The Vikings received some unwelcome news today as Luca Evans of the O.C. Register reports that wide receiver Jordan Addison has been arrested near Los Angeles International Airport under suspicion of driving under the influence. With a history of reckless driving, it’s likely that Addison will be forced to miss some time this season. 
Addison, the Vikings’ top pick in the 2023 NFL Draft, was back in Los Angeles this weekend, where he spent the final season of his collegiate career after two years at Pittsburgh. Late on Friday night, officers responded to reports of “a white Rolls-Royce blocking the number one lane of the freeway.” Addison, the driver of that vehicle, was reportedly found sleeping behind the wheel when officers arrived at the scene. The 22-year-old was arrested at approximately 11:36 p.m. and released two hours later, at 1:36 a.m. on Saturday
This arrest comes almost exactly a year after Addison was cited for speed and reckless driving after being pulled over for driving 140 MPH on a Minnesota freeway in a Lamborghini Uus. According to ESPN’s Kevin Seifert, Addison agreed to plead guilty in 2023 to a misdemeanor speeding charge and pay $686 in fines and fees, while Ben Goessling of the Star Tribune reminds us that Addison faced no discipline from the league for the incident last year.
The Vikings released a statement on the matter, saying, “We are aware of Jordan Addison‘s arrest this past Friday and are currently gathering more information regarding the incident.”
There’s still a chance, based on the wording of the reports, that Addison was not, in fact, under the influence, as the initial reports allege. Reports that he was arrested “on suspicion of DUI” and his relatively quick release make it seem as though there is a current lack of evidence to definitively lay that charge on Addison. After getting off with a slap on the wrist a year ago, there’s a possibility Addison may walk away from this situation scot-free yet again.
If he does face league discipline this time around, in the form of a suspension, a position of strength for the Vikings will quickly turn into a point of concern. Without Addison, the next top returning receivers from the room behind Justin Jefferson would be Brandon Powell (29 receptions-324 yards-one touchdown in 2023) and Jalen Nailor (3-29-0). The team also rosters Trent Sherfield, but he has been inconsistent over his six-year career, totaling 30 catches for 417 yards and two touchdowns in a 2022 campaign with the Dolphins but only amassing 48 receptions for 513 yards and three touchdowns in his five other years in the NFL. Last season with the Bills, Sherfield had 11 catches for 86 yards and a touchdown.
Time will tell what the future holds for Addison and the Vikings. Even if Addison finds a way to avoid punishment for this incident, a troubling trend is emerging for the promising, young receiver.
Ak, with you being in law enforcement I’d appreciate to hear your take on this subject. Obviously he’s a repeat offender and deserves whatever punishment comes his way. I’m just curious what goes through an officer’s mind when you have grounds for suspicion that there’s a DUI?
Additionally, I’m going attempt to bring up a sensitive topic (being that the folks on pfr tend to be much more civilized and respectful as compared to the cesspit that mlbtr has turned into) can you provide any insight, from a law enforcement perspective as to how the attempted trump shooting happened. It would seem that all available resources would have been put to use to prevent such an incident from occurring.
He denied taking all tests.
Or took physical tests but no alcohol blow or blood test
If he refused the tests then his license is automatically suspended in every state I know of. If he was too drunk to take them I think they take you to the hospital and get a blood test. Not sure about that though.
I’m hesitant to offer an opinion on an incident in another state specifically, because I am unfamiliar with its laws. But I can go through some general stuff. This will be based on my experience in my state, which may differ from Minnesota and others. Warning-this will be quite long.
I will say that there’s no such thing as being arrested for the “suspicion” of having committed a crime. The suspicion (or reasonable suspicion, as it is more commonly known) is the reason to initiate the stop (or get out with the individual). That just means that a crime might have occurred and this person might know something. It’s enough to detain someone (that doesn’t mean handcuffs-it means just that they can’t leave. Any time you’ve been pulled over, for instance, you’ve been detained) for questioning. It’s a pretty low bar for proof, so it’s pretty obvious why it’s not enough to arrest. That’s where the “suspicion” of committing a crime comes in.
