Another p#ssed system player ?
Discussion
Don't think it's up yet but
'Friend of Prince William claims police breathalyser which found him over drink drive limit is wrong because his mobile signal interfered with the reading'
http://dailym.ai/MXZLn0
Just out of interest how far do people generally go to bend the truth or get off with stuff ?
Rather than just hold their hands up and admit to being over ?
'Friend of Prince William claims police breathalyser which found him over drink drive limit is wrong because his mobile signal interfered with the reading'
http://dailym.ai/MXZLn0
Just out of interest how far do people generally go to bend the truth or get off with stuff ?
Rather than just hold their hands up and admit to being over ?
The case law on drink-driving is comical. Just about everything has been tried. A top defence lawyer can have a fair go at introducing reasonable doubt even if everything is done perfectly. It sound like some real bullst questions were asked like what frequency adjacent police radios were on etc.
I don't understand how it's not clear cut whether or not he had his phone on him or not. Surely that would be on camera?
I don't understand how it's not clear cut whether or not he had his phone on him or not. Surely that would be on camera?
agtlaw said:
There must be more to it than reported.
Like what Namedropping and implied threats ?
Hopefully if the person concerned is honourable they wouldn't use those sorts of things to try to 'influence' an outcome would they?
Maybe I'm just cynical nowadays and not very politically astute when I see and have heard 1st hand some of the things that go on.
Cliftonite said:
Is refusing to take a breath test at the roadside not an offence in itself? Or does taking a test later on an 'evidential machine' at the police station excuse you from that?
I always thought it was an offence to refuse the roadside test and that it carries similar penalties to proven dd.ferrariF50lover said:
Snowboy said:
It'll be the lawyers making up the silly stories - not the drunk toff.
Lawyers act on instruction, they don't tell the client what happened, the client tells them, then they apply that story to the law. Don't hate the player, hate the game.Simon.
Maybe the lawyer 'advises' the client on what to say before being instructed rather than after, perish the thought.
TBC may have a point but it may not have been picked up by the press or have no interest if it was Joe public.
9mm said:
Cliftonite said:
Is refusing to take a breath test at the roadside not an offence in itself? Or does taking a test later on an 'evidential machine' at the police station excuse you from that?
I always thought it was an offence to refuse the roadside test and that it carries similar penalties to proven dd.Cat
sorry to ask this slightly off topic, but are there medicines that can give a false reading, i just seem to remember someone using cough mixture or mouth wash and it saying they were over the limit when they hadn't had a drink.
i only ask as my wife and i were talking about it last night, i was going to post a new thread, but as there are BiB on this one then I thought i'd ask, thanks.
i only ask as my wife and i were talking about it last night, i was going to post a new thread, but as there are BiB on this one then I thought i'd ask, thanks.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff