to bear?
    You must be a very unhappy person.

    GeorgiaHawk, Got a drunken crush on BBnate?

    Everybody needs to chill on the suspension/conviction predictions.

  23. bbnate420 says:

    Thank you, mocarob!

  24. GeorgiaHawk says:

    OK, I will play nice! I think NateDog got the message.

  25. bbnate420 says:

    Georgia, I didn’t get whatever you think your message was. Would love to meet you in person at a game and give you a message.

  26. GeorgiaHawk says:

    To me as a Seahawk fan this brush with the law isn’t the biggest concern with me about Lynch.

    I’m not surprised at all with this, and I expect, ( unfortunately ), more of our players to get in some kind of trouble down the road.

    That’s just the nature of the NFL. It’s a brutal sport that would really be criminal if it weren’t so well liked by us blood thirsty fans.

    My biggest concern is, ( and that goes with every player that signs a big contract, especially running backs! ), How willing they are to play at the same level that they did before they signed the big contract?
    So hopefully this will turn out to be a positive thing moving forward with this team. A wake up call so to speak.

  27. bbnate420, can you give us a link to your 40% field test failure study? Not doubting you, I’d just like to read up on it.

  28. RDPoulsbo says:

    We’re starting to get more facts out, which is nice. The 2 breathalyser tests should be a huge concern for the CHP not just for the Lynch case, but for other cases where these units were used. A judge recently threw out 400 DUI cases in DC because the ones they used were unreliable.

    As for a suspension from Goodell, this looks like if falls under the substance abuse policy, not personal conduct. That is almost always a fine for a 1st time offense (and this would be Lynch’s first) as opposed to a suspension. DUIs are something the NFLPA fought to keep separate from the personal conduct policy and got it. At a .08, it’s pretty hard to see the league coming down hard on him, especially since this shouldn’t reach Goodell’s desk.

  29. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Natedog- The message was simply this- I was seeing the same pattern developing with your new username just like your old username.

    Example- Your response to joreb on the previous thread- ” Gee, I’m SORRY joreb, just trying to be CLEAR for people like you with only about 2 synapses firing”

    As you can see by my response below not only was I trying to remind you of your many personal attacks from the past that got you in trouble, I was also stating that I liked alot of your opinions.

    You just get way to defensive at times and want to pick a fight and take it all the way to the sewer.

    Now I do apologize to everyone for going to the sewer myself yesterday. I thought I had to make a point, however I could have done it in a better way.

    Response below from last thread.

    “bbnate420- You have some very good points with your posts, however you’re starting to get out of hand like you did when your username was NateDog, the EMT guy that lost his composure and went off on just about everyone. NateDog didn’t last too long did he?

    So chill out and come back down to Earth!”

  30. Dukeshire says:

    I would like to see a link to that, as well. I think it’s a good practice to include them when making ststement like that, that are outside the normal scope of the blog. Just my opinion.

    bbnate – Someone reported you? You can be a bit attacking yourself at times (we’re all guilty of that, to some degree) but nothing that ought to come close to complaining to the moderators. That’s pretty sad, actually.

  31. If Lynch does get suspended, I’m very interested to see how Turbin responds and who will emerge as his back up. Lumpkin doesn’t excite me, a few folks have mentioned Club Ced (Benson), but he seems like just another headache. Does anyone know why Ryan Grant is being more considered or if there are any other backs on the FA market that are available.

    I also recall someone mentioning Chris Ivory for a pick or two. I LOVE (all caps bbnate, give it to me) this guy after he steamrolled all over us the last time we went to N’awlins. Probably not worth another roster spot for a pick, but Lynch’s track record of 3 different incidences has me concerned.

    Ugh.

    GO HAWKS! (All caps again…oh oh)

    ;-)

    Try not to have an aneurysm here bbnate. I’m so hypocritical. :-)

  32. Grant isn’t being more considered (sp)

  33. bird_spit says:

    I agree with Duke. bbnate said nothing beyond normal .. Seems odd that we would censor his opinion, freedom of speech and all. Also, for the most part I agree with the substance of his argument. Oh well, have watch what I write, or the Man will come down on me too.