Probable cause is what you need for an arrest. If a person is being arrested, that person is being charged. Probable cause means that a crime occurred and that this person probably did it. If you have probable cause, you arrest. At this point, you’re past suspicion-you’re on to proof. The last major stage of proof is, of course, guilty beyond reasonable doubt, which of course means that the accused almost certainly did whatever crime he/she is accused of, and of course must be determined in court. So, Addison definitely was charged at the time of his arrest. Now, whether that charge is dropped later is another matter (the fact that he paid bond seems to suggest that it wasn’t), but when he was arrested, he had a charge. You can’t arrest without a charge. That’s a massive violation of civil rights, and really is not even possible if you think about it. If you take someone away without a charge, it cannot be a arrest by definition. It’d just be coercion. You need a charge for an arrest, and there’s no “suspicion of D.U.I.” charge that I know of, anywhere. It’s just “D.U.I.” and it’s what they will read to him in court.
Someone being released within a few hours after a D.U.I. offense would not likely happen where I work, because bond hearings are done at scheduled times, and must be held within 48 hours of an arrest, barring certain extenuating circumstances. Maybe in Minnesota they allow quicker bonds in crimes where the state is the victim (victims are normally entitled to the option of appearing at bond hearings, so they need to have time to be notified. Obviously the state is an entity, not an individual, and doesn’t need notice to appear at a bond hearing, so there’s no reason to delay it), they can be done more quickly.
Most states are pretty lenient with bonds these days. I can’t speak to how typical Addison’s bond was in terms of speed or expense. Everyone in my stare is entitled to bond, so to not grant it (which would be rare) the court must consider two things: danger to the community and flight risk. This is where the defendant’s attourney will say things like “ties to the community” a lot to emphasis that the client has things grounding him/her there, guaranteeing that he/she will show for court later and not flee. Obviously, Addison doesn’t have this concern, and his crime is not a danger to the community (I know, a D.U.I. is dangerous as an offense, but this phrase really means future danger. It’s pretty much only for violent offenses).
All of that said, when I see a car that I think may have an impaired driver, the common signs are the ones you’ve probably heard. Failure to maintain lanes, swerving WITHIN a lane, delayed reactions to light changes, difficulty starting or stopping are all common. Driving with lights off at night is also a pretty common one. After driving around all day for a few years, you start to pick up on what’s unusual for your local traffic pattern as well. You observe, and the more clues you see, the better. D.U.I.s are typically crimes with many specific citable factors with which to argue in a court setting, so being to articulate your reasons for doing what you did are important (ESPECIALLY in my state). D.U.I.s also vary GREATLY from state to state, so the tactics and what’s illegal versus what isn’t are quite different.
In any case, you’ll want to make contact with the driver (hopefully he/she stops) quickly. A lot of the time, if they’re stupid drunk, the hard part is getting them to simply turn off the car and put it in park. Most if the time, though, people aren’t that messed up. Slurred speech and the inability to follow a train if thought, conversation, or commands are good giveaways that might betray an otherwise normal looking person. Drunk people have diminished motor skills. As any of us know, it’s easier to stumble and harder to walk after drinking a lot. Well, that progression starts small. Walking is a gross motor skill that involves large muscle movements in an imprecise manner. Fine motor skills, like the precise use of fingers, will be affected first and may not even be noticeable to the person. Things like thumbing through a wallet for an I.D. and then pulling it out from behind another card suddenly take longer and become much difficult when a body has had too much to drink. Reading, staying on task, and reaction times also degrade as alcohol dominates the bloodstream, and this manifests in behaviors, like seeming a second slow in reacting to stimulus (say, a light) or looking at someone to answer a question.
Let’s also consider “too much to drink”. In most states, it isn’t illegal to drink and drive. It’s illegal to be too affected by alcohol (or drugs) to drive safely. That’s why there are legal limits in every state (nearly all are 0.08 these days). The amount that it takes to get someone to that point (in my state, that point is what’s referred to as “materially impaired” by drugs or alcohol) varies from person to person. That’s why the legal limits are different-it’s an absolute measure of blood alcohol concentration (B.A.C.). Someone doesn’t drink much but who has a B.A.C. of .12 is going to likely appear much drunker than someone who drinks all the time with the same. A heavy drinker’s .25 might look like a lightweight’s .08. The person is still affected, it’s just harder to detect. It’s not that the person’s experience somehow makes the B.A.C. lower, either. Two people of the same gender, height, body composition, and race (Asians, most notably, typically have less alcohol dehydrogenase, the enzyme that breaks down alcohol, and as such process it slower usually than most others) drinking the same drinks should have similar B.A.C.s regardless of drinking history. However, it is going to be more obvious in a light drinker than a heavy drinker.
