COURT TOMORROW MORNING!! DUMBEST OFFENCE EVER!

Convicted Driver Insurance

Stupidity

New Member
ON NEW YEARS EVE/DAY I DECIDED TO STAY HOME WITH THE FAMILY. MY BROTHER WENT OUT AND DROVE A RENTAL CAR WHICH WAS PARKED NOT TOO FAR AWAY. HE USED THE FAMILY VEHICLE TO DRIVE TO THE ZIP CAR LOCATION AND SWITCHED VEHICLES. HE ASKED IF I COULD MOVE THE CAR BACK INTO THE BAY BECAUSE HE MIGHT GET LUCKY AND DOES NOT WANT TO GET A TICKET.

I FELL ASLEEP AFTER DRINKING SMOKING SOME WEED AND QUICKLY REMEMBERED AT 3AM. I RAN TO THE CAR AND QUICKLY DROVE AT FULL SPEED BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE INSURANCE. AS I CAME TO A JUNCTION A MOTOR BIKE CAME ROUND THE CORNER AND I SWERVED WHICH RESULTED TO ME BEING ON TOP OF A METAL TRIANGLE SHAPED CYLINDER. IT WAS STUCK UNDER THE FRONT BUMPER AND I COULDN'T BELIEVE MY LUCK AS I WAS LESS THAN 25YARDS FROM MY HOUSE. A FEW PEDESTRIANS WALKED BY AND TRIED TO HELP BUT WITH NO SUCCESS.

I TRIED TO CALL MY BROTHER WHO IS INSURED BUT COULD NOT GET THROUGH. I THEN CALLED MY COUSIN WHO SAID HE WAS ON THE WAY WITH THE AA. I WAITED FOR 30 MINS MORE AND HE SAID IT WOULD BE 2 MORE HOURS. I THEN WENT HOME THINKING ALL WAS GOOD AND WELL AND DRANK SOME WREY & NEPHEW ALCOHOL WHICH WAS THE ONLY DRINK IN THE HOUSE TO KEEP ME WARM WHILST I WAITED OUTSIDE. ITS ALCOHOL 63% ABV BUT IS VERY SWEET AND THE ONLY DRINK MY JAMAICAN FRIENDS WILL TOUCH SO I'VE BECOME ACCUSTOMED TO IT.

1 HOUR 30 MINS LATER I WENT BACK TO THE CAR AND SAT INSIDE TO KEEP AWAY FROM THE RAIN AND WAIT FOR THE AA WHO WAS 20 MINS AWAY... AND THE POLICE SHOWED UP! I TOLD THEM WHAT HAPPENED AND EVERYTHING WAS BEING SORTED AND THEY DIDN'T SEEMED BOTHERED AND WAS WAITING WITH ME FOR THE AA TO COME AS THEY HEARD ME ON THE PHONE. JUST WHEN THEY WERE ABOUT TO LEAVE A VAN FULL OF POLICE PULLED UP, AND THEIR SUPERIOR OFFICER TOLD THEM TO CHECK ME OUT AND DO A BREATH TEST. I FAILED THE BREATH TEST AS YOU CAN IMAGINE AND WAS ABSOLUTELY GOB-SMACKED. I GOT A 59 READING AND GOT TAKEN TO THE STATION FOR 12 HOURS!!

I WASN'T WORRIED ABOUT THE DRINKING, JUST THE INSURANCE TILL I DECIDED TO CHECK THE NET AND SAW THIS FORUM! :(

NOW I'M PISSED AND WORRIED ABOUT GETTING A DRINKING BAN. THE CORNER IS KNOWN TO HAVE ACCIDENTS ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS AND I WAS ADVISED TO GET A RECORD FROM THE COUNCIL AS PROOF. MY FRIEND SAID THEY MIGHT DELAY THE HEARING TILL THE EVIDENCE HAS BEEN SENT FROM THE COUNCIL AND I MIGHT HAVE TO ALSO GET STATEMENTS FROM NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE SEEN PREVIOUS CARS IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS.

1 HOUR 30 MINS AND PEOPLE STILL ASK WHY DID I STAY, WHICH IS A QUESTION I'VE BEEN BEATING MYSELF UP WITH!!! :mad:

I COULDN'T HAVE PLANNED FOR THIS AND HAVE GIVEN MY MATES PLENTY OF YEARS OF CRYING LAUGHTER TO CHERISH... :mad::(

ESPECIALLY AFTER I JUST BLOODY WATCHED THE WOLF OF WALL STREET, I MAKE A FILM OUT OF THIS.

