HALLOWEEN MYTHS THE MEDIA LOVES TO SCARE US WITH RAZOR BLADES AND POT?
THC THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) is the primary psychoactive compound found in cannabis, and it’s the chemical that makes people high. In more recent years, there have been an increasing number of stories spread on social media about THC-laced candy or edibles being found in kids’ candy bags. There are also news stories of THC-laced candy being found during warranted searches. However, that’s as far as the story goes, at least when it comes to Halloween. In 2019, police in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, warned parents to be on the lookout for THC-laced candies after they found some in a bust. While the warning was certainly valid, nothing ever came of it. Should you check your child’s candy? Most definitely! It’s always good to check just in case, though the danger is negligible. That said, kids should never take unwrapped or homemade treats while trick-or-treating. This has less to do with hidden razors and more to do with simply not knowing what’s in those items, such as potential allergens.
For many people, Halloween is the time of year when certain spooky myths and superstitions come alive. It’s when we hear stories of black cats and bad luck or ghosts in the attic. But there are some recent myths that often get perpetuated by both mainstream and social media — stories that frighten parents and create an anxious, fearful atmosphere. Razor Blades and Poison For a long time, the “razor blades in candy” has been a go-to media story. Every year around Halloween, you’re sure to see your local news running a segment that encourages parents to check their kids’ candy for tampering so their children don’t swallow razor blades or poison. There have been zero substantiated cases of any child or parent finding a razor blade hidden in the chocolate and nougat. There has, however, been one lone case of a child being poisoned. In 1974, a father hid cyanide in his son’s candy in Texas, leading to the child’s death. It was discovered that the father was attempting to collect life insurance to ease his $100,000 debt.
ON THE DEFENSE
4 DUI Charge Defenses
No. 2: Invalid Arrest – Lack of Probable Cause Following a legal traffic stop, the law enforcement officer must have sufficient evidence before they can arrest you. This evidence suggests that there is “probable cause” for arrest. Examples include the results of field sobriety tests and the officer’s observations. If the officer cannot present enough facts for a probable cause, then all other evidence gathered after your arrest may be invalid. No. 3: Field Test – Lack of Reliability The officer is likely to request a series of field sobriety tests or other physical tests after they pull you over. Field sobriety tests are not the most reliable tests because alcohol is not the only factor that can affect your physical abilities. There can be other variables. Additionally, there are guidelines regarding how an officer should administer this test, and if the officer failed to follow these guidelines to the letter, the results might be considered invalid. No. 4: Eye Test – Lack of Expertise The horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) test looks at the involuntary movement of the eye, which changes in a person who is impaired by alcohol. This is a tricky exam that often requires an expert. The shaky science behind this test and the lack of expertise among officers can make this test inadmissible as evidence or simply too complex for judges to take the time to entertain.
When someone is arrested for driving under the influence, they are often worried about what happens after they are charged. Will they face steep consequences? In some cases, the answer is yes, there may be serious consequences. However, when they work with an experienced
DUI defense lawyer, that lawyer can use their knowledge and expertise to
develop a potential defense based on the circumstances surrounding the arrest and charge and may be able to get the charge reduced or dismissed. Here are four examples of those potential defenses. No. 1: Invalid Stop – Lack of Reasonable Suspicion Traffic officers are required to have “reasonable suspicion” before they can stop someone on the road. If there is evidence that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion (for example, if they acted on an unverified anonymous tip or even on a hunch), then the traffic stop might be invalid.
LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT
2 MRDUILA.COM
Published by The Newsletter Pro • www.TheNewsletterPro.com
Made with FlippingBook HTML5