I don't quite get this one

[Don Quixote]

From Rotoworld--

"Florida authorities returned the driver's license of Miguel Cabrera on Monday afternoon.
Cabrera still faces DUI charges and will go to trial eventually, but the Florida Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Department determined this weekend that there wasn't enough evidence to prove Cabrera was actually driving his vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. When he was arrested in February, his car was stopped on the side of the road. He refused the breathalyzer."

Well, if he wasn't driving, how did he get there? Did someone else drive him there? Did Scotty beam him and the car there?

[BuckyBuckner]

He could have driven there sober and then drank while the car is parked.

[Moonlight J]

Floriduhhhh

[B-Fly]

There are several issues, I guess. (1) Was he legally intoxicated? (2) Was he driving the car? (3) Did he drive the car while intoxicated, or is it possible he pulled over and then started drinking? (4) Even if one thinks that the circumstantial evidence is compelling, without direct evidence on these questions, can one get a conviction in court? (5) If a conviction is unlikely because the evidence is primarily circumstantial, wouldn't ending the prosecution sooner rather than later be a wiser decision with respect to the public's resources?

[Big Tymer]

From Rotoworld--

"Florida authorities returned the driver's license of Miguel Cabrera on Monday afternoon.
Cabrera still faces DUI charges and will go to trial eventually, but the Florida Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Department determined this weekend that there wasn't enough evidence to prove Cabrera was actually driving his vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. When he was arrested in February, his car was stopped on the side of the road. He refused the breathalyzer."

Well, if he wasn't driving, how did he get there? Did someone else drive him there? Did Scotty beam him and the car there?

Same thing just happened with Derek Lowe here in Atlanta. Guy was drag racing drunk in Buckhead yet there "wasn't sufficient evidence". Sure is nice to play baseball for a living...

[B-Fly]

Same thing just happened with Derek Lowe here in Atlanta. Guy was drag racing drunk in Buckhead yet there "wasn't sufficient evidence". Sure is nice to play baseball for a living...

Eh, I don't buy that. If anything, a prosecutor is more loathe to let a celebrity off the hook because it's a more public black eye. First of all, we don't know how many 'regular joes' avoid prosecution because the admissible and legally sufficient evidence is weak. Anecdotally, I think it's a lot. Second of all, if the celebrity has an advantage, it's in their representation. Their lawyers may or may not be better than the average defense lawyer or court-appointed counsel, but their lawyers can generally spend much more time and money on the case, hire more experts and tests to cast doubt on the state's evidence, bring more aggressive motions, etc. That could lead to prosecutors who are fearful about the prospect of an embarrassing high-profile loss. However, I certainly think that almost any prosecutor who thinks he has enough evidence to convict a celebrity is going to pursue the high-profile conviction.

[Big Tymer]

Perhaps in New York (ala Burress) but Georgia's track record of prosecuting high profile athletes would speak to the contrary (Big Ben and Ray in particular).