Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Twenty Years On

Twenty years ago or so I dealt with a memorably high-level drink driver. The young woman had burst two tyres by hitting the kerb, and a member of the public called the police. She was arrested at 9.30 am, and on arrival at the police station she blew 171 in breath, as against the limit of 35. I don't know what happened to her as we adjourned the case for reports and a different bench dealt with her.

Last week, in a grim coincidence, we saw a man who had blown 171. In his case, members of the public had called police, who stopped him to find a nearly empty bottle of vodka on the passenger seat. This level clearly reaches the custody threshold so we adjourned for 'all options' reports, imposing an interim ban as we did so.


15 comments:

  1. 1. Was the conviction on breath ? If so, it seems unusual that a blood or urine sample was not taken which would then have formed the principal evidence (or has that now changed ?).
    2. The first case's levels suggest morning drinking and hence physical addiction. There are nonetheless quite a few morning convictions where no alcohol has been taken after midnight. This is because ethanol is cleared in a way that is quite different from the large majority of other drugs, and this difference works to the disadvantage of the impaired driver (technically, ethanol undergoes 'zero order' rather than 'first order' drug clearance).

    ReplyDelete
  2. 171 at 9.30am? I wonder when her last drink was.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When they blow that high you have to think that the machine might be broken! Could kill a non-drinker like me!.
    My highest ever was about 135 which was an A+E doctor (female) drinking through extreme pressure of work.Did feel sorry for her a bit but she might have killed someone though.
    Jaded

    ReplyDelete
  4. The roadside test is a screening test and classed as pass or fail, although newer meters will give a reading that is not currently used as evidence. The evidential breath machine is in the police station. If the suspect blows under 50 they are entitled to give blood or urine, but cannot choose which.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Too much blood in the alcohol stream !! I remember attending a lecture at Loughborough University in the late 60s given by Professor Camps, a well-known forensic pathologist who told us about a driver Essex police has arrested who had an almost impossibly high level of alcohol in his blood. The police had doubted their equipment. The level was correct, and needless to say the man was an alcoholic. I can't remember what the court judgment was, but this was in the early days of breath testing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. My record is 195, also a female. Got away with an SSO and 44 months disqualification - and I heard later that she had been stopped driving drunk and disqualified and the inevitable followed.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This level clearly reaches the custody threshold.

    Please could you tell me what is the lowest reading when you would start considering custody.
    John Gibson

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Guidelines (find them via Google, they are a public document) say that for readings of 120-150 and above the starting point (for a first offender pleading not guilty) is 12 weeks custody, and the range is a high level community order to 26 weeks' custody, plus a ban of 29 to 36 months. The court has discretion to vary these so long as reasons are given. Aggravating features such as an accident, carrying paying passengers, and so on could move the custody point downwards.

      Delete
    2. Thank You.
      John Gibson

      Delete
  8. What happens when the driver is under the limit, but whose driving is impaired?

    I very rarely drink so even a lager shandy means my judgement and physical reactions would be compromised, but I would still be driving legally - being below the magic figure for a conviction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Driving while unfit is a separate offence, but is rarely charged because of the difficulty of proving the case.

      Delete
  9. Many years ago I sat on an unusual case of drunk in charge. The circumstances were these. At about 8.30am, mothers taking children to school saw a man in the drivers seat of a parked car drinking from a vodka bottle - he appeared very drunk. The police were informed and arrived to find the man out like a light. He was taken to hospital, under arrest, and a blood test taken which found a very high reading (I cannot remember how high) - there was also evidence of some form of sedative in the blood. Eventually he appeared in court. He pleaded not guilty to the charge. He had no previous for any kind of offence whatsoever. His story was that two days previously he had lost his job, on informing his wife of this fact she had promptly left him. After brooding on this misfortune for 24 hours or so, he had decided to end it all by taking an overdose of drink and drugs. He had driven to a quiet road, and set about the drink and drugs intake. However, not being used to either drink or drugs, he passed out before he could complete his task. He had never had any intention to drive after the intake because he anticipated being dead and therefore claimed he was not in charge. No keys were found but he could not remember what he had done with them as he had obviously driven to the location. Eventually, after extensive discussion we found him guilty (I can say at this distance of time 2:1) and requested reports. I never did find out what the sentencing bench gave him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Having no intention to drive is of course a defence to Drunk in Charge.

      Delete
    2. Yes - and lack of intent is often proved by lack of keys. In this case, he had had the keys at some point. Had he concealed them on his person or in the car? Had he deliberately disposed of them prior to his binge? Had they been lost on his journey via the hospital to the cell? These and many other issues (some of which I have not mentioned above), were the subject of lengthy discussions in the retiring room. Why did he not make his attempt at home? (His answer being he wanted to be found by a stranger). There were many other such questions to be wrestled with. This case was 20 years ago, but it has always stuck in my memory as one of the most difficult and intriguing cases I ever had to deal with.

      Delete
  10. I have a motorhome....and enjoy a few bevvies once parked up for the night in a suitable place, usually a campsite. Drunk in charge? Probably not as no intention to drive - but I do worry a little.

    ReplyDelete

Posts are pre-moderated. Please bear with us if this takes a little time, but the number of bores and obsessives was getting out of hand, as were the fake comments advertising rubbish.