The best test to determine impairment is the Horizontal Nystagmus test, which is the “follow the pen” test. Nystagmus is subtle pupil twitching that occurs commonly with high levels of alcohol intoxication, as well as certain medical conditions. It’s not enough on its own to prove D.U.I., however, as the officer still needs to prove the criminal activity along with impairment. Rights in refusing tests and the consequences of refusing vary widely from state to state. Breath tests or blood tests are how to measure B.A.C., but remember that B.A.C. is just a measure of how much alcohol a person has in his/her system. It’s NOT a measure of how much he/she is affected by it, like we talked about earlier. That’s why states passed these absolute B.A.C. laws, where they say that having a B.A.C. over a certain level is basically prima facia evidence that you are impaired (basically, prima facia means just accepted as fact). So, they say if you’re over .08, you’re too drunk to drive, just by default.
How this matters on the road is that most of the time, you don’t really need a blood or breath measurement (or even field sobriety tests, the utility of which varies from state to state) to be charged with D.U.I. most of the time. Now, it makes the case much harder or possibly impossible to try, but in most states, you just need to demonstrate that the person was too impaired to drive. Unsteady gait, not focusing on conversation, and loss of fine motor skills are good evidence of impairment, but you also need evidence of not driving legally, which was your traffic offense that led to the stop. As in every case, the level of cooperation on the part of the suspect can affect the outcome here. When it cones to court, a cooperative person-especially a remorseful person-is a lot more likely to get the reckless driving plea. More impactful for me is the history. Not only will past D.U.I. convictions (not charges-convictions) within a ten year period enhance your charge in my state, it also will affect the officer’s willingness to work with the defendant. A driving history will usually tell when someone worked a deal to avoid a D.U.I. conviction, like an alcohol driver’s school or intervention program for drunk drivers. Even though it doesn’t enhance the actual charge, for me it makes any potential reckless deal unlikely.
So that’s a lot to read. But it really varies from state to state. The thing that’s consistent is that you need to start building a case as soon as it starts. It’s pretty much impossible for an impaired driver to disguise their impairment. The pertinent part is proving it. Attention to detail and adherence to court guidelines is how it’s done. Defense attorneys do tend to act as if D.U.I.s are tough to beat them at because of minute details. Don’t get me wrong, they’re relevant, but in my state, I’ve found that it’s simple what to do at the dnd of the day if you just understand your statute.
Misdemeanor speeding and less than $700 in fines for driving 140? I know that the D.U.I. is the headline, and Addison doesn’t seem like a bad guy, but hot damn.
I’m not going to attempt a word count here. I’m just thankful BIB didn’t ask you to explain the meaning of life…lol.
I didn’t cover that? Damn
Wow I really appreciate the time you put invested to type all that information out. Definitely enlightening.
Now what IS the meaning of life….
Thanks AK. Knowledgeable. Isn’t it also true that if he was passed out in the car and couldn’t even function to the point of taking the tests that you have to take them to the hospital to determine if they’re not going to die from alcohol poisoning? I don’t think you can legally take someone and just toss them in a cell anymore until they sober up, Like the old days. They would have to do a blood test to determine the level of intoxication before they tossed him in a cell right? I was a Truck Driver for over 45 years and that’s the way I remember it anyway in the rules of the road. I still say if he was everything the article says he was, he’s lucky he’s not dead. Lot of details omitted. Was the car running, was he unconscious, Were his lights on? Lots of factors omitted.
I don’t know how it is in other states, but our jail will not take them usually if he/she is so inebriated that he/she cannot stay conscious and appears to be in danger health-wise. It’s not a rule, though-plenty of people pass out during the ride or after arriving. Simply sleeping isn’t what will keep him/her out. If you wake up a passed out driver, and they seem fine (just drunk), there’s no requirement for a hospital trip. There are time limits for certain things (I allude to them below) and a hospital could tie up the parties for six hours (I’ve had to for longer). Our jail also is…well, let’s say that they have plenty to work on. I can’t say how they compare to other detention centers in other counties (in our particular one, the jail is run by the Corrections Department, but in some the Sheriff’s Department runs the jail instead, which can be better sometimes since the employees in that case are all Sheriff’s Department employees who tend to all be certified, whereas the facility that we use just hires simple security guards for last couple of years to do most of the staffing due to employment issues).