ANY RECOMMENDATIONS AND FURTHER ADVICE WOULD BE A BONUS. :confused:
 
How many accidents there have been at that spot does not matter. I doubt the police have charged you with careless driving, so to say "I need to show the court that lots of people have got stuck where I did" has no bearing on your predicament.
What does matter is that you "are or have been the driver of a motor vehicle and the police suspect that you have consumed alcohol." You have then failed a breath test. (They didn't know about the weed) the drink drive offence is complete, and the driving without insurance.
You can put forward the defence that you had consumed alcohol since you drove, but from what you said, you were on your own so there are no witnesses to that. It is up to YOU to satisfy that court that you drank alcohol after driving, AND that the amount you drank made the difference to you being over the legal limit. The police do not have to prove that you have NOT had a drink.
when the police saw you, you were still in charge of the vehicle. Have you been charged with drink driving, for driving it there, or for being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle when they found you. If it is the latter, you can put forward he defence that you were not likely to drive whilst still over the legal limit, but then the court would wonder why you waited in the vehicle for the AA, rather than leave it to your cousin who was "on his way."
By the way, drinking alcohol does NOT keep you warm, it cools the body through helping the blood flow to the extremities, where cooler blood then flows back to the body core.
 
price1367 said:
How many accidents there have been at that spot does not matter. I doubt the police have charged you with careless driving, so to say "I need to show the court that lots of people have got stuck where I did" has no bearing on your predicament.
What does matter is that you "are or have been the driver of a motor vehicle and the police suspect that you have consumed alcohol." You have then failed a breath test. (They didn't know about the weed) the drink drive offence is complete, and the driving without insurance.
You can put forward the defence that you had consumed alcohol since you drove, but from what you said, you were on your own so there are no witnesses to that. It is up to YOU to satisfy that court that you drank alcohol after driving, AND that the amount you drank made the difference to you being over the legal limit. The police do not have to prove that you have NOT had a drink.
when the police saw you, you were still in charge of the vehicle. Have you been charged with drink driving, for driving it there, or for being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle when they found you. If it is the latter, you can put forward he defence that you were not likely to drive whilst still over the legal limit, but then the court would wonder why you waited in the vehicle for the AA, rather than leave it to your cousin who was "on his way."
By the way, drinking alcohol does NOT keep you warm, it cools the body through helping the blood flow to the extremities, where cooler blood then flows back to the body core.
Click to expand...

THERE ACTUALLY WAS A FEW WITNESSES AT THE SCENE. I'M TRACKING THEM DOWN, ONE OF WHICH WAS A SHOP KEEPER AND A NEIGHBOUR IN A NEARBY BLOCK OF FLATS. HOPEFULLY I'LL BE ABLE TO GET THE STATEMENTS ASAP SINCE I WAS ADVISED THAT IF I PLEAD NOT GUILTY, THE CASE WILL BE ADJOURNED TO ANOTHER DATE.

THE ACTUAL CHARGE IS DRIVING A MOTOR VEHICLE 'WHEN' ALCOHOL LEVEL ABOVE LIMIT!

THIS IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION

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,

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.

I WAS NOT DRIVING WITH A HIGH CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL AND DID NOT ATTEMPT TO DRIVE WITH ALCOHOL IN MY SYSTEM AS I ALREADY KNEW THE AA WAS ON THE WAY.

AFTER THE POLICE TOOK ME TO THE STATION MY COUSIN TURNED UP AND WAS TOLD HE COULD NOT TAKE THE VEHICLE EVEN THOUGH THE SAME OFFICER HE MET AT THE SCENE HEARD ME ON THE PHONE CONFIRMING HE WAS COMING WITH THE AA.

I'M LEARNING MORE AND HAD NO IDEA ABOUT ALCOHOL NOT KEEPING THE HUMAN BODY WARM. PROBABLY TOO MUCH HOLLYWOOD MOVIES.
 
I don't think you read what I put in my reply to you.
You DID drive the vehicle, when you were driving fast because you had no insurance, swerved and hit the metal.
you WERE over the legal limit. The Police are not accusing you of driving while you were sat in your car when they arrived, they charged you because you HAD been the driver when you had the collision.
What you have to satisfy the court is that you drank AFTER you drove AND that the amount you drank made the difference to you being over the legal limit. Witnesses at the scene are no good, what you need are witnesses who were outside your house when you were drinking 30 minutes AFTER the crash, even if there were some there at that very early hour, and can say they saw you drinking, can they say how much you drank?
it is one thing to say that witnesses "saw me drink three miniature bottles from full to empty." Which could be evidence of drinking AND how much you drank..... and another thing entirely that witnesses "saw me with a part full bottle and I drank some from it" which is evidence of drinking but NOT evidence of how much you drank.
I have used capitals to stress the important words. Your post would be much easier to read if you only used capitals where necessary. All capitals for postings on the internet is considered as shouting, aside from making reading harder.
the classic drinking alcohol when cold was showing a St Bernard dog digging a person out of an avalanche, then the person drinking brandy from a barrel round the dogs neck, looked good, but never really happened!
 
