But wouldn't that just depend on the dose, and whether someone has used before? I've never used drugs so I have no idea how fast they kick in. Maybe the cop just had a low tolerance and a bad reaction? I mean, I'm a super light-weight when it comes to alcohol and I tend to fall asleep after even one wine, so it doesn't sound that odd to me. But I could be wrong.
To be fair, everyone's metabolism is different, and I can't with any surety say "No way he felt a narcotic in five minutes."
But I know drugs, known a great many people who did a great many of them (as did I, back in the day) and I have never in my life (and I'm 51 now) seen a pill begin to work in less than 15 minutes....(Let alone a part of one; if it's dissolved, he didn't get the whole pill; he took the remainder of the drink for testing) -- never in my life heard of one kicking in less than 10 or 15 minutes. For me, most take about 25-30, although some with longer half-lives (methadone) take 45 minutes for me to feel, and about two hours to "peak" as far as nodding goes (when I think of the nods, I think methadone or a benzo like Xanax, Ativan, Klonopin, Valium.) I'm sure hydrocodone or any other lesser-potent painkillers would give some people a nod, but that quickly? Never heard of anything like that in my life.
Say he put -- okay say he went for it, and put a Roxicet (Oxycodone 30mg) into that lemonade. I doubt very seriously he'd choose that, as it's expensive; not likely easily affordable by a sandwich maker. But say he splurged. If that 30mg pill (they're tiny, by the way) if it dissolved in, say 16oz of lemonade -- how much is that cop going to even GET before reaching the red light?
Sure, he could've drained that lemonade so fast.... every drop, before leaving the parking lot. It's possible.
But that's not what happened. He himself said it "tasted funny" (not "bitter" like a Roxicet or -- god so many other narcotics, but okay, "funny") so they took the drink in to be tested. That tells us he hadn't drank it all or they'd have nothing to test. And by his account, it didn't taste right, and no cop is going to finish something that "doesn't taste right" -- they know to look out for that kind of thing.
So I'm saying he may have gotten a couple, three good gulps? And I'm being kind here -- if I were a cop and my drink tasted weird? No way am I touching that for three big gulps, that's unlikely as hell, but again, granting all the leeway I can. How much of that tablet could he have swallowed and digested anyway? If he drank even 1/10 of the drink, it's reasonable to assume he got 1/10 of the pill, which even if it was a fancy Roxicet, that's just 3 milligrams of oxycodone; that's not gonna do jack. It's not. It's not gonna render him unable to get to the brake pedal, nod out, become disoriented, unable to focus.... Twice that -- 6 mgs; not gonna do that, either.
Again, I do see your point, and it's a valid one. There is no chance I can be certain that whatever was wrong with that cop wasn't the fault of the Subway guy. That somehow, the drink-maker was able to concoct something that would absolutely render the cop unable to so much as stop at the "nearby" red light or speak coherently or stay awake. I honestly have no idea what that would be... but I can't say it's impossible; I learned right here on the Demon that nothing's impossible!
For me, though, there are too many "Is that reasonable?" "No, it's not" - type questions here. I'm bothered they brought up the meth because (1) It couldn't have been drank, no way, and (2) The tiniest bit of meth won't exactly make you spun, but you're not gonna be doing any nodding, either, and (3) Cops do kind of overdo the whole meth thing -- dude got arrested and detained last week because a cop thought he saw a baggie of meth in his front seat. Turned out to be glaze from a Krispy Kreme Donut. What I'm saying is: Meth is a horrible drug, and everyone knows it. Crying "meth" is going to make people more sympathetic to his plight -- ("ZOMG they gave him meth!") Haha -- oh come ON! Must've been some different kind of meth to make him NOD OFF, I've seen some meth in my day but never ever EVER seen anyone nod off on it. I think that was an absolute lie, and backed up by whoever "tested" the drink -- If what this article says is really what was reported? They're lying.
I'm sure there are drops or something to utilize THC when needed in that form (Actually I'm NOT "sure" -- I just don't know; never heard of it.) But so the cop smokes a little weed off duty, very seldom, once every two weeks, say. It stays in the system for up to 30 days depending on fat cells and metabolism, so he was gonna need to explain why he came up positive for THC when tested. "It was the Subway guy! He slipped some THC in my lemonade!" Sorry but no, that's not how pot works. There's so much wrong with the whole THC story that I firmly believe he was covering for the inevitable positive drug test he was about to undergo. So what if he couldn't explain how the kid did it, it sure beat being a "cop under the influence of drugs" rap. (It wouldn't work that way for me or for you, but for a cop? Pfffft, a cake walk.)
Again, the narcotics weren't found when they originally tested the drink. I believe they were "found" when it was obvious that his behavior was not caused by THC or meth. Better add something that'll cover confusion, nodding out, inability to focus, inability to stop your car, for God's sake.... what category covers every drug capable of that? "Narcotics." I'm surprised they didn't try to make it more believable (take off the meth, put in opiates, etc.) But to me, it's very clear what happened here, and it's the same thing that happens in small rooms in police stations all over the country: understandings are reached, problems are solved, and life goes on. The Subway guy? Collateral damage. He's not the first nor will he be the last.
There are exceptions to every rule, and I understand that and absolutely believe there are brave, honest, good men out there with all the valor, dedication, and determination to serve his community by being an officer of the law. Who withholds that law at all costs, and who makes sound decisions regarding his state of mind both on and off the job. I'm sure of it. But I'm equally sure that there are cops who couldn't care less what happens to Subway guy. Their egos have overtaken their better judgement, and the results are pretty unfortunate (not for them, for non-cops.) Not politically correct to say I'm sure, but no one can convince me otherwise, I know too many of them.
Thanks for replying; I wish I had your optimism (or at least hope?) that an innocent kid isn't sitting in jail, the reality of his (hopeless, essentially) situation sinking in; charges of assaulting an officer looming over him..... all because he poured the guy a lemonade. I hope that's not what's happening, I cannot imagine the fear, the confusion, and the clouds clearing and the realization that you're absolutely, severely, and completely... fucked. Ask Michael Crowe, ask Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, Jessie Misskelley, Timothy Masters... they could tell you how that feels. I cannot imagine it, but I know it's gotta be a waking nightmare.
There are so many red flags here it's like a parade. The courts usually side with LE, the judges do, too -- what chance does he have if they're wrong? I want him to get a fair chance, that's all. I want them to prove he did anything... ANYTHING...wrong that day. They don't have to blame the cop, but the burden of proof is theirs, and I hope they're made to carry that burden without favoritism (as IF!) But I predict: (a) He's found guilty, and (b) They didn't prove shit.
And the band will play on.