Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30

Thread: Casey Anthony prosecutor Jeff Ashton to defend son in DUI case

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    4,320

    Casey Anthony prosecutor Jeff Ashton to defend son in DUI case

    I'm not a fan of drunk drivers....he's lucky he didn't kill some family out for the evening.

    "Jeff Ashton's son, Alexander Ashton, blew twice the legal limit in a breathalyzer test, but the results got thrown out because the device is considered unreliable.

    Alexander Ashton stumbled trying to hold up his leg during a field sobriety test last October in Longwood.

    When asked if he was embarrassed by the incident, Jeff Ashton said, "No, not at all. I wouldn't be talking to you about this if I was. I would not be representing him in that courtroom, representing him right now."

    http://www.wftv.com/news/news/jeff-a...ui-case/nHb5F/
    ___________________________________

    "Life is life's greatest gift. Guard the life of another creature as you would your own because it is your own. On life's scale of values, the smallest is no less precious to the creature who owns it than the largest..." Lloyd Biggle, Jr.

    Let's bring Michelle Parker home: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...ichelle+parker

    All statements made by me are based on my opinion.

  2. The Following 19 Users Say Thank You to Reality Orlando For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    rossva's Avatar
    rossva is offline George Zimmerman: Innocent until proven guilty.
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,801
    I can already see it: Imperfect Justice II; Defending Alexander. I wonder if either Jeff or Alexander will be laughing during this trial? Or if Jeff will throw his son under the bus to garner votes?
    " When ever you find yourself on the side of majority, it's time to pause and reflect."
    - Mark Twain








  4. The Following User Says Thank You to rossva For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    sitting on a cornflake
    Posts
    2,376
    Quote Originally Posted by rossva View Post
    I can already see it: Imperfect Justice II; Defending Alexander. I wonder if either Jeff or Alexander will be laughing during this trial? Or if Jeff will throw his son under the bus to garner votes?
    I doubt anyone will be laughing - that is, unless Mr. Ashton tries to claim "ugly coping" and argues his son wasn't drinking, he was out looking for his lost daughter.

    In that case, we'd all be laughing.


    "I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
    -Martin Luther King, Jr.



  6. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Velouria For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    believe09's Avatar
    believe09 is offline For nothing is secret that will not be revealed
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Oh Captain, My Captain
    Posts
    27,086
    Oh boy, that must have been hard. Talk about playing both sides. Interesting to know that a breathalyzer can be unreliable.

    Bet LE was thrilled for that nugget to get out.
    email me


    Long Lost Love: The Bob Harrod Story Disappeared/ID Network
    Amazon: Purchase Long Lost Love $1.99


    Bob Harrod SAR


    “The first time someone shows you who they are, believe them.”
    ― Maya Angelou

  8. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to believe09 For This Useful Post:


  9. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Nestled Deep in Southern Hospitality
    Posts
    17,913
    Quote Originally Posted by rossva View Post
    I can already see it: Imperfect Justice II; Defending Alexander. I wonder if either Jeff or Alexander will be laughing during this trial? Or if Jeff will throw his son under the bus to garner votes?
    I sure wish I lived in Florida. I would vote for Jeff in a heartbeat.

    IMO
    "Pardon Our Noise, It's the Sound of Freedom" USMC New River Air Station, Jacksonville, North Carolina

  10. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to oceanblueeyes For This Useful Post:


  11. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,948
    Quote Originally Posted by believe09 View Post
    Oh boy, that must have been hard. Talk about playing both sides. Interesting to know that a breathalyzer can be unreliable.

    Bet LE was thrilled for that nugget to get out.
    Yup. There's a lot that needs to be done to keep a breathalyzer accurate - calibration, regular types of maintenance, and weekly tests, things like that. One of the first things you do in a DUI case is check the breathalyzer records, because if the LE don't keep them in good working order, the results are inaccurate. It's pretty much routine in our office to file a challenge regarding the accuracy of the breathalyzer for a DUI case, because many departments do not stay up on it as they should.
    “Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both.” - Eleanor Roosevelt


    In no way should any of my statements be construed as legal opinion or advice. I am a newly practicing lawyer (yay!) but not a verified poster here at WS. The above statement(s) are an expression of my personal opinion, for entertainment purposes only, and copyright.

