All on this week’s edition of Weird and Wacky Wednesdays!
A man… not just any man, but a Florida man… was recently arrested for disorderly conduct. The underlying offence is about as hilarious as the resisting arrest charge. He was reported to police for chasing another person around with a golf club, screaming in front of their house, and reeking of booze. It’s little wonder alcohol was involved. In the course of his much-deserved arrest, the man decided to fight with police. When interviewed later about it, he told the officers that he “really enjoyed” resisting arrest and that it was like being on television.
Methinks there was more than alcohol at play.
In Canada, causing a disturbance is a criminal offence. But it is generally considered to be much less serious than obstructing a police officer in the execution of their duty. Causing a disturbance is a summary offence, with no minimum penalty. By contrast, obstructing a peace officer by resisting arrest is a hybrid offence and if prosecuted by indictment carries a maximum term of two years’ jail. So while the urge to live life like a television show may be overwhelming at times, you’re better off to go check out one of Vancouver’s many film sets. Better yet, just watch TV.
The law of strip searches is apparently very different in Canada than in the United States. And I’ll bet that this Wisconsin woman is wishing she were in Canada right now. Desiree Webster was the driver of a Monte Carlo (as if that wasn’t suspicious enough…) when police received a tip that she and her passenger were involved in drug trafficking. Naturally, when a search of the women revealed only a small amount of marijuana in her bra, the police decided it was appropriate to arrest her and take her back to cells, where she was asked to participate in a strip search.
Webster declined. And so police scanned her body. The body scan revealed a fist-sized object, in her pelvic region. And when police, ahem, inspected further, they found a bunch of drugs inside her.
If this case had taken place in Canada, there would be obvious privacy issues. The search of Ms. Webster’s physical person, the subsequent strip search, and the irradiating examination are all cause for concern. But then again, they did have information that she was travelling with drugs in her nether regions, so it begs the real question: how did the tipster know this information?
One of the reasons why defending impaired driving cases is so enjoyable is that the facts are often hilarious. Take, for example, the case of Robert Quigley. After being involved in a suspected impaired driving crash that left his car ablaze, Mr. Quigley responded like any rational human would: he walked over to the burning car and lit a cigarette on the flames, singeing off his eyebrows in the process.
This reminds me of another favorite impaired driving case involving smoking. As the judge said there, “There are any number of reasons for individuals to quit the habit of smoking. This case outlines another one.”
Robert Quigley’s behaviour is the type of behaviour that will be difficult to explain at trial and certainly shows impaired judgment and decreased inhibitions. Which happen to be classic symptoms of alcohol impairment. But maybe an impaired driving conviction won’t really bother him, since it’s clear he gave zero fucks at the roadside.
