Tennessee has made national headlines again. However, this time it was not for our beautiful countryside, low taxes, or great quality of life. Unfortunately, Tennessee has made the news for a series of wrongful arrests made by the Tennessee Highway Patrol. WSMV4 reported on September 26, 2024, that a Tennessee driver has sued THP for one million dollars for his wrongful arrest. The driver, a Monroe County resident, was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI) despite being completely sober. He was even arrested in front of his mother, who happened to be driving by at the time of the investigation. She told the highway patrol that her son had not been drinking or doing drugs.

The driver asked officers to administer a breath test on the scene to demonstrate that he was sober. They refused, stating that they were going to seek a blood test instead. The blood test, analyzed by the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, showed that the driver had no alcohol or drugs in his system.

This case highlights several problems that currently exist in our legal system that can easily be remedied and one that is harder to remedy. No system is perfect, but it is important that we always strive to identify weak areas and improve.

Let’s start with the easy problems to tackle. It is wonderful that more law enforcement agencies are wearing body worn cameras. More than ever are the real facts being preserved for analysis by both the prosecution and the defense. More cases are being handled properly now that fewer facts are in dispute. This cuts both ways. Defendants who are caught admitting to the facts on camera are more likely to enter pleas to avoid trial. Also, more illegally obtained evidence is being suppressed for bad stops and other constitutional violations on the part of law enforcement.

So, “what is the problem” you ask. The problem is that most departments do not have policies in place that prohibit officers from muting their microphones. We are running into this issue in nearly every case with body worn camera footage. Officers have discussions about their observations but mute their microphones to keep these decisions from being reviewed later. This causes key facts to be lost prior to trial. In some instances, as you will see, it allows the officers to mask their real reasons for the arrest.

At Patton | Pittman, we have found ways to get some of the missing audio. It usually starts with getting dispatch logs to see what other officers were on the scene then requesting their recordings. It is rare that every officer mutes their microphones at the same time. This does not always work. We have also been able to pull closed circuit surveillance footage to get the missing audio. However, that footage has usually been destroyed before the case gets to us.

The bottom line is that more departments need body worn cameras and all departments need policies prohibiting officers from muting their microphones during active investigations.

Another problem that can be corrected is also policy related. Law enforcement departments allow individuals to be arrested for DUI before the investigation is complete. Yes, the law allows for a person to be arrested based solely upon probable cause. However, the standardized field sobriety tests are subjective and often not given properly. Given this subjectivity and inconsistency in administration, a policy could be written that allowed a person who is willing to give a blood test to be given the option of a citation pending the results of the test. Another option may even be to postpone any criminal charges until the investigation is complete.

Here at Patton | Pittman our criminal defense attorneys have been trained on the proper administration of field sobriety tests. Attorney Jeffrey Campbell has taken the same class that the officers take and has been certified to administer field sobriety tests. Attorney Chris Clark trained police officers for the State of Tennessee on how to properly conduct a DUI investigation. Both have extensive courtroom experience on DUI defense.

The more difficult problem to correct is the problem of preconceptions and prejudices. Too many law enforcement officers allow their personal feelings and biases to interfere with their investigations. According to the body worn camera footage, the lawsuit, and news reports, Trooper William “Billy” Yates-Matoy knew some of the driver’s family members. The trooper then made assumptions such as he’s “probably got weed; probably high” and I “guarantee he smoked weed today.” These baseless comments can be heard on the officers’ body worn cameras.

The trooper has now been sued for this unlawful arrest and these comments are being used against him. If he is put back out on the street, he may mute his microphone that much more, absent a policy prohibiting it. How many other arrests have been made for the wrong reasons, only for those reasons to be masked by a muted mic?

WSMV4 Investigates and Nashville reporter Jeremy Finley have done a great job covering this problem in their ongoing investigation titled “Sobering Problem”. That multipart investigation has highlighted another sober driver wrongfully arrested for DUI. If you have been arrested for DUI, call to speak with one of our experienced defense attorneys.