Footage shows US musician struggling with field sobriety tests he calls ‘really hard’ before his 2024 arrest in New York
  • partial_accumen@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    10 days ago

    Timberlake’s lawyers had sued to block the release of the video, arguing it would “devastate” Timberlake’s privacy by revealing “intimate, highly personal, and sensitive details”. They also said it would cause “severe and irreparable harm” to his reputation by subjecting him to “public ridicule and harassment”.

    I mean, Justin can just not drive drunk if we wanted to avoid this.

  • comador @lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    10 days ago

    I hope he is so humiliated by this that he quits driving altogether.

    ‘Why are you treating me like a criminal?’

    Because you entitled drunk driving prick: You WERE a criminal at that moment.

    • Pricklesthemagicfish@reddthat.comEnglish
      0·
      10 days ago

      Was he though? Do you get extra charges for robbing a bank drunk? Seems to me there are already laws that cover everything from speeding to vehicular manslaughter. Somebody think of the children though its totally not just another way for the police to extract money from civilians.

      • mastertigurius@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        10 days ago

        Umm, yes. If you rob a bank while being drunk, you’ll get a public intoxication charge slapped on with the rest of the charges.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        10 days ago

        In case you’re actually wondering, in the state of New York where Timberlake committed the DUI, that falls under Penal Law Part I Title B § 15.25. And the words your tapioca pudding brain is looking for are “aggravating factor”, not “extra charge” (unless you mean public intoxication). Your comparison, though, as everyone knows, is moronic, and trying to downplay DUI through amateurish pseudo-lawyering disgracefully disrespects the many lives selfish pieces of shit abruptly take and ruin every day by driving under the influence.

      • PapaStevesy@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        10 days ago

        Do you get extra charges for robbing a bank drunk?

        If the drunkenness was a big enough part of the interaction, I’m sure you would. Public intoxication laws do exist ya know.

      • frongt@lemmy.zipEnglish
        0·
        10 days ago

        Driving drunk is illegal even if you are following every other law, due to the inherent risk. Even if you crash and the only person you hurt is yourself, you still have to be medically evaluated at least, and anything you hit repaired.

  • [email protected]@lemmy.federate.ccEnglish
    0·
    10 days ago

    Timberlake, from Tennessee, agreed to give a public safety announcement against the perils of drunken driving as part of the plea deal that knocked down his initial misdemeanor charge to a noncriminal traffic violation.

    Ah yes, there it is. One does not simply arrest a rich white person in the Hampton and… convict them of the crime they committed!

  • surfrock66@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    10 days ago

    It is bad and he needs to face consequences, but the headline made me think it was worse than it was. He was polite, and his team reacted stronger than he did. I wonder how much the suppression was his PR agency over him; when he was in the station and telling the officers he appreciated everything they do, that is as good as you can do in a situation like that. Drunk driving is inexcusable, but that is not a celebrity meltdown which is how it’s being shared in a lot of headlines.

  • SkabySkalywag@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    10 days ago

    Just glad he wasn’t driving with Janet Jackson.

    “No officer, I had no idea she was gonna show nipple while I drove drunk.”

    Sorry, I know I should let it go, but I still have lingering resentment towards him about how that Super Bowl “fiasco” went down.

  • abbadon420@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    10 days ago

    But why? Are we doing publc shamings again? Should we put him on the village square and have kids throw fruit at him?

    • brackled@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      10 days ago

      It’s up to the public how they respond. The point here is not setting a precedent for police withholding bodycam footage regardless of who request. We can’t open any doors for police to try and withhold footage more than they already do. This time it just an embarrased celebrity but next time it might be copes wrongfully arresting, killing, etc. I do tngicr a shit about JT but I do care that body cam footage stays public information.

      • MrNobody@quokk.auEnglish
        0·
        10 days ago

        Hell no, cops should not be able to withhold camera footage but the other side 100% should have the right to their privacy if they don’t wish it public.

        Imagine the cops come to your house for something you’re not guilty off, record your house and your life and publish it out there for everyone to see. That could lead to people getting killed because they get outed as LGBT to their family for example.

        • brackled@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          10 days ago

          I should have clarified, guilt and location matter. If it’s in public space then all bodycam footage should be free game. That’s no different than if someone recorded it from the side of the street. If it’s in private space then it should be based on guilt. But again, I don’t like where that can go as well because the inverse is cops come into your home shoot you and that footage is locked away because it was recorded on private property and you are no longer around to consent release of that footage.

          • parody@lemmings.worldEnglish
            0·
            10 days ago

            Well after just posting this in the other direction, what about when we’re in public and we tell the cop we’re only stumbling because we left the bar crying after our kids died or something like that… Or we’ve just stripped nude to hump a street post

            OK, should this be all about “public interest”?! Lawyer people talk about that standard. We have a public interest in boy bands, not in John Doe Mental Break. You can’t just request footage for the fun of it? Unless like there was a pattern of people stumbling or nudiestreaking in your community that was not being addressed

      • zeejoo@thelemmy.clubEnglish
        0·
        10 days ago

        So if a cop has his body cam on when he comes into your house to help you because you got your hand stuck in a peanut butter jar butt ass naked, that should be made public? Even against the consent of the person the video is of? I agree police should never be able to withhold body cam footage, but people should absolutely be able to request body cam footage of themselves be withheld. He was convicted of the DUI and received legal penalties for it. Why does the shame game need to be played too? That wasn’t part of his sentence. For your own enjoyment? How does releasing this footage benefit society other than us getting to laugh at him all over again?

        It’s perfectly fine to joke about JTs DUI when he comes up, I always do, but acting like he was a bad guy for trying to suppress footage of him regarding an incident he’s already been punished for is asinine. This isn’t some freedom of information issue bro get therapy. This is TMZ in lemmy tinsel and it got you to engage.