Caught drink driving
Discussion
LuS1fer said:
Exceptional hardship....
Can't run exceptional hardship for excess alc.
Only way to avoid a ban is to argue Special Reasons, such as short distance driven (putting car on drive cos you live in a crap area), driving cos a copper told you to move the car, or in the case of a medical emergency.
I've been hacking around the local Magistrates' Court for the last ten years and I can't ever recall seeing Special Reasons succeed.
It just doesn't wash.
Pat H said:
LuS1fer said:
Exceptional hardship....
Can't run exceptional hardship for excess alc.
Only way to avoid a ban is to argue Special Reasons, such as short distance driven (putting car on drive cos you live in a crap area), driving cos a copper told you to move the car, or in the case of a medical emergency.
I've been hacking around the local Magistrates' Court for the last ten years and I can't ever recall seeing Special Reasons succeed.
It just doesn't wash.
Sorry, that was a bit of an elemental mistake. You're absolutely right of course. As for special reasons, they certainly allow them here and relatively frequently I must say but never for a reading of this magnitude (but then I've never seen anyone actually foolish enough to try to argue it on such a reading....). I've even seen the local DJ allowing special reasons on more than one occasion so I suppose a lot depends on your local court. The only thing I would say is the DJ's tend to exercise it only in genuine cases whereas some magistrates seem to be so gullible to what is obviously a pack of lies that it's painful to take part in.
a friend of mine took his car out after a heavy night out, he crashed and luckily no-one was hurt. He got 2.5 year ban and a £1000 fine i think. IIRC he was about 3-4 times over the limit...
he's the only person i know who's actually learnt his lesson, stopped drinking and everything because he was so ashamed!
he's the only person i know who's actually learnt his lesson, stopped drinking and everything because he was so ashamed!
Mr Whippy said:
Come on, 104? 3x over?
Why they can't standardise it to pints of Stella
How many pints of Stella is that equal to?
Dave
Why they can't standardise it to pints of Stella
How many pints of Stella is that equal to?
Dave
Limit is 35. 3 x 35 = 105
How many pints of Stella? A stellar amount. It can't be standardised in this way as we wouldn't be able to prosecute people who drank Heineken
A mate of mine who lives in Florida, got stopped for DUI and banned, but was still allowed to drive to and from work and to the shops?? think there was also a somthing about no alcohol to be in the car at all, even locked in the boot... must have been a bugger walking to the offy and back 
G
G
king hell. 
maxed said:
DUI at 104 
I reckon mags will give him 18 months with a reduction if he attends a drink course.
Better prepare him to lose his job
I reckon mags will give him 18 months with a reduction if he attends a drink course.
Better prepare him to lose his job
That's three times over. Probably two year ban plus, BIG fine and CSO. Job loss as he'll be uninsurab;w ehn he eventually gets his licence back.
As you say. Prick. He could very easily have killed someone, and then he'd be looking at five years.
Edited by Vesuvius 996 on Thursday 3rd August 10:33
It's not that difficult to forego a drink if you have the car with you. 3 times the limit could as little as 3 pints of strong lager so the guy probably wasn't reeling about drunk. Still a very stupid thing to do though, he better hope that his bosses think its worth the inconvenience of having a mechanic that can't drive.....
when i was nicked for DD i blew 53 and got i 20 months and a £650 fine.
one small benefit was that at the time insurance companies let you keep your no claims bonus for 2 years without having a car, so when i got back on the road i still had full no claims to make it a little cheaper.
one small benefit was that at the time insurance companies let you keep your no claims bonus for 2 years without having a car, so when i got back on the road i still had full no claims to make it a little cheaper.
boobles said:
This all goes back to a debate on another post about drink driving! Dont do it, its not big & its not clever! You just look a tosser for doing it.
This post is not about DRINK driving boobles, it's about DRUNK driving; there is a significant difference.
Someone who consumes this amount of alcohol knows they are drunk, there can be no question about that.