    I think the ML story is a dead horse now that the facts are out. .08 is 2-3 shots in the last hour…likely last call. Was he impaired? I think it was reckless to drive with that much in the system at that hour, but it’s close enough to legal, that it’s in the domain of the noise of the test. The blood test will be much more accurate, if he actually took one.

  34. btw…I would never censor anyones opinion. I might slap them around a little verbally for being over the top, but I believe in free speech. For the record.

  35. bbnate420 says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_in_the_United_States#Field_sobriety_tests

    Sorry, I just was writing something longer but hit the wrong button and erased it. Arg! The 40 % i referenced was actually 38 % if I recall correctly and was from a study done in California when the legal limit was .10 there. I cannot find it through a fairly quick google right now. I will try to find it later. It found that 38 % of people that failed one of the 3 approved FST’s in the Wiki article were actually under the limit of .10, at that time. I think it comes down to this. If you don’t drink very often you may be more impaired at .06 or around than someone who drinks often would be at .08 or moderately higher. Obviously, impairment is subjective, as are FST’s as a person is rating you on them. The limit, breathalyzer or BAC. has to be set at a certain number or it would be next to impossible to convict anyone. Some people may drive fine at .10 and others impaired at .06. Just the way it is. As I think Lynch’s lawyer referenced, you can be charged at lower than .08 if significant impairment is observed. Just more subjective and harder to convict on. Plus, the charge would typically be settled at something less like negligent or reckless driving in my limited experience.

  36. bbnate420 says:

    I’m not totally sure that anyone flagged any of my comments but, it seems that my ability to post is hit or miss sometimes. I will write something and click “submit comment” and it just reloads to the top of the page and doesn’t post the comment. Hence, if you see a post of mine that simply says “test”or a one word answer. I have seen the same from other posters. It seems to me like if someone flags your comment that the TNT freezes your ability to post until it is reviewed.

    Georgia, I did flag one of your comments and I apologize if it affected your ability to post. I was upset at your recent posts towards me. I wave the white flag.

    I totally defend my right to criticize others’ opinions but, I will try to be more sensitive about it. I try not to strongly call anyone out on their pure opinion. I try to reserve that to posts that I believe are factually incorrect or misleading. I think that holding each other accountable for our opinions is one of the best things about a forum like this. As I was taught in a philosophy class, Descartes actually said, “I doubt, therefore I am.” Not, “I think therefore I am.” It is through doubting and challenging our beliefs/assumptions that we learn something new and/or reinforce what we think is true.

  37. The TNT site seems to reject posts from posters who have exceeded a certain amount of posts over a certain amount of time.

  38. bbnate420 says:

    Just anecdotal evidence, I have a couple of friends and my sister were charged with DUI, but I have personally witnessed a couple of cases thrown out when the defendant failed FST’s and admitted to drinking at least somewhat because the the breathalyzer was faulty/inadmissible. In my experience, unless you can only afford a public defender, DUI cases hinge on the validity of the breathalyzer results/blood test.

  39. Dukeshire says:

    I’ve noticed that too. A few years back, there was a message that would pop up if a certain number of posts were submitted in a given time frame, that would say “whoa, slow down….”, or something to that effect. It seems that message has been taken away but the effect is still the same. Pab is right, I believe.

  40. bbnate420 says:

    Georgia, I agree that my response to joreb that you referenced was insulting. I felt insulted by his post that I felt mocked me.

    BTW, even if I write in caps it doesn’t mean I am truly upset or going crazy. I don’t take this that seriously. I respect anyone’s prerogative to say anything they want about me on here. I am for total freedom of speech. I would hope that anyone could post anything they want. You can always ignore posters you don’t like. It just bothers me if I feel the same isn’t afforded me, either real or possibly imagined.

  41. RDPoulsbo says:

    There were a few times where I’d post and nothing happens. Logging out and back in seems to clear up the problem.

  42. Palerydr says:

    Not sure why the failed post happens to me as I don’t post that often. When it does I sign out from the home page then sign back in. Near as I can tell it has something to do with Cookies although it might be from language as I have used a few salty words from time to time.

