Read variations on this story a few times and it usually involves there being a mixup or whatever and someone “drinks” to “excess” but its not actually spiked or alcohol or anything psychotropic and they end up making an ass out of themselves and everybody else knew they didnt actually drink.
Are they faking or did they experience an honest placebo experience or something else crazy?
Something something cultural expectations
Yeap, that’s how the placebo effect works. Your brain is really good at making things happen based on expectations. Granted, they could just be an asshole and thought alcohol/drugs would give them an excuse, but my understanding is that yeah, that’s the placebo effect at work.
Could they “drunk drive” if they got in their car afterwards? Could thry be charged for being impaired while not actually under the influence of anything?
It would just be reckless driving/endangerment at that point
Can they give identical penalties for it such that they were punished in the exact same way. Its an interesting notion
I’m not a lawyer but I have been through the criminal system a couple of times.
They might face SOME of the same consequences if they damaged property or hit someone but they wouldn’t get a DUI.
Which is way worse
Like all legal questions, depends on the location but to answer the question generally, yes they could be charged with DUI if they fail a field sobriety test. Which doesn’t always include / require a test for BAC specifically.
But if they drug tested them and there was literally no trace of substances nor alcohol and yet they’re driving while “smashed”. Law is very interesting, reminds me of the auto-brewer guy
Some states lump it all into ‘driving while impaired’ which can also cover stuff like falling asleep while driving, so I’d assume it’d apply in your hypothetical.