Blood tests in my state require a warrant. Breath tests must be conducted within two hours of an arrest, blood tests within three. A warrant is not required for a blood test if one or more of the following three factors are present: great bodily injury (legally defined as an injury that results in death, or loss of a body part or bodily function), unconscious or death of the subject (only practical way to test B.A.C. without consciousness is blood), or if the subject has a mouth injury that prevents him/her from doing a breath test. Note, these requirements are specific to my state. I’m sure that others have similar requirements, but they likely differ. Generally, for blood, you need a warrant. And waking up a judge at 0300 to sign one means that you probably should put together a good affidavit first.
No, the old “sober up” really isn’t a thing anymore. Groups like M.A.D.D. lobbied hard for increases in D.U.I. penalties (it’s very common today for them to send letters to officers or departments for D.U.I.s that end up being pled down to a lesser charge, like reckless driving), and they monitor a lot if current instances. Drivers now should expect, at the very minimum, to spend a night in jail and face formal charges for a D.U.I. Now, whether that charge gets pled to something lesser due to their cooperation or a deal or something is another matter, but at least for that night, they should expect to go through the criminal process.
I know how to help him get his head on straight: have somebody in the organization introduce him to former Arizona Cardinals 2012 first round pick, wide receiver Michael Floyd. That guy had all the talent in the world, but he had a DUI in college, and then an extreme DUI late in his fifth year, his contract year, de-railed it all. He played two more years with different teams on one year deals, and that was the end of his career.
Didn’t the same thing happen to the WR for the Lions? Was his name Rogers, I wanna say? And we don’t even have to go Josh Gordon do we? These guys are rich, And they can’t call a cab or get a hotel room and sleep it off? It’s not exactly intelligent behavior.
Yes, Charles Rogers the #3 overall pick. He’s dead now….
If the Number 1 lane is the lane I think it is( Fast Lane), He’s lucky he’s not dead. I assume passed out means the car was parked and in the drivers seat so he would have been a sitting duck. All it would of taken was a semi driver not paying attention and he would have been vaporized. He might want to think about that while he’s taking cabs everywhere. Unless he’s stupid enough to drive while it’s suspended. Just watch On Patrol Live to see how many morons are out there. Lucky man. Although he probably doesn’t think so right now.
Lanes are usually numbered from the median (which is lane zero) going out; higher number is further from center. They are labeled in the direction of travel. In a case where you have a four lane road going north/south, you have two northbound lanes on one side, and two southbound lanes on the other. The northbound number two lane is the right hand lane two lanes out from the median that traffic uses to go north.
So, in a four lane road, the right hand outside lane is going to be number two, plus whatever direction. The inside lane will be the number one. You just number it out from the median or center line and add a direction. The lanes don’t have to be even mirrors on each side, of course. Roads can have three lanes on d side and two on the other, and are numbered the same way.
I have trouble getting my sympathy meter to spike for guys who have to trade down from a Lamborghini to a Rolls Royce.
Hahahaha, Stand up citizen.
Relative to the risk it poses, damage it causes, etc. we treat DUI so very lightly because it’s the one crime people with good jobs commit as much as the people we are OK with putting in jail.
So, give him his gentle slap on the wrist for selfishly risking an untold number of lives.
Highly irresponsible, obviously, and this is going to set the Vikings back considerably on offense.
Beyond the sheer lack of depth at wideout touched on in the article, Hockenson is making his way back from a nasty knee injury. The Vikes presumably drafted McCarthy in hopes that the talent around him would be sufficiently high to compensate for his deficiencies. Now, with Jefferson being the only sure thing to begin the season, Minnesota might be best starting with Darnold, so as to avoid destroying McCarthy’s confidence. Perhaps this is an overreaction, but it’s at least worth considering
Man, I’d love to drive 140 and only have to pay $700 bucks for it… As a Vikings fan I was pretty stunned at how lax that was. If this truly was a DUI I hope he does not get of easily. Here in NM (better climate than MN lol) we treat DUIs far too loosely (I’m sure other states do, too) and it drives me insane (pun intended). We have repeat DUI and reckless driving offenders continue to get a slap on the wrist until they kill someone.
As a side note, we needed to sign Hunter Renfroe even before this.