  12. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to AnaTeresa For This Useful Post:


  13. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    85

    I am sorry to say that I just lost respect for Jeff Ashton

    I disagree with him defending his adult son in this case. His son was speeding, could not perform the dexterity tests and officers smelled alcohol.

    Even if they could PROVE the breathalyzer malfunctioned, there were other clear signs that his son was impaired.

    The fact that Jeff Ashton is DEFENDING his son knowing that his son could potentially have killed or injured someone else just rubs me the wrong way.

    JMO.


  14. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    464
    Quote Originally Posted by believe09 View Post
    Oh boy, that must have been hard. Talk about playing both sides. Interesting to know that a breathalyzer can be unreliable.

    Bet LE was thrilled for that nugget to get out.
    Google Sarasota County drops DUI cases. They had to drop about 100 cases.

  15. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to grace60 For This Useful Post:


  16. #9
    rossva's Avatar
    rossva is offline George Zimmerman: Innocent until proven guilty.
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,801
    Well, his son is, just like Casey Anthony, INNOCENT, till proven guilty. Looks like so far the people responding are automatically assuming Alexander is guilty. By the way, in Florida (at least Brevard County, probably all), it is not a crime to refuse to perform the dexterity tests; you can not be arrested for that alone.



    Quote Originally Posted by Basmat View Post
    I disagree with him defending his adult son in this case. His son was speeding, could not perform the dexterity tests and officers smelled alcohol.

    Even if they could PROVE the breathalyzer malfunctioned, there were other clear signs that his son was impaired.

    The fact that Jeff Ashton is DEFENDING his son knowing that his son could potentially have killed or injured someone else just rubs me the wrong way.

    JMO.
    " When ever you find yourself on the side of majority, it's time to pause and reflect."
    - Mark Twain








  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rossva For This Useful Post:


  18. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,948
    And the dexterity tests can be difficult to pass - or the police reports summarizing performance can be wildly overstated than what the cruiser video shows. I've seen that more than a few times, where the police report says that a person cannot do something or performs poorly, and the video tells a different story.

    It's important to keep an open mind, at this stage of the game.
    “Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both.” - Eleanor Roosevelt


    In no way should any of my statements be construed as legal opinion or advice. I am a newly practicing lawyer (yay!) but not a verified poster here at WS. The above statement(s) are an expression of my personal opinion, for entertainment purposes only, and copyright.

  19. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to AnaTeresa For This Useful Post:


  20. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,412
    Quote Originally Posted by believe09 View Post
    Oh boy, that must have been hard. Talk about playing both sides. Interesting to know that a breathalyzer can be unreliable.

    Bet LE was thrilled for that nugget to get out.
    TALLAHASSEE, Florida -- How would you like to go to work and get drunk on the taxpayers' dime? That's exactly what happened for 15 Florida Department of Law Enforcement employees who were testing out the state's breathalyzer machines.

    (snip)

    http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/artic...k-on-your-dime

    Only in Florida...

  21. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to daisy7 For This Useful Post:


  22. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Near Austin, Tx
    Posts
    4
    hello! I am so new to this website. I want to ask a lawyer if Casey can be tried in federal court for making chloroform and causing the death of her daughter. It was found in her car trunk, in HIGH concentrations and so was the smell of death. One lawyer did answer and said, "we don't know that Casey made chloroform." Well, she did search on how to make it, and on and on. Thanks

  23. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    onthecouch
    Posts
    11,712
    Give me a break - about the breathalizer being faulty. That's a cop out and if true, they should do away with them.
    Having peeps in high places is an unfair gift (to the rest of us) I guess.
    Is this JA being CA? I don't blame him for trying to help his son, but it shouldn't be done using his position imo.

