Justice Francis Marsano set an interesting precedent in his recent ruling (“Rockland man innocent in influence case: Judge rules Councilor Reilley was too drunk to threaten police,” BDN, Dec. 30). Apparently, what we say when the beer is talking can’t be held against us. What about what we do?
If being too drunk to know what one is saying is sufficient to excuse an otherwise illegal threat, why isn’t being too drunk to know what one is doing sufficient to excuse an otherwise illegal act? For example, resisting arrest comes to mind, and interfering with police administration.
Probably most date rapists are drunk.
“I didn’t know what I was doing.”
The implications are enormous. Michael S. Moore Veazie