I have been pulled over a few times in my lifetime. On one occassion, and only one, I blew a .16. I don’t drink much. I do what most of us do when we go out. We all drive drunk. I did before I blew the .16. I was at least able to follow the pen without moving my head. I was able to count down from 44 to whatever (and I’m not good with numbers, lol). I was able to do fairly well with walking the straight line, which is difficult for most people, but still possible. I was able to touch my nose with my finger and ‘withdraw my finger from my nose immediately after touching my nose’. I was able to do all those things and still blew a .16. That’s double the legal limit nearly everywhere.

I was arrested for DUI that night, and in hindsight, it was the best thing to ever happen to me because I will never do it again. I will never let my friends do it. I will never let anyone I am near do it. I learned my lesson. But what lessen did Mr. Baird learn? That he can get people to lie for him? That he shouldn’t be held accountable for his actions? That he can get away with anything, as long as he does work for the youth group?

The entire process of deciding to drink impaired, getting arrested, going through the judicial system should be a learning experience. I fear you have taught Mr. Baird nothing of value–nothing that will benefit your community. In contrast, you have taugh Mr. Baird, indeed your entire community, that the rules they agreed to–don’t apply to everyone. Too bad you missed this learning opportunity. I hope the next one will not be over a child’s grave that Mr. Baird ran over the next time he drives drunk. As Fred states, there will be a next time. Always is. Mr Baird would have learned that fact in DUI class and counseling for his apparent drinking problem. Yes, I said a drinking problem. If you drive impaired, you have a drinking problem. Always remember, driving buzzed IS driving drunk.

He refused to obey a law enforcement officer. Why aren’t their any repercussions for that? What a joke. If he were not ’such a wonderful person” doing work at a youth group and such, he would have been convicted. If he were not white–he would have definitely been convicted.

Once again, the moral elite believe that the rules should only apply to the ‘other guy’ and not themselves. Poor guy wouldn’t drive drunk–he works with the church or youth group. But if someone doesn’t fit their version of a ‘good person’, then the vehemently go for the jugular. This duplicity is what is wrong with politics.

Why don’t they release the video of his driving prior to the arrest and let us be the judge. Juries are a joke. Why? Because most of them are filled with the same elitist, arrogant, racists that are on most of them.

Good day to all that facilitated this guys acquittal. His future actions are on you.

BTW, why didn’t anyone have his doctor testify about a life-long issue with balance? Are his girlfriend or assistant medical experts? What their testimony to that affect or was it just people stating what they believe?

Finally, everyone out there that wants to get away with drunk driving in Indian River County, just refuse to take the breathalyzer and have some friends lie on your behalf. It doesn’t hurt to have a relative on the jury either. Oh that’s right–they are all related. Welcome to the Indian River judical system–where it’s all about who you are, and not what you did.