At this level the readings of alcoholic concentration in their bloodstream become academic: they are clearly incapable of driving.
jith said:
boobles said:
This all goes back to a debate on another post about drink driving! Dont do it, its not big & its not clever! You just look a tosser for doing it.
This post is not about DRINK driving boobles, it's about DRUNK driving; there is a significant difference.
Someone who consumes this amount of alcohol knows they are drunk, there can be no question about that.
At this level the readings of alcoholic concentration in their bloodstream become academic: they are clearly incapable of driving.
at the risk of looking a bit pedantic, he was clearly capable of driving because he was stopped whilst driving!
eccles said:
jith said:
boobles said:
This all goes back to a debate on another post about drink driving! Dont do it, its not big & its not clever! You just look a tosser for doing it.
This post is not about DRINK driving boobles, it's about DRUNK driving; there is a significant difference.
Someone who consumes this amount of alcohol knows they are drunk, there can be no question about that.
At this level the readings of alcoholic concentration in their bloodstream become academic: they are clearly incapable of driving.
at the risk of looking a bit pedantic, he was clearly capable of driving because he was stopped whilst driving!
Driving involves more than moving a car... He was luck (as well as being a tosser) that nothing happened to test his driving skills. An airline pilot only really earns his/her money if they have to deal with something going wrong. Same logic applies to driving a car - it's only when something goes wrong - or potentially goes wrong that the driving skill comes into effect. And with that much alcohol he wouldn't have been able to react any where near as well as he would without. He's a tosser - FACT and he's clearly NOT capable of driving with 3 times the legal limit of alcohol in his bloodstream - irrespective of whether or not he was behind the wheel of a moving car!!!!!
Two true stories.
1) A mate of mine was caught in 2003, after drinking a bottle of vodka, decided to drive the 400 yards home! (idiot) No idea what the reading was, but he was caught as he put his keys in front door - polieman said something along the lines of "we had no reason to stop you, you were driving ok - but at this time in the morning we wanted to know what you were up to". Policeman also repeated this in court, and mentioned how civil mate was, and mate pleaded guilty.
First offence - he received a 4 year ban, £650 fine and 240 hours community service.
2) Very recently and details are a bit sketchy. Mate had been at a party that I was at, and was on the lash big time.
Next thing he knows, he wakes up in a police cell. It transpires that he was found fast asleep on the hard shoulder of the M2, with his car parked up, and running next to him. Went to court three weeks ago where he was asked how he pleaded, and he pleaded not guilty, adjourned til last week.
He is defending himself, and has no legal knowledge. His claim is that he cannot remember getting in the car, or being arrested, or being in charge of a car. His memory finishes at the party, and only starts again at the police cell the morning after. He only has the arresting officers word.
I have spoken to him about this, and from what he tells me, he genuinely does not seem to have any recollecion of the evening. I have told him from what I have read on here that there is no way he will keep his licence, as policemans word, evidence, will be good enough!
However went to court again last week and he kept to the same argument. Case has been adjourned again for another 3 weeks - I think - although DVD et all should be able to correct me - that they dropped drink driving, but are pursuing being drunk in charge of vehicle. Again I am not sure if this is fact, or me getting confused. Not sure if there are separate charges.
I will keep you posted with what happens after three weeks.
1) A mate of mine was caught in 2003, after drinking a bottle of vodka, decided to drive the 400 yards home! (idiot) No idea what the reading was, but he was caught as he put his keys in front door - polieman said something along the lines of "we had no reason to stop you, you were driving ok - but at this time in the morning we wanted to know what you were up to". Policeman also repeated this in court, and mentioned how civil mate was, and mate pleaded guilty.
First offence - he received a 4 year ban, £650 fine and 240 hours community service.
2) Very recently and details are a bit sketchy. Mate had been at a party that I was at, and was on the lash big time.
Next thing he knows, he wakes up in a police cell. It transpires that he was found fast asleep on the hard shoulder of the M2, with his car parked up, and running next to him. Went to court three weeks ago where he was asked how he pleaded, and he pleaded not guilty, adjourned til last week.
