drunk in chage

[tabu]

hi all i have a case here i was on the hard shoulder when our car broke down i was left behind by the miss, as we were in a convoy and a friend went with her to pick up a battry as the one we had was bringing out smoke, the police showed up and took me in for being incharge now they say there were no other people there so i am to be the one who drove it there, they failed to contact my partner at the time as she had to go by the btry not at home with our friends, they came back to find the car gone and assumed i had taken off,, the thing here is the car would not drive so i had no intention to drive of.. i have read that if the prosecution can not prove i intended to drive then it shld be ok, is that true or false?? oh-ye the keys were left behind

[FredPuli43]

To being in charge when over the prescribed limit, the defence is that there was no likelihood of the defendant driving when still over that limit. It's for the defendant to prove that defence on the balance of probablities i.e. that it was more likely than not that he would not drive when still over.

[dotty.]

when you say 'our' car, are you legally insured on that vehicle and is it registered in your name?

[dotty.]

plus, it is illegal for civilians to drive in convoy on british roads, also, that means the other car pulled up with you, also illegal, plus, how does a battery smoke? plus, do you and your misses purposefully forget both your mobile phones when you are errrr mobile?

[craft1948]

I think you may be done for being in charge of a car whilst illiterate........

[dotty.]

oh yes and the statement 'they assumed I had taken off' suggests that you were legally entitled to drive the car and so you're bang to rights.

[dotty.]

If you are going to try to defend yourself out of this can I suggest you go for the less is more defence i.e. say nowt and avoid filling any silences during your court case with drivel. you'll drop yourself in it i just know.

[FredPuli43]

The car wasn't there when your friend and your partner returned. Where was it and how did it get there? Did the police drive it? If so, how did they start it?

It is clear that it was intended that the car be driven, because someone had gone for a battery. Of course, if there is compelling evidence that you were not to be the driver; that you were in a passenger seat when waiting and found, that someone else could drive the car and was meant to do so etc; then the defence of 'no likelihood' can be established.

If the car could not be driven at all, because of its mechanical state viz. no battery working, car broken down, then you could argue that nobody was going to drive it, drunk or sober. It's unfortunate if you told the police that someone had gone to get a new battery, since that suggests that the car would be driveable within an hour or so, which fact might cause the court to think that you would be driving it when over the limit. Still the fact remains that, when found and if left so, the car could not have been driven. If you'd invited the police to start it and they couldn't, you could have said that obviously you couldn't drive it either and you'd have to walk or get a cab or a lift. That could have saved you.

[plautus]

"i was on the hard shoulder when our car broke down"
That is just your first offence.

[baza]

how long were the miss and friend gone for, as the police do not drive recovery vehicles it takes time for said vehicle to arrive.
why was the car on the hard shoulder with you in it, current advice in the event of a breakdown is to leave the vehicle .
still trying to work out the bit about bringing out smoke, was the battery, battry or btry on fire?
you shld be lucky and get a beak that speaks text and you may get a sht sntnce.

[FredPuli43]

The police have surely going to charge, or have charged, with simply driving with excess alcohol whether or not they have charged with 'in charge'. That avoids arguments about the car being undriveable or you not going to drive it in the future. Even if you were literally only in charge when found, and had been for some while, they could, if necessary, back calculate to establish that you were over the limit when you were driving. If you claim that you were never driving you have a credible defence to put to either.

[cupid04]

that owls eyes keep loking at me!!

[baza]

tabu have you gone to roost ?

[bednobs]

i don't really get why you would stay in the car on the hard shoulder (an extremely dangerous place to be when sober, let alone drunk), when you could have gone with them

[boxtops]

agree with bednobs, at the very least you should have got out of the car and be waiting away from it up the slope or on the verge. Hugely risky to stay in the vehicle.

[BRIGHT SPARK]

Could you please re-submit this question when you sober up...T.I.A.