Palms Owner Gets Court Date For His DUI

Palms Casino Owner George Maloof Jr. Gets Trial Date For DUI

George Maloof Jr.

by Jagajeet Chiba, – Las Vegas casino magnate and Sacramento Kings co-owner George Maloof Jr. has a trial date for his DUI case.  Maloof Jr. is the owner of the Palms Casino.  On October 9 [2010] he was pulled over on suspicion of driving while under the influence just southwest of the Las Vegas Strip.

Maloof later told The Associated Press that he had four beers at a wedding and that his blood-alcohol level was measured at 0.086%.

That’s just over the legal limit in Nevada of 0.08%, but Maloof said he thought he was “nowhere near intoxicated.”

Maloof’s attorney Wade Rabenhorst stood before the judge this past week in his client’s absence.

A May 31 trial date has been set.

Please visit my legal website: Nevada DUI Attorneys
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl


Palm Casino Owner Arrested for DUI

Palms Owner George Maloof Arrested for DUI

George Maloof Jr.

by The Associated Press [LAS VEGAS]  — Palms Casino Resort owner George Maloof Jr. was arrested for drunken driving after being pulled over by police late Saturday night [October 9th, 2010].

George Maloof Jr. was arrested about 11:30 p.m. Saturday near Spanish Trail Country Club, where he lives, police said Monday. Maloof, 46, told The Associated Press he was driving home with his assistant from a friend’s wedding at The Mirage hotel-casino about six miles away.

Maloof said the assistant asked him to drive. “I just didn’t think I needed her to drive — I should have had her drive — because I didn’t drink that much,” said Maloof. He said he thought he was “nowhere near intoxicated” and would likely fight the arrest in court.

Maloof said he had four beers and his blood-alcohol level was measured at 0.086 percent. That’s just over the legal limit in Nevada of 0.08 percent. He said he asked if he could go home but was told he would be arrested.

Police searched his car and his assistant’s purse but found nothing else out of the ordinary, Maloof said. Police spokeswoman Barbara Morgan said Maloof was speeding 21 to 30 mph over the limit, made an illegal left turn and was driving without a valid license or proof of insurance.

Maloof said he didn’t post bail and didn’t want to call anyone, and was released from jail Sunday morning.

Maloof owns the resort with his brothers and sister. His family also owns the NBA’s Sacramento Kings.

Please visit my legal website: Nevada DUI Attorneys
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

Nevada Supreme Court Doesn’t Know Jack nor Pot

Nevada High Court Rejects Pot User’s Driving Bid

Nevada “High” Court By Martha Bellisle – A California woman who legally smoked marijuana in her home state and then drove across the Nevada state line with an “inactive” marijuana metabolite in her system still is guilty under the state’s impaired driving law, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled.

Shira Garfinkel was convicted in Incline Justice Court of being over the legal limit of marijuana metabolite, which is the “inactive” substance the body produces to get ride of marijuana’s active ingredient tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC.

Her lawyer, Deputy Public Defender Priscilla Nielson appealed, arguing that since the metabolite is an “inactive” substance, it “does not affect the person’s ability to drive,” and the law is unconstitutional.

Justices Nancy Saitta, Michael Cherry and Mark Gibbons disagreed.

In an unpublished decision, which means the ruling only applies to this case and does not set legal precedence, the justices said they already ruled in another case that the law appropriately applies to both marijuana’s active ingredient and the metabolite, and they don’t need to “revisit that decision.”

They also dismissed Garfinkel’s claims that the law “interferes with her right to travel” because she is a legal user of marijuana in California and Nevada’s DUI law would keep her from crossing the state line.

The law does not prohibit her from traveling, the justices said, “it criminalizes her driving a motor vehicle through the state with prohibited substances in her blood and urine.”

Nielson said she was “somewhat discouraged” with the ruling and that she has not yet decided if she’ll ask the full court to review the case.

“I’m disappointed that they did not apply a legal analysis, they just looked at the bottom line of the Williams case,” Nielson said.

Case details

Jessica Williams was convicted in 2002 of running over and killing six teenagers after smoking marijuana.

She appealed, and the high court affirmed her conviction, saying the law served two legitimate state interests: promoting highway safety and deterring the illicit use of drugs, Nielson said.

Nielson said that neither of those points apply in this case. The metabolite does not impact driving ability because it’s inactive, and the drug use in this case was legal, she said.

According to William Anderson, chief toxicologist at the Washoe County crime lab, regular users of marijuana would have an almost continual level of metabolite in their systems.

Garfinkel was stopped for speeding on Tahoe Boulevard early in 2010 and charged with driving with a prohibited amount of a prohibited substance. She has a doctor-approved cannabis card that allows her to use the drug, under California law.

