Police procedure following RTI

Convicted Driver Insurance

Kermit72

New Member
Please can I have some advice on behalf of my husband. He was involved in car accident in the early hours of the morning recently. No one else was involved but the car was a right-off. He was treated by paramedics at the scene and the police attended. He admitted to the police that he had had a drink (it was 3 pints if normal strength lager though he didn't tell them that) and remembers being breathalised but does not know the outcome. He was taken to hospital for treatment and a blood test was taken 4 hours later. He injured his right (writing) arm in the accident and consequently doesn't remember signing anything though he gave verbal consent to the blood test. No doctor was present when he gave this consent. My husband was not charged or bailed and the only thing he left the hospital with was his own sample and the accompanying lab leaflet. He decided not to get it analysed (it was a nasty accident and he was still in shock so not based placed to make the right tactical decision).

I know he can still be charged and I guess we just need to sit and wait the outcome of the BAC but does this sound like correct police procedure. Shouldnt he have signed something? I know we can't get full legal advice until there is a charge to answer but wondering if this sounds possible. If so is there any way to prevent charges being brought rather than having to have to fight to have them dropped? Any help / advice gratefully received.

Thanks
 
i think you already realise that its difficult to give advice with no charge, no client and no real detail on what happened so its probably best to wait and see whether any charges are laid. if so then the summons will come through the post with a court date and time and hopefully some case papers also. The cases where blood is taken from hospital patients are the best one to defend as they usually involve a large degree of human error and continuity of evidence. However people also lose sight of the original offence, ie. was your husband drunk and was he driving??? everyone is entitled to a defence but there is no point flogging a case that gets him a larger sentence following a pointless defence trial. I look forward to hearing from you once the summons is received unless you have any more questions before then, many thanks
 
Thank you for the reply. I'm really struggling with this as I'm so very angry with my husband. I am just finishing maternity leave with a 7 month old and 2 year old which is very stressful in its own right. We've had a tough time with a colicky baby and difficult toddler which has put our marriage under pressure. My husband should never have got behind the wheel of his car and driven and he lied to me about where he was so I've been distraught about that. He went to see his cousin who was just bavk from Afghanistan after being hit in a mortar attack my husband was worried when he wouldnt see him again after hecwas due to go back 2 weeks later. But he didn't need to drink and he could easily have killed someone or left his children without a father. I can't contemplate that. The worst of what we have to deal with now is he was driving a company car and is very likely to lose his job. One he loves and one required to keep the roof over our head. He works in the automotive industry so whole career down the drain. He belatedly had his blood sample tested. It was in a holdall for 10 days (not fridge) and came back at a whopping 162mg. We are just trying to figure out the best course of action as I can't face a trial and high costs if he fails a challenge (if there are any chances on a technicality) but losing his licence and being convicted will have such devastating consequences for us as a family. Any thoughts or advice welcomed.
 
the blood sample that your husband had tested will not be accurate due to the length of time that it was kept at room temperature, but on the amount of alcohol consumed it is likely that he will have been over at the time of the crash in any event. the fact that a vehicle was written off and that he had injuries are aggravating features. It may well be that an early guilty plea is that best way forward and keeping the ban down to a minimum is the best option, the plea could be dealt with at the first hearing and we could have a solicitor attend court and get everything resolved quickly and effectively, many thanks
 
Thanks for the advice. One last question, as my husband has not yet provided the police with a statement and wasn't arrested and bailed, we are anticipating that he will be asked to attend an interview before they decide what exactly to charge him with. We expect to receive a call once they get their blood test results back.

My question is, what is the earliest opportunity for pleading guilty. He would prefer to wait until he receives the pack of papers from the police but that will be after any interview. Would he have to plead at the interview if/when arrested there? Does that make sense?

Thxnk you.
 
the only place that he can plead guilty is in court, the police may well wish to interview and we would be able to provide someone to attend with him to ensure that this is done correctly. The police station could be funded on legal aid although the rest of the case would most likely need to be privately funded. let me know how you get on and what the results are when they come back, many thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top