Cowboys .. NT Manslaughter

[Playoffs]

Originally Posted by CloakNNNdagger

I just wanted to bring up some additional info...

Great info, Doc. (If I hadn't just repped you in the other thread I'd rep you on this.)

And to add some empirical variability, I've known a few men & women who showed significant affects from just over one drink: slurred speech, repeating themselves, wobbly.

Regardless, the general consensus is at .056 judgment and self-control are reduced, and caution, reason and memory are impaired. The young man made a bad decision to get in the car with his friend -- one he may not have chosen had he not been drinking that night.

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by CloakNNNdagger

In this and other thread, we’ve spoken about drinking and its effects. I just wanted to bring up some additional info as relates to “size” of an involved individual.

There is a deeply ingrained misconception about a large person, such as Brent always being able to drink more than a smaller person before exhibiting the effects of alcohol, or the level of effect, as well as how long the effects can last.

Yes, there will be some difference based on the total volume of blood in a small vs large person, and therefore some ability to dilute the alcohol somewhat in the larger person....not much of a factor when comparing a 200 pounder to a 300 pounder.

BUT

Body fat content is a commonly overlooked major factor in inebriation and length of inebriation. Body fat doesn’t absorb alcohol. Therefore a person with higher body fat is going to have a higher BAC than a person who has less body fat. Since body fat cannot absorb alcohol, it instead forces the alcohol to remain in the bloodstream until the liver can break it down. The liver can only break down about one alcoholic drink per hour. The longer the alcohol remains in a person’s bloodstream, the longer they will feel inebriated.

Women tend to have a higher BAC than men do. This is because women have a higher percentage of body fat and a smaller amount of an enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase that helps break down alcohol. Women also have less blood than men do because they are usually smaller in size.

Tolerance for alcohol seemed a lot higher when you are 21. The longer it took the inevitably feel the affects of alcohol, the more alcohol you probably consumed. Body fat tends to increase with age and enzyme action tends to slow down as a person gets older. And, again, body fat doesn’t absorb alcohol and the more body fat a person has, the higher their BAC will be and the more and longer he stays inebriated.

Also, as an aside, if a person is stressed or angry, they are likely to have a higher BAC than a person who is calm. When a person is under stress or is upset, their body tends to divert blood away from the stomach and small intestines, and instead moves it to the muscles. The reduced blood flow slows down the absorption of alcohol into the bloodstream. The angry or stressed person might not feel the affects of the alcohol immediately and continue drinking. As soon as the person calms down and the blood flow returns to the stomach, the person could experience a sudden increase in their BAC.

Good info and it makes a lot of sense

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by Playoffs

Great info, Doc. (If I hadn't just repped you in the other thread I'd rep you on this.)

And to add some empirical variability, I've known a few men & women who showed significant affects from just over one drink: slurred speech, repeating themselves, wobbly.

Regardless, the general consensus is at .056 judgment and self-control are reduced, and caution, reason and memory are impaired. The young man made a bad decision to get in the car with his friend -- one he may not have chosen had he not been drinking that night.

It does impact everyone differently. You can certainly be highly impaired arrested and convicted of dwi and still be under 0.08. To say most people arent impaired at all at 0.5 is silly imo but Mr Brown certainly showed some impairment that night as you point out that he may not have otherwise

[CloakNNNdagger]

Any empathy that one would have been left for Brent's plight should just disapper with this latest released bit of information...........Brent was travelling between 110 and 134 mph at the time of the crash.

Documents: Brent Was SpeedingBefore Fatal Crash

According to the documents, Brent was going at a minimum of 110 mph down Highway 114. The report said he may have gone as fast as 134 mph at points.

At least three different surveillance cameras at a nearby Dallas Area Rapid Transit station captured the car, according to the documents. Investigators said the cameras recorded Brent going through a green light at Tom Braniff Drive.

Two 911 calls were made from the car. In one, clicking sounds from the car's flashers are all that can be heard.

NBC 5 has obtained a timeline of what happened Dec. 7:

11:15 p.m.: Brent and some teammates were at Eddie V’s in the Oak Lawn section of Dallas.
1 a.m.: According to witnesses, Brent was at Beamers Nightclub.
2:15 a.m.: Surveillance cameras from the club show Brent driving away.
2:19 a.m.: DART cameras capture Brent's car driving down Highway 114.
2:19 a.m.: A 911 call was made automatically from the in-car phone.
2:21 a.m.: The first passer-by calls 911.

link

[Heath Shuler]

Prosecutors say Cowboys DT Josh Brent has tested positive for marijuana while awaiting trial for a deadly car crash. Seriously?

@AdamSchefter

[badboy]

Originally Posted by Heath Shuler

@AdamSchefter

Probably stressed about the trial and needed to mellow.

[Playoffs]

Originally Posted by badboy

Probably stressed about the trial and needed to mellow.

Yep, just dabbling in some of that none habit forming marijuana ..... and likely lost his freedom.

[CloakNNNdagger]

Prosecutors said in their motion that Brent failed a urine test taken after a May 24 court hearing in which they had sought for his bond to be revoked due to problems with his alcohol monitoring. While the judge declined to do so, he did order Brent to provide a urine sample.

A hearing on the prosecutors' motion had not been scheduled Thursday afternoon. Brent's attorney, George Milner, did not immediately return a phone message and a spokeswoman for the Dallas County district attorney declined to comment.

Brent is required to wear an alcohol ankle monitor and appear for regular meetings with a county officer. Judge Robert Burns last month ordered a second form of monitoring to take breath samples, and for Brent to provide the sample after the hearing.

The prosecutors' motion said the test results indicate Brent took marijuana within 30 days of the test date and it did not appear the exposure to marijuana was second-hand.

"Given the defendant's prior alcohol-related contacts and the severity of the charge in this case, it is the State's belief that the defendant continues to pose a threat to the community," prosecutors said in the motion.

link