The courts

At her trial in Incline Village Justice Court, Judge Alan Tiras said she was not guilty of having THC in her system. Her test showed she had two nanograms of the THC, the legal limit.

But since the test is plus-or-minus 1 nanogram, he did not convict her. But he found her guilty of having the metabolite in her system. The test measured 20 nanograms of metabolite, and the legal limit is 5 nanograms.

She appealed to Washoe District Court, and Judge Robert Perry affirmed Tiras’ ruling.

The next appeal took her argument to the Supreme Court, but the justices affirmed the conviction.

“Garfinkel’s attempts to distinguish her case from Williams by arguing that in Williams this court grappled only with the prohibition on active marijuana and did not meaningfully analyze the constitutional implications of the prohibition of driving while carrying marijuana metabolite in the blood are unavailing,” the ruling said.

In the Williams decision, the justices said, they “rejected the arguments of those who claimed that the law ‘lacked a direct correlation between the prohibited drugs in a driver’s system and impairment.'”


In this case clearly the justices did not even look at the law, nor he facts of the case.  The intent of the law is to stop someone who is impaired from driving a very heavy, speeding vehicle that will do serious harm to someone else.  In this case, there was no evidence of any potential harm coming to anyone since the substance in question was not the marijuana, but the bodies production of a substance which cleans out marijuana.  It is like saying having bleach or bathroom cleaner is evidence there was illegal substances in your bathroom and therefore you’re criminally liable.

Now, I don’t mean to cast aspersions on a fine Nevada DUI Attorney, but how do you lose a case on these facts?  Yes, the DUI attorney was looking for the court to declare the law unconstitutional, but it seems nearly a slam dunk.  That last sentence makes assumption of the reader.  I apologize and will correct that assumption now.  The DUI attorney was looking for the Nevada Supreme Court to declare the law unconstitutional.  It is my personal opinion that all courts and police are completely corrupt and run amuck of the constitution ad nauseum.  There is almost no way that any court in the land would declare any law unconstitutional these days, UNLESS, it was so blatantly obvious that even the ignorant, unwashed masses could plainly see it was unconstitutional.  It is the same reasoning we have a 2 billion dollar HIV industry.  They haven’t located actual HIV, but they can see antibodies to HIV.  This is the same reasoning.  There was no THC, the substance in marijuana that makes you high, but they found metabolite in her system, nor was she potentially dangerous while driving.

Please visit my legal website: Nevada DUI Attorneys
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

Washington Officer Pleads Not Guilty to Shooting a Man in the Back 7 Times

Wash. Officer Pleads not Guilty to Manslaughter

EVERETT, Wash. — An Everett police officer charged with manslaughter for shooting a drunken driving suspect has pleaded not guilty in Snohomish County Superior Court.

The Everett Herald reports Officer Troy Meade remained free without bail after Thursday’s plea, under orders not to leave the state or possess weapons.

Prosecutors say he was not justified in shooting Niles Meservey, 51 years old [pictured above], of Stanwood last June in the parking lot of a restaurant.

Other customers reported Meservey was intoxicated. Investigators believe Meade was attempting to prevent him from driving away in his Corvette.

Meservey had been shocked with a stun gun and had rammed a chain-link fence when Meade fired through the rear window, hitting him seven times.

The DUI Scam and Scare

This is retarded. This is absolutely ridiculous. What you ask? I looked up the numbers for DUI vs all traffic vs pedestrian accidents vs motorcycles. Guess who came in last? Guess who didn’t even make the national bar? Guess who they didn’t even want to report? DUI!

Let’s look at the numbers:

  • 2.9 million injured in car wrecks due to: lack of seat belt; driver inattentiveness; running red lights
  • 3,662 motorcycle deaths: due to lack of helmets; other driver inattentiveness
  • 4,749 pedestrian deaths: due to other driver inattentiveness

Ok you ready for the DUI numbers?

  • 17,103 alcohol related ACCIDENTS: not deaths; not injuries. Just the accident itself. Now if you scroll back through my blog you’ll see I discussed the word ALCOHOL RELATED. That’s a euphemism for something that sounds like one thing but means another.

Alcohol Related:

  1. does not mean there was a test for alcohol by anyone involved in the accident; does not mean anyone was intoxicated; does not mean anyone was under the suspicion of being intoxicated; does not mean anyone was visibly intoxicated.
  2. means that there was the presence of alcohol at the scene of the accident
  3. means that alcohol could have been present inside the passenger compartment.
  4. means that alcohol could have been present inside the trunk of the car
  5. means that alcohol could have been present in either vehicle including the victim of the accident.

Ok just so everyone understands: when they say “17,103 alcohol related ACCIDENTS”, it literally could mean that there was a closed, sealed, just purchased, unopened container of some form of alcohold somewhere in either vehicle, OR EVEN INCLUDING A PEDESTRIAN, and they did not perform any DUI screening test whatsoever, they will write it down as an alcohol related accident.

They would not release the nationwide DUI deaths. How can they? They lie about the accidents, so can they pencil in a number of deaths that are alcohol related?

So let’s compare 2.9 million to 17,103. No let me make it quite visible

  • 2,900,000
  • 17,103

If you have a calculator, you can see immediately that DUI accidents… WAIT, no no no, alcohol related accidents. DUI accidents are an even smaller number than the alcohol related accidents. I don’t have that number. They won’t release it. A DUI accident would be an accident, where they actually tested and tried to prosecute someone in connection to the DUI laws. The number would probably number in the hundreds. Be that as it may, just by looking at the numbers we do have, the alcohol related accidents compared to overall accidents is .0058975. That means it’s not even 1%.

This Lunatic Cop Shoots the Man in the Back

This is getting way out of hand. Just by the sheer numbers, DUI accidents nationwide aren’t even remotely in the top 10 causes of accident or death while driving. The fear mongers that have demonized DUI as some huge out of control factor in America are simply doing it to make money. There is no reality to DUI being something that we need fear and smite from our roads. The danger that DUI posses to loss of life is less than pedestrians who cross the street inattentively. Yet we are not passing harsh punishments for those pedestrians. If anyone with half a brain wishes to go look up the statistics, I welcome them to see for themselves.

This scare, that has surrounded DUI, is so out of control that we have the above incident, that this untrained policeman, so gripped with fear that this person would become some demon on wheels, took the man’s life. There is simply no defense for it. No judge, worth his salt, should sit on his bench and listen to any defense for it. He admittedly shot the man in the back seven times, ending his life.

We need to look at real numbers and real facts about DUI and stop paying attention to fear mongers.

I pray for his family. That is just… God bless his family and watch over them and help them through this painful time.

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas DUI Attorney
See me on YouTube: Shakaama Live

Las Vegas The Drinks Are On Us

About My DUI Website

In this day and age where life is quite tragic for so many in America, I’d like to think I bring hope in a hopeless situation. Quite a few of us fall through the cracks. We cannot let so many fall by the wayside. If left to fate our downtrodden would also bring us down. I’d like to think I reach out a helpful hand where none was sought.

I’d Like to say my site is sexy. I’d like to say my site is the cat’s meow. [how old is that phrase] I’d like to say my site brings all the boys to the yard. But if you mention DUI, I admit, it’s a party pooper. However, it is centered in Sunny Las Vegas, where the men are men and the chicks are topless, well at least in the shows. Some shows even have the men and women totally nude, but it’s behind a sort of see through bed sheet, so it’s considered “art.”

Well what does this exciting discussion of topless women and shows have to do with DUI. Simply this, I bring a fresh new take on a very touchy subject. I present the lighter side of DUI arrests, like articles about the “silver man”, where a man arrested on halloween was found to be completely covered in silver paint, including hair, wearing nothing but shorts, video clip included. Unfortunately, he actually was drunk. However, I humanize a topic most would shun and quite a few would demonize.

What might that mean you ask? Simply that not every boy dressed in blue is there to “serve and protect”. It is the reality that police departs have political issues to contend with, and arresting poor saps on horrible charges like DUI pads their coffers. I’m not saying every “sap” on the road is innocent, just that a cop sitting outside a club isn’t the Mother Theresa we’d like to think he is.

Daily I give, “non-legal”, advice on such sites as Yahoo Answers to would be victims. Some of the articles I come across are tragic: i.e. football starter looses all scholarships and eligibility from being CHARGED for DUI. Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for pulling drunks off the road that would kill themselves or others, but ruining someone’s life due to shoddy police work and a zeal to get traffic ticket money I think is just as egregious if not more so. Public officials have a duty to uphold the law, just as much as they have a duty not to abuse it themselves.

I give MADD their due. I have even been the voice of reason when they point their rage at some kid that was stopped after 2 beers on the side of the road and is facing untold horrors from the ramifications at school, home and job. I feel their loss due to losing a loved one to drunk drivers, but not everyone on the road is a reckless sloppy drunk, a tragedy waiting to happen. We can no more throw away some kid’s future because of your pain than we can throw the key away on the 13 year old homeless kid begging for change on the street.

Let me end my pontification here. If you’re ever in Las Vegas and want information about DUI, visit my site for enlightenment:

Please Visit My Website: Las Vegas DUI Lawyer

Watch Me on Youtube: Shakaama Live