My brother was arrested last night!!!
20 January 2008, 07:59 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. CPS are not consulted re charging for drink drive/unfit cases. It's an automatic charge once the person fails the test.
2. You HAVE to do the paperwork once someone's arrested. All it is is simple few paragraphs. It's compulsory.
3. He'd be circulated as wanted for failing to appear and then be arrested again, kept in custody overnight for court. Again, nothing to do with the arresting officer - the court issues the warrant.
20 January 2008, 08:13 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 3,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I meant the officer doesn't arrive in court. Plus, I've had NIPs from an officer and heard nothing more of it - despite being handed them in person.
I'm pretty sure these things can go away mysteriously if the pressure is applied in the right places...
I still think it is worth making a fuss about. You do see these things getting "reviewed" once the media makes contact.
5t.
I'm pretty sure these things can go away mysteriously if the pressure is applied in the right places...
I still think it is worth making a fuss about. You do see these things getting "reviewed" once the media makes contact.
5t.
20 January 2008, 08:15 PM
#33
BANNED
Thread Starter
Was just talking to my brother earlyer and he said the copper didnt think he had
insurance on the car and my brother asked if he could go to the glove
department to get the insurance certificate , and he the coppers response was
'yhea yhea save it'. Now my brother will have to go back to the police station
and produce his documents
. And what that plonker of a police man
didnt realise that my brothers 2 mates was there standing and heard everything!
Why do police behave this way is beyond me!
insurance on the car and my brother asked if he could go to the glove
department to get the insurance certificate , and he the coppers response was
'yhea yhea save it'. Now my brother will have to go back to the police station
and produce his documents
. And what that plonker of a police man didnt realise that my brothers 2 mates was there standing and heard everything!
Why do police behave this way is beyond me!
20 January 2008, 08:18 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I have ad blocked my rep - so dont waste your time!
Posts: 1,548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20 January 2008, 09:06 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A powerslide near you
Posts: 10,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I drive 100mph through a residential area (say at school opening time) completey rat-arsed but somehow don't kill anyone, then who's the victim?? Would doing this be ok as there's no victim?
I agree that the OPs brother should be let off but the law is the law and he was stupid and broke it. As I say, if the spirit of the law is applied then he should be unpunished, however if the letter of the law is applied he will get done. If it gets to court it may depend on if the judge is a spirit or letter man
I agree that the OPs brother should be let off but the law is the law and he was stupid and broke it. As I say, if the spirit of the law is applied then he should be unpunished, however if the letter of the law is applied he will get done. If it gets to court it may depend on if the judge is a spirit or letter man
20 January 2008, 09:27 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last night my brother and two mates was walking from the pub. Down the
road where his house, his car was parked (he ran out of petrol that afternoon
).It started pouring down with rain so he and his mates decided to jump
in the car until it calmed a bit, so my brother puts the radio on as they were
chatting. Next thing the police pulled up, knock on the window.
Police man: What do you think you are doing
My brother: listening to some music waiting for the rain to calm down
Police man:You have been drinking
My brother:Yes im pissed why?
Police man:Get out of the car.
At this point my brother is getting out of the car while the copper puts the back of his hand against the bonnet to check if it was worm.
Police man: Have you been driving this tonight
My brother: off course not, i can barely stand for crying out loud.
Then the copper did a breath test on him, and off course he was over the limit, twice over the limit in fact.
Then he did a search on him and found his keys.
Police man: aha so what are these doing on you then
My brother: because my house keys are stuck to them, and i need them.
Police man: Right you are under arrest
My brother: You what, here take the keys and try and start it up your self, and then you can see it wont because there is no petrol in it!
Police man: no thanks sunshine. Can you turn round so i can put on the handcuffs.
My brother has a nasty cut on his wrist, and he asked the copper not to put them on too tight.
But plod wouldnt listen so my brother was screaming with pain, and his 2 mates even pleaded with plod to slacken them, but again he didnt want to know.
From the village to the police station which is 7 miles, my brother was pleading and begging them to slacken them but to no avail, and he could feel some thing warm in his hand.
At the station when they took them off my brother looked at his wrist and it was pissing blood, thanks to the cuffs.
My brother was worried if he was gonna be done for drink driving when he didnt even put the key in the ignition. But no he was arrested under Section 5,1b, which is
Driving or being in charge of a motor vehicle with alcohol concentration above prescribed limit
(b) is in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or other public place.
after consuming so much alcohol that the proportion of it in his breath, blood or urine exceeds the prescribed limit he is guilty of an offence.
So in my brother's eyes he has been arrested for sitting in a stationary car sheltering from the rain.
So my question to you guys is, what is he looking at? a hefty fine or a bann etc etc?? As the coppers at the station wouldnt answer him.
