andy_s:
I know someone who was over the limit after a few at the pub, decided to sleep in their car till the morning and coppers turned up and arrested him for drunk in charge even though he’d given the keys to the landlord of the pub. He got banned. I’d say it’s a lot down to how much you pay a lawyer and how good they are.
I’m not saying this didn’t happen but I’d be amazed if your mate got banned on the above facts alone. The fact he has given his keys to the landlord takes away being in charge of the vehicle. Unless, at the time he was pushing it down the street while ■■■■■■■
andy_s:
I know someone who was over the limit after a few at the pub, decided to sleep in their car till the morning and coppers turned up and arrested him for drunk in charge even though he’d given the keys to the landlord of the pub. He got banned. I’d say it’s a lot down to how much you pay a lawyer and how good they are.
■■■■■■■■. If you don’t have the ignition key, you can not drive. That would be thrown out of court.
goshow:
For a successful prosecution for being drunk in charge the CPS have to be satisfied that you intended to drive whilst over the prescribed limit. The fact that you are on an 11 or 9 hour rest period negates any intent.
This guy got done for failing to provide, which is an absolute offence.
I agree entirely.
Apart from refusal to provide, no case to answer, any good defence brief would have no problem with this imo.
Wtf has it to do with those nosey ■■■■■ coppers how he spends his time off, as long as he was doing nothing illegal…as he wasn’t.
andy_s:
I know someone who was over the limit after a few at the pub, decided to sleep in their car till the morning and coppers turned up and arrested him for drunk in charge even though he’d given the keys to the landlord of the pub. He got banned. I’d say it’s a lot down to how much you pay a lawyer and how good they are.
■■■■■■■■. If you don’t have the ignition key, you can not drive. That would be thrown out of court.
That was my exact same initial thought mate, but I know it happened.
andy_s:
I know someone who was over the limit after a few at the pub, decided to sleep in their car till the morning and coppers turned up and arrested him for drunk in charge even though he’d given the keys to the landlord of the pub. He got banned. I’d say it’s a lot down to how much you pay a lawyer and how good they are.
■■■■■■■■. If you don’t have the ignition key, you can not drive. That would be thrown out of court.
That was my exact same initial thought mate, but I know it happened.
Then he must have failed first the attitude test, and subsequently failed to get a half decent lawyer. . Is he a gobby so and so, who likes to argue?
goshow:
For a successful prosecution for being drunk in charge the CPS have to be satisfied that you intended to drive whilst over the prescribed limit. The fact that you are on an 11 or 9 hour rest period negates any intent.
This guy got done for failing / refusing to provide, which is an absolute offence.
Depends on how much you drink…
4 500ml cans of normal strength lager will take roughly 9 hrs from when you stop drinking to be out of your system…so if you’re on a 9 and get caught 2 hrs in…
Makes me laugh the amount of drivers that smash back the booze each night then proudly call themselves professionals. …
Not in this case- I am pretty sure that if you drunk enough to still be over the limit 45 hours later (which was the break the driver was on) then you would probably be dead and pickled
Failure to provide a specimen is an absolute offence and one where the magistrate has very little leeway in sentencing- that’s what this guy got done for
If he had provided a specimen, even if he was over the limit current case law says if he can show there was no intention to drive he has not committed an offence.
Casper68:
Most police will just give advise and go on the attitude of the driver. If arrested though it’s down to the defence to prove there was no intention to drive not the police.
Guilty 'til proven innocent? The start of a slippery slope my friend.
All seems pretty bloody harsh to me. If the police were so concerned about it, why didn’t they simply keep an eye on him. Oh hang on, there probably ain’t enough coppers to have a drive past on their rounds…
Casper68:
Most police will just give advise and go on the attitude of the driver. If arrested though it’s down to the defence to prove there was no intention to drive not the police.
Guilty 'til proven innocent? The start of a slippery slope my friend.
But the way it is.
Below is a section taken from a law website
What if I was in my car on my driveway having a cigarette trying to keep warm and I had no intention of driving?
There is no need for the prosecution to prove that a person was likely to drive whilst unfit or over the limit. It is for the Defendant to prove that there is no prospect of using the vehicle.
Casper68:
Most police will just give advise and go on the attitude of the driver. If arrested though it’s down to the defence to prove there was no intention to drive not the police.
Guilty 'til proven innocent? The start of a slippery slope my friend.
But the way it is.
Below is a section taken from a law website
What if I was in my car on my driveway having a cigarette trying to keep warm and I had no intention of driving?
There is no need for the prosecution to prove that a person was likely to drive whilst unfit or over the limit. It is for the Defendant to prove that there is no prospect of using the vehicle.
This is true but there’ll be a long list of investigative procedures before it came to a trial. I think I’m right in saying that the police still have to liaise with the CPS regarding a charging decision. Unless the CPS are 95%+ happy that they’ll get a conviction in court they won’t bother charging.
Also worth remembering that police do not prosecute people. They purely act as investigators for the CPS.
peterm:
All seems pretty bloody harsh to me. If the police were so concerned about it, why didn’t they simply keep an eye on him. Oh hang on, there probably ain’t enough coppers to have a drive past on their rounds…
It’s all about risk management and covering arses these days. The police could have sat there for hours waiting to see what the drivers intentions were but if he’d driven off and mowed someone down then you can imagine the front page of every national paper.
There’ll be a lot more to the OP. The old bill won’t have just rocked up and nicked him. Likewise at the station, there is a drink drive procedure to go through and the driver would have been asked numerous times to provide a sample and also warned numerous times about failing / refusing to provide.
99% of the time it’s always best to comply with the police, especially if you haven’t done anything wrong. Act like a ■■■■■ get treated like a ■■■■■
I heard from a friend of a friend who’s a copper that common sense will prevail regarding trampers who’ve had a few, if the delivery notes show that you will start driving before you sober up then you would probably get done, if not then you should be ok.
Not sure how this would go abroad though, I’ve often been weekended in an autohof etc and seen police cars driving through the lorry park while I’ve been sipping on a bottle and wondered ‘what if’.
peterm:
All seems pretty bloody harsh to me. If the police were so concerned about it, why didn’t they simply keep an eye on him. Oh hang on, there probably ain’t enough coppers to have a drive past on their rounds…
It’s all about risk management and covering arses these days. The police could have sat there for hours waiting to see what the drivers intentions were but if he’d driven off and mowed someone down then you can imagine the front page of every national paper.
There’ll be a lot more to the OP. The old bill won’t have just rocked up and nicked him. Likewise at the station, there is a drink drive procedure to go through and the driver would have been asked numerous times to provide a sample and also warned numerous times about failing / refusing to provide.
99% of the time it’s always best to comply with the police, especially if you haven’t done anything wrong. Act like a [zb], get treated like a [zb]!
Totally agree regarding attitude. Someone mentioned earlier that there might have been a language barrier. I don’t agree with that because not only would the police have tried to get the message across that he had to blow in to the bag/machine, but I’m pretty sure they’d have got an interpreter in. So on second thoughts, I’d say he was probably stroppy and got his just desserts.
That could be the reason neither could understand each other 