  43. bbnate420 says:

    On a more positive note, the more I look into RW the more I am stoked about him. Hope he can dispel the doubts about his ability to be effective at his height. Other than height, he seems to embody everything else that it has been reported that PC wants out of a QB.

  44. Hammajamma says:

    Absolutely one of the lamest threads I’ve read. Some of you guys with your hackles constantly up, hitting refresh all night long could really use a girlfriend.

  45. GeorgiaHawk says:

    bbnate420- I hear you.

    When you were Natedog I felt that you went over the top alot, however I never flag you are anyone else for that matter. I just assumed that you got blocked as NateDog because suddenly you disapeared.

    I don’t flag anyone because I enjoy the freedom sometimes to post something stupid. I’ve taken it to the edge myself several times wondering the next day if this will be the day I get blocked? Lol.

    I prefer to settle things on this blog, so Im no threat to you are anyone else on this blog.
    I don’t hate anyone on this blog! I may disagree strongly about this or that at times, however one of the things I like about it here is that Eric gives us a good amount of freedom.

    I pretty much read all the comments, and value most of the opinions here, and most of yours.

    BTW- I do say some crazy things from time to time, and I can’t use the excuse that I use with my girlfriend, (that I had one to many beers and forgot what I said ), because it is recorded on this blog for all to see!
    Dam!!! Lol.

  46. We ‘re all friends b / c we ‘ re all Seahawk Fans! We always do not agree but all want the same result. Super Bowl!

  47. Here, here.

    And to add to bbnate’s swing towards RW, I’m with ya. RW seems to be the ‘teacher’s pet’ right now, but we’ll see if he can deliver. Other than height, it seems that he has it all. Love his college track record, confidence, mobility, escapability/speed and to pick things up quickly. Could you imagine all the sportswriters and what they’d have to say if #3 was are opening day starter?

    Crazy (by the way formerly known as crazyhawk here on this blog before going to joreb, since we’re putting it out there)

    GO HAWKS!

  48. bbnate420 says:

    Agreed, Bobby. Sometimes I forget that. I appreciate everyone that posts, even the few trolls. :-)

  49. Hammajamma, I totally agree. My wife calls this a hen house because of all the pointless clucking going on.

  50. bbnate420 says:

    I really like and totally respect Eric for his reporting/insight and running this blog. That said, there are a number of other good writers that cover the Hawks, i.e. Danny O’Neill. The major difference that makes this blog more special to me than any other is the caliber of people that post here. Rare on the net I believe.

  51. I really hope Lynch isn’t suspended, but I do believe with his checkered past anf the NFL Player Code of conduct has it written in those words so Goodell has final say over what happens to any player who commits acts detrimental to the league.

  52. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I agree about Wilson! My third favorite player now behind Baldwin and Thomas!

  53. I don’t see the commissioner caring about the science argument Golde lays out for the court case, or seeing it as a positive thing as he considers how to respond. I hope I’m wrong, but the argument that, “He was below the limit, it’s proven because it was on the rise”, if true, sounds like it means a drink or two shortly before leaving whatever event he was at. I’m thinking Roger Goodell might not see that as a case of applying good judgment.

  54. gonefishin69690 says:

    Good read and good news pdway! And I do hope it turns out to be correct. I do however think PC will have him own way of dealing with this.

  55. I sure hope that the report is correct, would like our offense to be as close to full strength as possible, in order for whichever QB takes the field has the best chance to win games. Over-protecting the quarterback and playing to not lose last year didn’t work very well.

  56. dunceface says:

    Well this sounds encouraging. Even if he is suspended, which sounds less likely than Adam Schefter would lead you to believe, it won’t be til next season.
    Which is important because if he is not at the home opener against the Cowboys this year I will punch him in the gold teeth.

  57. dunceface says:

    …because I am going to that game.

  58. Isn’t 0.10 the limit in Washington? If so, Goodell really needs to lighten up.

  59. bbnate420 says:

    No, it’s .08. Used to be .10 but, I think it’s .08 pretty much everywhere now.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0