And should he report the plod who put on the handcuffs? What do you think??
road where his house, his car was parked (he ran out of petrol that afternoon
).It started pouring down with rain so he and his mates decided to jumpin the car until it calmed a bit, so my brother puts the radio on as they were
chatting. Next thing the police pulled up, knock on the window.
Police man: What do you think you are doing
My brother: listening to some music waiting for the rain to calm down
Police man:You have been drinking
My brother:Yes im pissed why?
Police man:Get out of the car.
At this point my brother is getting out of the car while the copper puts the back of his hand against the bonnet to check if it was worm.
Police man: Have you been driving this tonight
My brother: off course not, i can barely stand for crying out loud.
Then the copper did a breath test on him, and off course he was over the limit, twice over the limit in fact.
Then he did a search on him and found his keys.
Police man: aha so what are these doing on you then
My brother: because my house keys are stuck to them, and i need them.
Police man: Right you are under arrest
My brother: You what, here take the keys and try and start it up your self, and then you can see it wont because there is no petrol in it!
Police man: no thanks sunshine. Can you turn round so i can put on the handcuffs.
My brother has a nasty cut on his wrist, and he asked the copper not to put them on too tight.
But plod wouldnt listen so my brother was screaming with pain, and his 2 mates even pleaded with plod to slacken them, but again he didnt want to know.
From the village to the police station which is 7 miles, my brother was pleading and begging them to slacken them but to no avail, and he could feel some thing warm in his hand.
At the station when they took them off my brother looked at his wrist and it was pissing blood, thanks to the cuffs.
My brother was worried if he was gonna be done for drink driving when he didnt even put the key in the ignition. But no he was arrested under Section 5,1b, which is
Driving or being in charge of a motor vehicle with alcohol concentration above prescribed limit
(b) is in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or other public place.
after consuming so much alcohol that the proportion of it in his breath, blood or urine exceeds the prescribed limit he is guilty of an offence.
So in my brother's eyes he has been arrested for sitting in a stationary car sheltering from the rain.
So my question to you guys is, what is he looking at? a hefty fine or a bann etc etc?? As the coppers at the station wouldnt answer him.
And should he report the plod who put on the handcuffs? What do you think??
Harsh but fair I'm afraid as this kind of excuse has been used so many times the plods don't believe you and nor will the magistrates.
Whilst at the police station, the borther should have asked to be seen by the duty police doctor. He could then have made a formal complaint. If he didn't, tough again I'm afraid. Unfortunately I've no time for pissheads - people who can't hold thier beer shouldn't drink it.
20 January 2008, 09:40 PM
#39
There's a lot of rubbish posted above. There is a statutory defence to being in charge whilst over the prescribed limit. I don't intend posting it on here for obvious reasons.
Rather than take 'advice' from some ill informed posters, with little or no knowledge or understanding of the offence or the prosecution procedure, tell your brother to either get onto pepipoo or speak with a solicitor.
Rather than take 'advice' from some ill informed posters, with little or no knowledge or understanding of the offence or the prosecution procedure, tell your brother to either get onto pepipoo or speak with a solicitor.
20 January 2008, 11:10 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a lot of rubbish posted above. There is a statutory defence to being in charge whilst over the prescribed limit. I don't intend posting it on here for obvious reasons.
Rather than take 'advice' from some ill informed posters, with little or no knowledge or understanding of the offence or the prosecution procedure, tell your brother to either get onto pepipoo or speak with a solicitor.
Rather than take 'advice' from some ill informed posters, with little or no knowledge or understanding of the offence or the prosecution procedure, tell your brother to either get onto pepipoo or speak with a solicitor.
There is a statutory defence which I've seen used many times.
Unlike many on here, I know something about the law
21 January 2008, 08:43 AM
#42
BANNED
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jasey@Work
Posts: 2,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.Help the lad out though - what's the statutory defence for this one ?
21 January 2008, 08:44 AM
#43
BANNED
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jasey@Work
Posts: 2,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
21 January 2008, 08:53 AM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Warrington
Posts: 4,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only differences were that the sleeping driver was found at the wheel and the engine was running. That case was particularly interesting because the standard of proof was not "beyond reasonable doubt" but "the balance of probabilities". The burden of proof therefore shifted to the Defence, which sought to employ the statutory defence that, at the material time, there was no likelihood of the defendant driving or attempting to drive whilst in excess of the legal limit.
Last edited by speedking; 21 January 2008 at 09:14 AM.
22 January 2008, 12:41 AM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you start from the baseline that if you are out for a beer or five you leave the car and its keys at home, you'll never need to come on ScoobyNet to see if someone knows how to get you off a charge you may or may not win.
Simple really.
Simple really.
22 January 2008, 07:55 AM
#48
BANNED
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jasey@Work
Posts: 2,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see our resident "Legal beagles" aren't willing to share their "obvious" or "statutory" defences.
Thanks for your great contribution to this thread - I'm sure you've really helped
Maybe they're holding out for some sort of payment - are you both ambulance chasing lawyers ?
Get back to claims R Us
Thanks for your great contribution to this thread - I'm sure you've really helped
Maybe they're holding out for some sort of payment - are you both ambulance chasing lawyers ?
Get back to claims R Us
22 January 2008, 09:00 AM
#50
BANNED
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jasey@Work
Posts: 2,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If smarty-pants knows it but doesn't want to let anyone else know then he shouldn't post - not really helping anyone.
Mind you neither are we
.
22 January 2008, 11:35 AM
#51
Scooby Regular
Loved that function, haven't had it in anything since then.
To the OP - **** situation, good luck to your bro.
22 January 2008, 12:11 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This sort of thing pi55es me off, if the keys werent in the barrel and the car running i dont see a problem with sitting in your car while pi55ed, everyone at our local was doing it on sat cos of the rain!
This is the problem with performance related pay and target setting for coppers!
I bet this particular tw@t was down on his drinkdrive quota and saw an easy opportunity to get an arrest on his books!
If he had pulled into our locals car park at 10 on sat night he would have to have nicked about 15 people!
Go nick a serious drinkdriver, not someone walking home and hiding from the weather!
This is the problem with performance related pay and target setting for coppers!
I bet this particular tw@t was down on his drinkdrive quota and saw an easy opportunity to get an arrest on his books!
If he had pulled into our locals car park at 10 on sat night he would have to have nicked about 15 people!
Go nick a serious drinkdriver, not someone walking home and hiding from the weather!
22 January 2008, 12:32 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: same time, different place
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Road Traffic Act 1988.
5.
Driving or being in charge of a motor vehicle with alcohol concentration above prescribed limit.
— (1) If a person—
(a)
drives or attempts to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, or
(b)
is in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or other public place,
after consuming so much alcohol that the proportion of it in his breath, blood or urine exceeds the prescribed limit he is guilty of an offence.
(2) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1)(b) above to prove that at the time he is alleged to have committed the offence the circumstances were such that there was no likelihood of his driving the vehicle whilst the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine remained likely to exceed the prescribed limit.
(3) The court may, in determining whether there was such a likelihood as is mentioned in subsection (2) above, disregard any injury to him and any damage to the vehicle.
Why the **** was this so secret above?
5.
Driving or being in charge of a motor vehicle with alcohol concentration above prescribed limit.
— (1) If a person—
(a)
drives or attempts to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, or
(b)
is in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or other public place,
after consuming so much alcohol that the proportion of it in his breath, blood or urine exceeds the prescribed limit he is guilty of an offence.
(2) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1)(b) above to prove that at the time he is alleged to have committed the offence the circumstances were such that there was no likelihood of his driving the vehicle whilst the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine remained likely to exceed the prescribed limit.
(3) The court may, in determining whether there was such a likelihood as is mentioned in subsection (2) above, disregard any injury to him and any damage to the vehicle.
Why the **** was this so secret above?
22 January 2008, 12:46 PM
#55
Super Muppet
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Inside out
Posts: 33,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My mate got done was a few years back,he went to his car in the pub car park to get a packet of smokes instant ban 
and he always left his car in said place then walked home!
and he always left his car in said place then walked home!
22 January 2008, 01:42 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And people wonder why i hate coppers
22 January 2008, 01:42 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: There on the stair
Posts: 10,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Road Traffic Act 1988.
(2) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1)(b) above to prove that at the time he is alleged to have committed the offence the circumstances were such that there was no likelihood of his driving the vehicle whilst the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine remained likely to exceed the prescribed limit.
(2) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1)(b) above to prove that at the time he is alleged to have committed the offence the circumstances were such that there was no likelihood of his driving the vehicle whilst the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine remained likely to exceed the prescribed limit.
I hope he had a receipt for the petrol he put in the next day indicating a FULL tank was required.
22 January 2008, 02:05 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: same time, different place
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Yeah, that sounds like our current legislature 
The thing that bugs me is subsection 3,
(3) The court may, in determining whether there was such a likelihood as is mentioned in subsection (2) above, disregard any injury to him and any damage to the vehicle.
Which suggests that, even if the guy had two broken legs in plaster and the car had a wheel missing, they could still convict him. Or am I misinterpreting it
Lucky for OP that running out of petrol is not "damage"
The thing that bugs me is subsection 3,
(3) The court may, in determining whether there was such a likelihood as is mentioned in subsection (2) above, disregard any injury to him and any damage to the vehicle.
Which suggests that, even if the guy had two broken legs in plaster and the car had a wheel missing, they could still convict him. Or am I misinterpreting it
Lucky for OP that running out of petrol is not "damage"