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Woe.be.gone For This Useful Post:


  25. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    35,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Wells View Post
    hello! I am so new to this website. I want to ask a lawyer if Casey can be tried in federal court for making chloroform and causing the death of her daughter. It was found in her car trunk, in HIGH concentrations and so was the smell of death. One lawyer did answer and said, "we don't know that Casey made chloroform." Well, she did search on how to make it, and on and on. Thanks
    I don't see how...no one ever said chlorofrm caused Caylee's death and not sure what the statute of limitations would be if they could somehow prove she made some, which they probably can't, or they would have done so. They can only prove she looked it up, and that some experts say it was in the trunk. It did not sound to me as though Dr. G. believed chloroform to be the cause of death. JMO
    Just my opinion, of course.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to cluciano63 For This Useful Post:


  27. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    563
    Im more of a fan of admitting your mistakes and taking the punishment.
    All comments are my opinion or observations only.


  28. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Woe.be.gone View Post
    Give me a break - about the breathalizer being faulty. That's a cop out and if true, they should do away with them.
    Having peeps in high places is an unfair gift (to the rest of us) I guess.
    Is this JA being CA? I don't blame him for trying to help his son, but it shouldn't be done using his position imo.
    If the machine is properly maintained and calibrated, it can be very accurate - it's a great tool for LE to have. It's when LE fail to keep up with the machines that problems occur.

    Honestly, having JA as an attorney may not help his son, because it has brought media attention to the case. If you get a halfway decent attorney, most DUIs are plead down to physical control or reckless ops, things like that. Your chances of a good plea are even greater when you have a pliable set of facts, such as a faulty breathalyzer or a possible lack of probable cause. However, they may be less willing to do so in this case because it is receiving more attention than most DUIs would receive.

    I don't think it's using his position, not really. This assumes that he would get favors because of who he is, and I'd like to think that our judicial system is usually better than that. From what I've seen with my job, having a likeable personality and playing fair gets you a whole lot more cachet in defending someone (or for that matter as a prosecutor, trying to get a defense attorney to give up info/set up a proffer), rather than who you are. It's how you treat people that opens doors.
    “Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both.” - Eleanor Roosevelt


    In no way should any of my statements be construed as legal opinion or advice. I am a newly practicing lawyer (yay!) but not a verified poster here at WS. The above statement(s) are an expression of my personal opinion, for entertainment purposes only, and copyright.

  29. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to AnaTeresa For This Useful Post:


  30. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    onthecouch
    Posts
    11,712
    About the possibility of the breathalyzer being faulty - to what degree and how would one's lawyer prove this? They wouldn't have access to the actual breathalyzer gadget that was used to test the person being charged. So I'm curious as to how a lawyer would use the faulty gadget approach as a defense.

    The idea of this tactic hit me the wrong way due to the fact that you must not refuse a breathalyzer test if you are suspected of DUI. But then if you take one, you're saying that the test may indicate you're over the limit when you're not? To what degree do they test faulty when they do? Because if someone blows 2.0 or something, a little this way or a little that way doesn't really matter does it? I'm just trying to understand the truth behind this tactic as I don't think it's fair that peeps who can't afford a good lawyer don't get any breaks when they make potentially deadly mistakes but the rich kids so-to-speak do.

    I'm sorry for JA that his son made this serious error in judgment but I wish the son would get the same punishment that anyone else would get under the law since the charge is a specific one. I don't think we can just brush laws aside because we like someone or are on their side. We can support them and understand what they're going through but not make excuses for them just because we like them.

    Oh and I don't doubt that JA's son was targeted too due to JA's political goals. All the more reason that he should have called for a ride or stayed where he was or made any other decision than to get behind the wheel of his car.
    Last edited by Woe.be.gone; 02-15-2012 at 04:49 PM. Reason: add

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to Woe.be.gone For This Useful Post:


  32. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    onthecouch
    Posts
    11,712
    One more comment - why isn't JA embarrassed? And if not embarrassed, concerned, disappointed, p.o.'d - all of the things a parent would be when their child risks his and others' lives this way? I'm sorry but he came off a little harsh - kind of opposite of what AnaTeresa suggests, that being likeable and fair gets peeps on one's side.

  33. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Woe.be.gone For This Useful Post:


  34. #19
    rossva's Avatar
    rossva is offline George Zimmerman: Innocent until proven guilty.
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,801
    BBM

    Actually, you can refuse to take a breathalyzer test once. You will automatically lose your drivers license for one year, but you will not have a dui on you record.

    Florida Law permits a person to REFUSE to submit to testing one time without any criminal penalty, but there are consequences with regard to your driver's license. If you refuse to take their so-called "tests", the Florida DMV (not the Court) will suspend your license for one year.

    I think his son targeted himself because he was going 68 mph in a 45-mph zone.

    "Florida uses old, antiquated, unreliable, Intoxilyzer Breath testing devices. Many are ten or more years old. The technology is from the 50s and 60s! In fact, the factory warranty on them is only 90 DAYS! The manufacturer states in its warranty that the machines are NOT warranted to be for "any particular fitness or purpose" for which they are designed. Hence, they are saying that these machines are not warranted to be used for the particular purpose they were designed for. <SNIPPED>

    http://www.privatecounselllc.com/DUI...zer-Info.shtml


    Quote Originally Posted by Woe.be.gone View Post
    The idea of this tactic hit me the wrong way due to the fact that you must not refuse a breathalyzer test if you are suspected of DUI.


    Oh and I don't doubt that JA's son was targeted too due to JA's political goals.
    " When ever you find yourself on the side of majority, it's time to pause and reflect."
    - Mark Twain








  35. The Following User Says Thank You to rossva For This Useful Post:


  36. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Woe.be.gone View Post
    About the possibility of the breathalyzer being faulty - to what degree and how would one's lawyer prove this? They wouldn't have access to the actual breathalyzer gadget that was used to test the person being charged. So I'm curious as to how a lawyer would use the faulty gadget approach as a defense.
    What you do is pull the records for the machine - they are supposed to be calibrated every X amount of days, so you check to see if that is done. You see if the reading gives the proper amount. You check to see if it was maintenanced on schedule. You check to see if the person administering the test has kept his certification up to date (like CPR certification). You check to see if there have been any major repairs, and to what part of the machine.

    If the machine is faulty, the reading can't be used. Mostly, this affects "high test" cases where you get a stricter penalty, but for others, where there's very little evidence otherwise that the person was impaired, the loss of the result as evidence kills the case.

    The idea of this tactic hit me the wrong way due to the fact that you must not refuse a breathalyzer test if you are suspected of DUI. But then if you take one, you're saying that the test may indicate you're over the limit when you're not? To what degree do they test faulty when they do? Because if someone blows 2.0 or something, a little this way or a little that way doesn't really matter does it? I'm just trying to understand the truth behind this tactic as I don't think it's fair that peeps who can't afford a good lawyer don't get any breaks when they make potentially deadly mistakes but the rich kids so-to-speak do.
    It's actually better not to blow - it's not proof that you are inebriated. Then the case centers on the police testimony and the cruiser video, which don't always add up. There is some wiggle room with the outcome of the test - I don't recall the exact amount off the top of my head, but a case is very pliable if the result is within .02, I believe (guessing here, could be wrong).

    You don't even have to afford a "good" lawyer - DUIs are super easy. Most lawyers can handle them very easily with minimal effort. It's not just for rich kids to get out of. In Ohio, I heard the statistic that 1 in 7 has a DUI. I can tell you that I believe it - and many more have DUI charges which were plead down to other traffic infractions. For some, you can tell by the video that they certainly were under the influence, but for others, you really cannot tell. If they perform well on field sobriety tests, but LE has them take a faulty breathalzyer, that puts them in an untenable position.

    I'm sorry for JA that his son made this serious error in judgment but I wish the son would get the same punishment that anyone else would get under the law since the charge is a specific one. I don't think we can just brush laws aside because we like someone or are on their side. We can support them and understand what they're going through but not make excuses for them just because we like them.

    Oh and I don't doubt that JA's son was targeted too due to JA's political goals. All the more reason that he should have called for a ride or stayed where he was or made any other decision than to get behind the wheel of his car.
    The thing is, there's not one set punishment under the law - things like DUIs are very flexible, and they take into account the circumstances of the case and the person who committed the infraction. The result of the breathalyzer, previous DUIs, how they behaved towards LE, whether they took proactive steps beforehand, whether the prosecutor is inflexible or not - all of these things change what the sentence will be.

    This isn't like a federal crime with set sentencing guidelines. Municipal Courts are pretty free in their sentencing.
    “Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both.” - Eleanor Roosevelt


    In no way should any of my statements be construed as legal opinion or advice. I am a newly practicing lawyer (yay!) but not a verified poster here at WS. The above statement(s) are an expression of my personal opinion, for entertainment purposes only, and copyright.

  37. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to AnaTeresa For This Useful Post:


  38. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney Australia
    Posts
    3,655
    GUILTY!

    Jeff Ashton's son Alexander Ashton has been found guilty of drunken driving, and sentenced to a year of probation and six months without a license.

    "You have to be sure and confident, there has to be no doubt in your mind," Jeff Ashton said. "We want you to draw your conclusion on what happened that night. Deputy Loride would like you to just rubber-stamp this."




    http://www.wftv.com/news/news/trial-...-ashton/nH6jf/

  39. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to butwhatif? For This Useful Post:


  40. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,948
    Totally couch quarterbacking here, but I think JA should have hired someone and gone for a plea. Especially if you have a bad video, as the news article indicates.
    “Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both.” - Eleanor Roosevelt


    In no way should any of my statements be construed as legal opinion or advice. I am a newly practicing lawyer (yay!) but not a verified poster here at WS. The above statement(s) are an expression of my personal opinion, for entertainment purposes only, and copyright.

  41. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to AnaTeresa For This Useful Post:


  42. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by butwhatif? View Post
    GUILTY!

    Jeff Ashton's son Alexander Ashton has been found guilty of drunken driving, and sentenced to a year of probation and six months without a license.

    "You have to be sure and confident, there has to be no doubt in your mind," Jeff Ashton said. "We want you to draw your conclusion on what happened that night. Deputy Loride would like you to just rubber-stamp this."




    http://www.wftv.com/news/news/trial-...-ashton/nH6jf/
    Good, glad to see a guilty verdict. I've lost all respect for Ashton after watching the video. It's disgusting that he would stoop to that level and malign the officer who could have saved his drunken son's life or someone innocently driving on the same road. He's arrogant too.

    I hope he does not win his campaign for SA.

    IMO

  43. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jon_burrows For This Useful Post:


  44. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    7,266
    Quote Originally Posted by jon_burrows View Post
    Good, glad to see a guilty verdict. I've lost all respect for Ashton after watching the video. It's disgusting that he would stoop to that level and malign the officer who could have saved his drunken son's life or someone innocently driving on the same road. He's arrogant too.

    I hope he does not win his campaign for SA.

    IMO
    At the end of the day, he is a lawyer. Isn't this what most lawyers do, stoop to a level to clear their client, no matter the offense?

  45. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to cityslick For This Useful Post:


  46. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,987
    Quote Originally Posted by cityslick View Post
    At the end of the day, he is a lawyer. Isn't this what most lawyers do, stoop to a level to clear their client, no matter the offense?

    I guess....I just thought so many years as a prosecutor might have rubbed off some morals or something...that whole "not embarrassed, why would I be"* thing really made my stomach churn. the whole "if you dont like it, unfriend me"* thing...well, so I did.


    ** not a perfect quote, dont beat me.

  47. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 2goldfish For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Defense wants prosecutor Jeff Ashton held in contempt
    By Intermezzo in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 531
    Last Post: 01-01-2012, 01:30 AM
  2. Replies: 405
    Last Post: 12-30-2011, 08:40 PM
  3. Imperfect Justice-Prosecuting Casey Anthony by Jeff Ashton
    By JBean in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 481
    Last Post: 09-10-2011, 11:01 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •