Solicitor recommendation....drunk and in charge of a vechicle.

[purplea4T]

I've heard of it happening to people when the car was miles away.

Really?

 

[Boydie]

Jeepers this has escalated - @Gaz has nailed it all pretty much in the head, the police are taking every precaution to potentially prevent a crime/incident/accident so I do not see the issue here when people are being charged with DIC.

 

[KrisSRT]

Our tanker drivers have a breathalyzer fitted in the lorry to check for alcohol consumption, if they don’t pass the engine doesn’t start. I’m surprised they aren’t fitted in cars yet.

 

[davey-dimples]

Really?

Yep - Could well be an urban myth but from what has been discussed in this thread how are the arresting officers to know the location the vehicle?

They arent going to go searching the country on the word of a drunkard

 

[davey-dimples]

Jeepers this has escalated - @Gaz has nailed it all pretty much in the head, the police are taking every precaution to potentially prevent a crime/incident/accident so I do not see the issue here when people are being charged with DIC.

Like the sequel to How to remove a wheel nut

 

[purplea4T]

Our tanker drivers have a breathalyzer fitted in the lorry to check for alcohol consumption, if they don’t pass the engine doesn’t start. I’m surprised they aren’t fitted in cars yet.

That’s a step too far, it’s up to the company and their procedures and contract of employment. How often are these devices recalibrated to ensure correct readings?

 

[purplea4T]

Yep - Could well be an urban myth but from what has been discussed in this thread how are the arresting officers to know the location the vehicle?

They arent going to go searching the country on the word of a drunkard

It is an urban myth - not one that I’ve heard but the police haven’t the time to go hunting the country. The only time they do is for a proper drunk driver who has left the car at the scene of an accident then made off. The wording of the legislation is very clear what powers the police have in relation to the offence.

 

[KrisSRT]

That’s a step too far, it’s up to the company and their procedures and contract of employment. How often are these devices recalibrated to ensure correct readings?

Don’t know to much about it to be honest, I just know if the lorry has been off for more than 30mins the test needs to be done again. Not sure about calibration etc

 

[chris_b]

That’s a step too far, it’s up to the company and their procedures and contract of employment. How often are these devices recalibrated to ensure correct readings?

That system has actually been around for quite a few years now. Like everything they do require a degree of calibration but not much actually.

This company was originally set up by a friend of mine
Alcolock GB | The Alcohol Activated Vehicle Immobiliser

 

[purplea4T]

That system has actually been around for quite a few years now. Like everything they do require a degree of calibration but not much actually.

This company was originally set up by a friend of mine
Alcolock GB | The Alcohol Activated Vehicle Immobiliser

I’ve seen it in action in the US but it tends to be for court mandated problem cases! I suppose it’s a fail safe for transport operators but equally hard to enforce if you’ve a “helper”!

 

[chris_b]

I’ve seen it in action in the US but it tends to be for court mandated problem cases! I suppose it’s a fail safe for transport operators but equally hard to enforce if you’ve a “helper”!

That’s where the in cab cctv comes in lol

 

[Captain Starlet]

I think it's more than a presumption.

If you cannot buy a defence in court....you're screwed because it costs the police/CPS nothing to have lots of solicitors etc to fight against you and make allegations, but if you're a working person, it costs you a pretty penny to try and prove your innocence.
That has to be wrong on every level of justice. Justice and a fair trail should not have to be bought or come down to money, yet the entire legal/court system is built around that very thing, unless you're a DLA freeloader type.

Better off rich and guilty than poor and innocent.

 

[Apis]

Yep - Could well be an urban myth but from what has been discussed in this thread how are the arresting officers to know the location the vehicle?

They arent going to go searching the country on the word of a drunkard

A few kebabs and sit in an unmarked car with the lights off in Portrush, watching people stagger from the from the pub to the car park. Easy pickings.
EDIT: sorry slightly wrong topic here.

 

[stevieturbo]

Our tanker drivers have a breathalyzer fitted in the lorry to check for alcohol consumption, if they don’t pass the engine doesn’t start. I’m surprised they aren’t fitted in cars yet.

If there was a blanket check on any person in work having alcohol in their systems.....lots of people would be sacked. I've worked alongside plenty who do drive for a living, and the reek of some of them in the mornings is wild...and sometimes even still the afternoon !
And nevermind driving, most politicians are probably blocked most of the time with the **** they get up to ! Any intoxication in the workplace, road or otherwise shouldnt be tolerated.

 

[rollinstone]

Yep - Could well be an urban myth but from what has been discussed in this thread how are the arresting officers to know the location the vehicle?

They arent going to go searching the country on the word of a drunkard

Definitely an urban myth. Are you in charge of a vehicle you have no access to just the keys? Same as if you walk past the car when you stumble into the house and the keys are in your pocket let's be honest what would the difference be between this and your keys being in the hall table 5ft away in the house your about to gain access to. It is common sense. I've parked the car in town had a painful got a taxi home and went in for it the next day and at no time did I commit an offence.

 

[mayweather]

Jeepers this has escalated - @Gaz has nailed it all pretty much in the head, the police are taking every precaution to potentially prevent a crime/incident/accident so I do not see the issue here when people are being charged with DIC.

I do see an issue.

You have to prove in court, beyond reasonable doubt, that someone has committed an offence to be found guilty.

In this case, guilt assumed based on a breathalyser, not his actual intent.

This man was sleeping on his side with a blanket wrapped around him, not passed out at the wheel.

They could have parked up and observed his intention and they may have done that but there certainly wasn’t an intention.

For many many people, being done for drink driving is a massive hinderence to their everyday live. For some people, for example those who drive for a living or are registered to a professional body, the charge can be life changing.

I’ve slept in a van over the drink drive limit countless times when away motorbike racing and fishing down south.

Whet happened to my mate feels like a points scoring exercise, it’s that time of year for it. Shower of *******s.

 

[purplea4T]

Driving, or being in charge of, a motor vehicle with alcohol concentration above prescribed limit
16.—(1) If a person—

drives or attempts to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, or

is in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or other public place,

after consuming so much alcohol that the proportion of it in his breath, blood or urine exceed the prescribed limit he is guilty of an offence.

(2) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under paragraph (1) to prove that at the time he is alleged to have committed the offence the circumstances were such that there was no likelihood of his driving the vehicle whilst the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine remained likely to exceed the prescribed limit.

(3) The court may, in determining whether there was such a likelihood as is mentioned in paragraph (2), disregard any injury to him and any damage to the vehicle.

Surely the Police and media have gave enough warnings over the past 3 weeks and into November (and previous years) that ANY form of vehicle and alcohol are going to be dealt with robustly.
Can you guarantee that when he woke up he wasn’t going to drive home? The Police can’t so it is dealt with as keeping someone who may in the next couple of hours turn into a drink driver off the road.

 

[Gavlar]

Alot of wannabe judges on this!

 

[purplea4T]

I do see an issue.

You have to prove in court, beyond reasonable doubt, that someone has committed an offence to be found guilty.

In this case, guilt assumed based on a breathalyser, not his actual intent.

This man was sleeping on his side with a blanket wrapped around him, not passed out at the wheel.

They could have parked up and observed his intention and they may have done that but there certainly wasn’t an intention.

For many many people, being done for drink driving is a massive hinderence to their everyday live. For some people, for example those who drive for a living or are registered to a professional body, the charge can be life changing.

I’ve slept in a van over the drink drive limit countless times when away motorbike racing and fishing down south.

Whet happened to my mate feels like a points scoring exercise, it’s that time of year for it. Shower of *******s.

Are you actually trying to defend people who drink drive there? **** them and their life changing situation, they chose it - an innocent pedestrian or other motorist that they may wipe out wouldn’t choose to be in that situation.

 

[mayweather]

Are you actually trying to defend people who drink drive there? **** them and their life changing situation, they chose it - an innocent pedestrian or other motorist that they may wipe out wouldn’t choose to be in that situation.

Are you actually trying to twist what I said?

You can't wipe out a pedestrian or another motorist when your sleeping on your side so you wouldn't have drink drive.

The police seen an easy target..

Surely if you are worried about the person intending to drive, sit back and watch if they intend to. I bet they did though and of course, it didn't happen.


Would be like catching someone with drugs in their pocket and charging them with intent to supply.......just in case they intended to do it.

 

[Rocko]

Surely if you are worried about the person intending to drive, sit back and watch if they intend to. I bet they did though and of course, it didn't happen.

Not think they have better things to be doing than waiting for your pissed mate try and drive drunk? They got him for DIC, he was.

 

[purplea4T]

“For many many people, being done for drink driving is a massive hinderence to their everyday live. For some people, for example those who drive for a living or are registered to a professional body, the charge can be life changing.”

So are you talking about drinking driving or drunk in charge? I’m not twisting anything. I’ve replied to what you’ve written.
Your friend has been arrested and processed for the offence of being in charge of a motor vehicle with alcohol over the prescribed limit. Police don’t need to show any intent - the wording of the Article 16 offence is pretty clear on that, and they haven’t all night to sit and watch a car. I’d say the way it has occurred it’s been reported rather than detected.

 

[purplea4T]

Not think they have better things to be doing than waiting for your pissed mate try and drive drunk? They got him for DIC, he was.

That doesn’t seem to be sinking in. It’s one of the most simple to understand pieces of road traffic legislation, in fact I posted it word for word. But the peelers shouldn’t have done it, let him sleep on....





Then drive home at 7, full as a gypsy woman’s diddy.

 

[rollinstone]

I'm genuinely not trying to be argumentative so please don't take it as such. The police did not see an easy target they did their job. It is not up to the police to decide sentences or to judge, they are paid to uphold the law and this includes detecting offences and gathering evidence.

As I have said before someone may go to sleep in their car and wake up several hours later cold and feeling better for a bit of sleep and then drive believing that they are under the limit. If the police officers ignore or turn a blind eye to someone sleeping in their car over the limit and that person then drives a few hours later it is a dereliction of their duty.

The offence is complete in this instance there is no need to prove the intent of the person that is in their car in charge of the vehicle whilst over the prescribed limit.

Don't get me wrong I have genuine sympathy for someone who gets caught in this situation and has absolutely no intention of driving until they are 100% sure they are under the limit and fit to drive.

I digress however I hope the asking member was able to get a contact for a solicitor who would be able to argue their defence in court appropriately.

 

[Boydie]

It’s clear cut

You are drunk
You are in a car
You have the keys on your persons or inside the vehicle

You are DIC

Simples.