price1367 said:
I don't think you read what I put in my reply to you.
You DID drive the vehicle, when you were driving fast because you had no insurance, swerved and hit the metal.
you WERE over the legal limit. The Police are not accusing you of driving while you were sat in your car when they arrived, they charged you because you HAD been the driver when you had the collision.
What you have to satisfy the court is that you drank AFTER you drove AND that the amount you drank made the difference to you being over the legal limit. Witnesses at the scene are no good, what you need are witnesses who were outside your house when you were drinking 30 minutes AFTER the crash, even if there were some there at that very early hour, and can say they saw you drinking, can they say how much you drank?
it is one thing to say that witnesses "saw me drink three miniature bottles from full to empty." Which could be evidence of drinking AND how much you drank..... and another thing entirely that witnesses "saw me with a part full bottle and I drank some from it" which is evidence of drinking but NOT evidence of how much you drank.
I have used capitals to stress the important words. Your post would be much easier to read if you only used capitals where necessary. All capitals for postings on the internet is considered as shouting, aside from making reading harder.
the classic drinking alcohol when cold was showing a St Bernard dog digging a person out of an avalanche, then the person drinking brandy from a barrel round the dogs neck, looked good, but never really happened!
Click to expand...

I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'RE HERE TO VENT OR HELP. FIRST TIME EVER USING A FORUM AND USING CAPITALS IS MY PEROGATIVE, NOT TO EMPHASISE SHOUTING.

I CLEARLY DIDN'T STATE I WAS SPEEDING OR NOT. AND WAS DEFINITELY NOT IN A RUSH BECAUSE OF NO INSURANCE! SO I GUESS YOU WASN'T READING MY POST CLEARLY.:confused:

I ALSO NEVER STATED IF I STAYED ON MY DOORSTEP DRINKING OR WHETHER I WALKED AROUND WITH THE DRINK. MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE STATED THE VEHICLE WAS LITERALLY ON MY DOORSTEP AND HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO TAKE PICTURES TO SHOW HOW CLOSE. IF ONLY YOU WAS ABLE TO SEE THEN YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND.

MY PREVIOUS POST WAS JUST TO LET OTHERS KNOW ABOUT THE ACTUAL CHARGE AND HOW I CHALLENGE TO TACKLE IT. I JUST HAVE A FEELING MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT AWARE THAT THE WORDING IN THE CHARGES MATTERS A GREAT DEAL.

IN THE MEAN TIME, LOOKS LIKE MY DEFENSE ILL BE A POST INCIDENT CONSUMPTION. AFTER I PLEAD NOT GUILTY I SHOULD HAVE SOME TIME TO PUT MY EVIDENCE TOGETHER AS THE CASE WILL BE ADJOURNED FOR TRAIL.

FINGERS CROSSED!!
 
I accept that you did not use the word speeding, what you did say was:
I RAN TO THE CAR AND QUICKLY DROVE AT FULL SPEED BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE INSURANCE. AS I CAME TO A JUNCTION A MOTOR BIKE CAME ROUND THE CORNER AND I SWERVED
Sounded like speeding when I read it, and certainly that you were in a hurry.
As to using capitals, this is what Wikipedia says about it:
With the advent of the Bulletin board system, or BBS, and later the Internet, typing messages in all caps became closely identified with "shouting" or attention-seeking behavior, and is considered very rude. As a result, netiquette generally discourages the use of all caps when posting messages online. While all caps can be used as an alternative to rich-text "bolding" for a single word or phrase, to express emphasis, repeated use of all caps can be considered "shouting" or irritating.

There is also a practical element in that people with dyslexia have trouble making out words that are written in all upper case, so your posting may be impossible for them to read.
As it is considered rude, not by just me but the internet community, exercising your prerogative to use all upper case may well see some posters with useful information exercising their prerogative to not offer good advice to you because you chose to be rude.
It was good to see that when you quoted the legislation you left it in lower case, which will be readable to all. When the legislation talks about "excess alcohol" it is not talking about excessive amounts of alcohol, just "In excess of the legal limit" which is 35.

You are using the post incident alcohol consumption as your defence. I was trying to show what you will have to satisfy the court about. People tend to think that just showing that you have had a drink afterwards is enough, but it isn't. Your reading was 59, the limit is 35. You will have to satisfy the court that you drank enough to increase your reading by 23 or more after you had the collision. I was therefore trying to be helpful in the preparation of your defence, so you have a realistic picture of what you will be challenged on in court.
 
Let us know how it goes with this one then mate, a tough one to prove that you drunk afterwards considering the other mitigating factors going against you. My advice would be to speak in depth to solicitors or your legal rep before deciding your plea.

good luck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top