He is defending himself, and has no legal knowledge. His claim is that he cannot remember getting in the car, or being arrested, or being in charge of a car. His memory finishes at the party, and only starts again at the police cell the morning after. He only has the arresting officers word.
I have spoken to him about this, and from what he tells me, he genuinely does not seem to have any recollecion of the evening. I have told him from what I have read on here that there is no way he will keep his licence, as policemans word, evidence, will be good enough!
However went to court again last week and he kept to the same argument. Case has been adjourned again for another 3 weeks - I think - although DVD et all should be able to correct me - that they dropped drink driving, but are pursuing being drunk in charge of vehicle. Again I am not sure if this is fact, or me getting confused. Not sure if there are separate charges.
I will keep you posted with what happens after three weeks.
Fats25 said:
Two true stories.
1) A mate of mine was caught in 2003, after drinking a bottle of vodka, decided to drive the 400 yards home! (idiot) No idea what the reading was, but he was caught as he put his keys in front door - polieman said something along the lines of "we had no reason to stop you, you were driving ok - but at this time in the morning we wanted to know what you were up to". Policeman also repeated this in court, and mentioned how civil mate was, and mate pleaded guilty.
First offence - he received a 4 year ban, £650 fine and 240 hours community service.
2) Very recently and details are a bit sketchy. Mate had been at a party that I was at, and was on the lash big time.
Next thing he knows, he wakes up in a police cell. It transpires that he was found fast asleep on the hard shoulder of the M2, with his car parked up, and running next to him. Went to court three weeks ago where he was asked how he pleaded, and he pleaded not guilty, adjourned til last week.
He is defending himself, and has no legal knowledge. His claim is that he cannot remember getting in the car, or being arrested, or being in charge of a car. His memory finishes at the party, and only starts again at the police cell the morning after. He only has the arresting officers word.
I have spoken to him about this, and from what he tells me, he genuinely does not seem to have any recollecion of the evening. I have told him from what I have read on here that there is no way he will keep his licence, as policemans word, evidence, will be good enough!
However went to court again last week and he kept to the same argument. Case has been adjourned again for another 3 weeks - I think - although DVD et all should be able to correct me - that they dropped drink driving, but are pursuing being drunk in charge of vehicle. Again I am not sure if this is fact, or me getting confused. Not sure if there are separate charges.
I will keep you posted with what happens after three weeks.
1) A mate of mine was caught in 2003, after drinking a bottle of vodka, decided to drive the 400 yards home! (idiot) No idea what the reading was, but he was caught as he put his keys in front door - polieman said something along the lines of "we had no reason to stop you, you were driving ok - but at this time in the morning we wanted to know what you were up to". Policeman also repeated this in court, and mentioned how civil mate was, and mate pleaded guilty.
First offence - he received a 4 year ban, £650 fine and 240 hours community service.
2) Very recently and details are a bit sketchy. Mate had been at a party that I was at, and was on the lash big time.
Next thing he knows, he wakes up in a police cell. It transpires that he was found fast asleep on the hard shoulder of the M2, with his car parked up, and running next to him. Went to court three weeks ago where he was asked how he pleaded, and he pleaded not guilty, adjourned til last week.
He is defending himself, and has no legal knowledge. His claim is that he cannot remember getting in the car, or being arrested, or being in charge of a car. His memory finishes at the party, and only starts again at the police cell the morning after. He only has the arresting officers word.
I have spoken to him about this, and from what he tells me, he genuinely does not seem to have any recollecion of the evening. I have told him from what I have read on here that there is no way he will keep his licence, as policemans word, evidence, will be good enough!
However went to court again last week and he kept to the same argument. Case has been adjourned again for another 3 weeks - I think - although DVD et all should be able to correct me - that they dropped drink driving, but are pursuing being drunk in charge of vehicle. Again I am not sure if this is fact, or me getting confused. Not sure if there are separate charges.
I will keep you posted with what happens after three weeks.
Voluntary intoxication is no defence to the offence of DD.
If they drop it and charge him with drunk in charge he's a VERY lucky boy.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff