Retrospective drink driving - not right surely?
Discussion
Some time ago a friend of mine went to look at a house and had a glass of wine with the landlady.
In return to his house share he had an altercation with someone else in the house.
Post altercation he drank a bottle of wine.
Police were called by the person my friend had he altercation with, somehow he got breathalysed / tested and they’ve deduced that he must have driven drunk.
He’s adamant that he didn’t.
But ts his word against the police and the technology. One or both of which seems flawed.
He’s looking at an 18 month driving ban according to a solicitor. But surely a decent solicitor would pick this to pieces, wouldn’t they?
In return to his house share he had an altercation with someone else in the house.
Post altercation he drank a bottle of wine.
Police were called by the person my friend had he altercation with, somehow he got breathalysed / tested and they’ve deduced that he must have driven drunk.
He’s adamant that he didn’t.
But ts his word against the police and the technology. One or both of which seems flawed.
He’s looking at an 18 month driving ban according to a solicitor. But surely a decent solicitor would pick this to pieces, wouldn’t they?
The Rookie said:
A bottle of wine is about 14 units, about the same as five pints of cider. Not very drink aware are you!
No that is not a normal evening consumption, unless you are an alcoholic I’d expect an explanation as to why you consumed that much. Again though I did mention the missing timescale, was it an hour or 6 hours.....
I think someone else has shown toir calculation is slightly out. I can assure you that, as someone who doesn’t drink during the week, a bottle of Aldi’s finest is often polished off on a Friday or a Saturday night after the kids are in bed. No that is not a normal evening consumption, unless you are an alcoholic I’d expect an explanation as to why you consumed that much. Again though I did mention the missing timescale, was it an hour or 6 hours.....
I’ll see if I can find out the total timeline as I don’t know it myself.
pavarotti1980 said:
Hackney said:
I’ve included what I know and thought pertinent.
Where in the timeline do you think something is missing and I’ll see if I can help
The story he has told youWhere in the timeline do you think something is missing and I’ll see if I can help
So, "the story he has told you" doesn't quite make sense. Do you doubt the whole story? If so, then not much I can do.
If there's something specific I can try to find out.
Apologies for the gaps or questions that the original post has provoked.
The reason for the gaps is that this was told to me by a friend last week. The subject is actually a third friend of us both.
He's generally having a very bad time of things at the moment and the drink driving allegation actually happened some time ago. I haven't spoken to him directly about this but the three of us have known each other for 30 years. We don't see each other or talk all that frequently but we regularly meet up.
I know both of them very well and I trust them both. That isn't to say I can 100% guarentee the whole story, I am taking it on trust that what I've been told is true and not under or over exagerrated.
Some of the responses have been a help and I've passed them on as questions. On a side note he feels he's been let down by the police and his solicitor (who I believe should've been picking holes in this left right and centre), a family member who is also a solicitor (unknown speciality) has told him he could be looking at an 18month ban. However, i don't know what her knowledge of this kind of offence is. She may simply be stating that the going rate for a drink driving conviction is 18 months rather than getting into specifics of the case.
Thanks to those who have posted constructive questions, they may prove helpful.
If I find out more I will, but it's tough talking to the individual involved because of other things that are going on right now.
The reason for the gaps is that this was told to me by a friend last week. The subject is actually a third friend of us both.
He's generally having a very bad time of things at the moment and the drink driving allegation actually happened some time ago. I haven't spoken to him directly about this but the three of us have known each other for 30 years. We don't see each other or talk all that frequently but we regularly meet up.
I know both of them very well and I trust them both. That isn't to say I can 100% guarentee the whole story, I am taking it on trust that what I've been told is true and not under or over exagerrated.
Some of the responses have been a help and I've passed them on as questions. On a side note he feels he's been let down by the police and his solicitor (who I believe should've been picking holes in this left right and centre), a family member who is also a solicitor (unknown speciality) has told him he could be looking at an 18month ban. However, i don't know what her knowledge of this kind of offence is. She may simply be stating that the going rate for a drink driving conviction is 18 months rather than getting into specifics of the case.
Thanks to those who have posted constructive questions, they may prove helpful.
If I find out more I will, but it's tough talking to the individual involved because of other things that are going on right now.
Pothole said:
Just popped in to see if the OP has bothered to get any more FACTS. Seems not. Carry on.
Why do people (seemingly) default to "attitude"?I'm busy and haven't seen either the friend who told me this in the first place or the guy in trouble.
I was possibly going to meet up with them this evening but it didn't happen.
I realise you're not getting the complete story, neither am I. But, again, thanks to people who have give me useful info particularly on burden of proof and questions to ask - which have been passed on, some of them had already been asked / ruled out.
guindilias said:
Funny, innit, how threads just stop with no more info...
Very. Didn't realise anyone had posted anything and I had no new information.
Until today. Met up with the guy involved today and got his version of events first hand. Have to say I think he's been let down by the system at the very least.
He had a very bad relationship with a neighbour. Ex con, done time. Parks his car in a visitor bay because it's closer than his parking spaces. Coincidentally blocks access to my friend's parking space. Evening in question it's the last straw and my friend knocks on his door and is told to "f**k off" in front of his 10 yr old son. Then physically assaulted. No witnesses other than 10yr old son.
My friend went back to his house and opened the bottle of wine. Police arrive an hour later, although they say it was 3 minutes after the call.
Really? What do the police attend in 3 minutes? Distance to police station means 75mph average speed.
Commotion outside means my friend investigates and an officer startes talking to him. Breathalysed at the scene.
Without fully understadning why he was offered a blood test later.
There are discrapancies in the police report. It refers to time spent in a holding cell. He never went to a holding cell.
They've mis-timed things by at least an hour etc.
He got seriously messed around and ultimately ripped off by one solicitor and is now on a second.
Police didn't investigate some information they were given. Didn't get CCTV from a local shop (seconds away from my friend's house) which would show time he went in there, and therfore time he arrived back home.
The vexatious nature of the call to the police by the neighbour hasn't been investigated. Luckily he does have messages from this neighbour which show threats and third party information which shows he's made similar claims in the past - reported damage to his car caused by my friend yet at the time my friend was driving a hire car which showed no damage; "damage" on his car didn't actually look like damage, witness reported it looked like a gready hand print
To be honest, it's difficult to see how it's gone this far.
A solicitor did advise my frient to plead guilty for leniency's sake but he doesn't want to plead guilty to something he's not guilty of. In the meantime he's racking up costs - hearing has been postponed a couple of times, once by the judge who basically advised him to get a new solicitor.
Trouble is, no matter how convinced he is of his innocence, he could be found guilty and then ordered to pay ever increasing prosecution costs (couldn't he?) due to the delays. This happened in November 2016. His court date was set and delayed again for a couple of months. He's clearly stressed by it and is also out of work at the moment.
I can't claim to know or have remembered all of the story. But even if he's only been 80% honest with me there's enough to know that this stinks.
The police look to have made errors which they're covering with lies, for want of a better word. Not sure how I can help using information gleaned from a car forum though, so feel free not to reply.
Thanks for the constructive replies so far.
GT03ROB said:
I don't get why he has been breathalised, when there is no evidence of him driving after the police were called?
Seemingly based on the neighbour telling the police he was drunk. Even if this was a genuine, innocent claim by the neighbour it’s based on my friend staggering after being punched, banging his head on the floor and being wobbly on his feet when he got up. Trouble is it’s not an innocent claim by the neighbour there’s malice to it.
Thesprucegoose said:
He drank a bottle of wine in an hour but doesn't have a problem. The story still has holes in it.
Fortunately one is not put on trial for problems 
Apologies for any holes, I’ve tried to include everything I wanna told which was a lot over the course of two hours and without taking notes.
It’s not an intentional effort to miss out detail.
Greendubber said:
This.
Also, the police station could be 10 miles away and it wouldn't make a scrap of difference as I'd wager the bobbies attending weren't sat in the station waiting for the call, they could have beenbjust around the corner. We can get reports that show the GPS tracking on our radios, maybe worth asking if that's available...
With regard to the 'holding cell' that's just the room/area between the police vehicle and custody desk where you sit with the arresting officer before being booked on when you arrive at custody. He'd have got out of the vehicle and most likely sat in a bench, in a room with the officers before being called to the custody desk to be booked into custody.
ThanksAlso, the police station could be 10 miles away and it wouldn't make a scrap of difference as I'd wager the bobbies attending weren't sat in the station waiting for the call, they could have beenbjust around the corner. We can get reports that show the GPS tracking on our radios, maybe worth asking if that's available...
With regard to the 'holding cell' that's just the room/area between the police vehicle and custody desk where you sit with the arresting officer before being booked on when you arrive at custody. He'd have got out of the vehicle and most likely sat in a bench, in a room with the officers before being called to the custody desk to be booked into custody.
Edited by Greendubber on Thursday 10th May 06:45
guindilias said:
When was the call made? Given that the alleged assault was over a parking space when he returned home, and there was a "commotion" outside, I would imagine there would be plenty of independent curtain twitchers as witnesses that he had been driving.
There could be CCTV from anywhere along the route. We still are not getting the full story, or, I suspect, the true story.
IANAL but having been through it myself, I strongly suspect he is fecked.
As far as I know the only CCTV is from the Co-op "45 seconds walk from the home addres".There could be CCTV from anywhere along the route. We still are not getting the full story, or, I suspect, the true story.
IANAL but having been through it myself, I strongly suspect he is fecked.
My friend has already pointed the police to this (twice) as it proves he wasn't falling about the place, but it also proves the timing.
Only witnesses as far as I know: friend, friend's 10yo son, neighbour who he had the fracas with and another neighbour. Not sure what exactly she saw but she's proven unreliable in relation to another incident.
guindilias said:
Hackney said:
As far as I know the only CCTV is from the Co-op "45 seconds walk from the home addres".
My friend has already pointed the police to this (twice) as it proves he wasn't falling about the place, but it also proves the timing.
Only witnesses as far as I know: friend, friend's 10yo son, neighbour who he had the fracas with and another neighbour. Not sure what exactly she saw but she's proven unreliable in relation to another incident.
But he has told the police he was driving? Or does the Co-op have external CCTV that would show him driving, parking, whatever? You don't need to be stumbling all over the place to be over the limit...My friend has already pointed the police to this (twice) as it proves he wasn't falling about the place, but it also proves the timing.
Only witnesses as far as I know: friend, friend's 10yo son, neighbour who he had the fracas with and another neighbour. Not sure what exactly she saw but she's proven unreliable in relation to another incident.
Also, neighbour's statement that he was staggering (due to being drunk) would be disproven by cctv of him walking normally, but it was as much about the timeline as anything else.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff