PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Drink Driving Blood Tests Discretionary Limits, threads merged
Volvo V40
post Sun, 1 Feb 2009 - 11:32
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 1 Feb 2009
From: London
Member No.: 25,923



Hi Posters,

On friday I had a bit of a party at my house. A few guests stayed, and whilst I drank a bit I wasn't sure how I was feeling. Waking up the next day with a headache a few of the girls asked me to drop them down at the local tube station.

Being only 5 minutes away I didn't grab breakfast because they were in a bit of a hurry. just grabbed a T-shirt, and then out the door, barely a sip of my coffee was made I took them down to the station, then disaster - apparrently i went through an orange light and I was being pulled over and breath tested.

Back at the station my readings came back at 41 over 35 and I excercised my rights to have a blood sample. The officers gave me a coffee straight after my breath test and were genuinely really friendly. I didn't think that they wanted to charge me.

The blood test was undertake approximately 45 -50 minutes after the breath test, and the alcohol was definitely on the way out of my system. Does anyone know if a breath test on an empty stomach may have influenced the results against me.

If my blood reading is 80 or 81 millilitres per litre - I have calculated this based on the delay, Can the police excercise discretion. They were impressed as I am full time volunteer helping keep under privileged children in the community, maybe this will sway them?

I am going to get my own sample tested but by counting back on an average of 15 ml burnoff of alcohol I think I will be just on the limit. Even though I am fairly slight, I am a fit active guy with a high metabolism will this help?

Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated, and yes I will be getting my own blood sample anaylsed too - Cheers



Volvo

This post has been edited by Volvo V40: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 - 00:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 34)
Advertisement
post Sun, 1 Feb 2009 - 11:32
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Volvo V40
post Tue, 31 Mar 2009 - 13:37
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 1 Feb 2009
From: London
Member No.: 25,923



Hi Posters,

As per my previous topic, I made a major stupid mistake one morning after having a party. unsure.gif

I offered to take one of my guests to a local tube station, and was found to be over the limit when pulled over. My breath came back at 41/35, and my blood test came back at 84, so am being charged, and have got a solicitor and have some final police procedural questions someone may be able to help me with.

The one slight silver lining is because I lost my job before Xmas, drinking driving defendants on benefits are entitled to legal aid. My day in Court is on Friday, so am a little stressed by everything in general especially until my legal aid application comes through.

At the police station whilst I was arriving at the Custody Suite, and before evidence was collected, (evidential Breathtest/ Blood test was administered) I was told not to worry - Drink Driving is not a criminal offence but would come with a ban and a fine.

I was more relaxed by this, and answered all questions as helpfully as possible. (My parents always told me to be nice to friendly policemen and women)... Again stupid mistake number 2.

The standard procedure is for the police to ask you whether you would like to speak to a solicitor. This happened, and even though policeman advised I could not delay the breath test whilst waiting for a solicitor I asked to speak to the duty solicitor as soon as possible.

After being confused by broken promises of breakfast, and fingerprinting, and confronted by the Doctor with a very large syringe I totally forgot to remind the policeman to let me speak to a solicitor during the 2 hours I was held at the police station.

I was officially charged on Thursday. It was agreed by the constable that she told me that Drink Driving was not an Criminal offence, and this was even reiterated by The Senior Seargeant who officially charged me. I understand that this is not the case and the charge will be listed on CRB, so even if I am lucky enough to find a job they will probably turn me down. Oh and visas to the US will be completely off limits too I understand, I so wish I had spoken to a solicitor when I was in the station.

Does anyone know if I have grounds to appeal based on procedural improprieties ie police not following set procedure or offering incorrect advice, failing to act upon requests for legal advice.

I will never go anywhere near car keys again having drunk in the previous 24 hours I promise.... I am a surveyor and desparately need to retain my license in order to get a job again.

Desparate and worried - Volvo V40 icon_hang.gif

This post has been edited by Volvo V40: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 - 13:48
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
andy_foster
post Tue, 31 Mar 2009 - 14:04
Post #22


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 20,977
Joined: 9 Sep 2004
From: Reading
Member No.: 1,624



QUOTE (Volvo V40 @ Tue, 31 Mar 2009 - 14:37) *
As per my previous topic...


You've started a duplicate thread!


--------------------
Andy

"Whatever the intention of Parliament was, or was not, the law is quite clear." - The Rookie
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Volvo V40
post Tue, 31 Mar 2009 - 14:47
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 1 Feb 2009
From: London
Member No.: 25,923



Hi Andy,

I thought it may be better to put on a different topic.

The topic title was: Is Drink Driving a Criminal Offence, and Possible Police Station Procedures contravention. This has nothing to do with discretionary limits as per the original title...

Perhaps you can review your comments about the suitability of a separate thread accordingly.

Thanks,

Volvo

This post has been edited by Volvo V40: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 - 15:25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Volvo V40
post Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 10:21
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 1 Feb 2009
From: London
Member No.: 25,923



Dear all,


Its been a while, although I though i would provide an update on my case, I could not believe how long it took before this was resolved and I would hasten to add I am very much more careful now everytime I get behind the wheel.

The defence argument raised that there was reasonable doubt because my blood sample registered at 102 over a limit of 80, and the police test was 84.



Whilst I acknowledged the police automatically deduct 4 (so their actual result was 88) the difference between both samples was just too big, and chances of them coming from the same sample were 2.8 million to one. It turned out the sampling doctor had only 3 weeks experience. I appointed an expert witness, the person who tested my sample.


After three months the blood samples and because of other questions raised in the due procedure, the actual vials of blood were all disposed of so it was impossible to DNA test the evidence.


The prosecution argued that both samples were over as was my breath test at 41/35. The judge held that the breath test was irrelevant, and whilst there was some likelihood that I may have been over the limit there was sufficient doubt that I was indeed given a test sample of my own blood. This is a critical step in the process and without this the process has not been followed. All charges were thrown out and I am pleased to say I still have a totally clean license.


Best wishes for anyone else going through the same ordeal. You can message me and I will provide further info.


Volvo V40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ict_guy
post Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 11:34
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,338
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 18,924



Fantastic result. Well done!!!!

Next time a 'guest' tries to kick you out of bed for a lift to the station, tell them to WALK!!!!!!

biggrin.gif biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sgtdixie
post Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 12:09
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,529
Joined: 5 May 2011
From: UK
Member No.: 46,399



QUOTE
Fantastic result. Well done!!!!


Given the circumstances not the phrase I would use.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ict_guy
post Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 12:21
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,338
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 18,924



QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 13:09) *
Given the circumstances not the phrase I would use.


Hmmm!!! ....and the phrase you would use is??? rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sgtdixie
post Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 12:31
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,529
Joined: 5 May 2011
From: UK
Member No.: 46,399



QUOTE (ict_guy @ Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 13:21) *
QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 13:09) *
Given the circumstances not the phrase I would use.


Hmmm!!! ....and the phrase you would use is??? rolleyes.gif


LUCKY.

Hope a strong lesson learnt.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mattd
post Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 19:23
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,238
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Member No.: 50,335



Indeed, considering his own sample was analysed at considerably over the limit luck is the word I would use.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ict_guy
post Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 19:34
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,338
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 18,924



QUOTE (Mattd @ Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 20:23) *
Indeed, considering his own sample....


But that is the defence - It is debatable that it was HIS sample. The original roadside breath test reading is neither here nor there and can not be used to convict. So, all the police had was one blood reading that was very marginally over the blood alcohol limit.

I do not condone drink driving at all, but there is lack of evidence that this was the case - So 'well done' in fighting for justice.

This post has been edited by ict_guy: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 - 19:35
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mattd
post Mon, 20 Aug 2012 - 12:26
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,238
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Member No.: 50,335



Can't really agree myself, his breath results were over regardless just within the required levels for the statutory option.....lucky is def a good description.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gan
post Mon, 20 Aug 2012 - 12:51
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,678
Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Member No.: 27,239



I would also go with "lucky" but with the additional comment that the "morning after" failure will become a lot more common if/when the alcohol limits are lowered
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sgtdixie
post Mon, 20 Aug 2012 - 18:10
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,529
Joined: 5 May 2011
From: UK
Member No.: 46,399




QUOTE
I do not condone drink driving at all, but there is lack of evidence that this was the case - So 'well done' in fighting for justice


Well, there was a failed RSBT, failed station procedure and a failed blood test. The OP 'won' because his own sample was ****** up and gave an unreliable reading. Very convenient but the law is the law and he walks away an innocent man.

But fighting for justice.... a bit of a stretch I think.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ict_guy
post Mon, 20 Aug 2012 - 19:58
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,338
Joined: 18 Apr 2008
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 18,924



QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Mon, 20 Aug 2012 - 19:10) *
.....failed station procedure.....


I think you've hit the nail on the head!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Mon, 20 Aug 2012 - 20:25
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,972
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Mon, 20 Aug 2012 - 19:10) *
Well, there was a failed RSBT, failed station procedure and a failed blood test. The OP 'won' because his own sample was ****** up and gave an unreliable reading. Very convenient but the law is the law and he walks away an innocent man.


or maybe not! thats the point

i do (for once) agree with Dixie. the OP is one very lucky bugger!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 15th August 2020 - 19:30
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.