FSTs only exist to give cops "objective" data points to buttress their conclusion that you are impaired; there is no such thing as "passing," you cannot improve your case by participating.
Correct. I've literally never seen a bodycam footage video where someone performed SFTs and proved their sobriety and I've never heard a criminal defense attorney recommend you take them if you're sober (or drunk, for that matter). The moment they ask, politely decline, then immediately volunteer a breath sample on-site and make it clear you will also provide a blood sample voluntarily at the hospital (at their expense, and none of this "oh the paramedics can do the draw at roadside" bullshit either) if they want one. That way the "implied consent" laws can't be invoked to immediately steal your license. Make sure to state it clearly and aim it at their bodycam, so they can't claim later you "weren't cooperative" or "refused to provide samples."
That whole "implied consent" thing they're doing nationwide still doesn't sit well with me anyway, especially when they tell people things like "oh yeah and you're not entitled to a lawyer at this time, also if you refuse to give us evidence to use against you at trial, we can immediately punish you for it anyway, and if you
do agree to give us evidence to use against you at trial and it turns out you
are drunk, that consent magically counts even though you were drunk at the time you gave it
and even though that literally isn't legal in any other context, including drunken sexual encounters, etc." I guess their legal wizards never heard of "
informed consent."
