NEW Hip Flask Defence April 15

Convicted Driver Insurance

redmauger

New Member
HI Guys, im new to this forum and this is my first post. Im in desperate need of some glimmer of hope really. I best start with the first offence. In 2004 i pleaded guilty to drink driving and was given 14 months. In 2009 I went to the shop and bought copius amounts of wine went home got very drunk and due to a neighbour complaining got breathalised at home and sentensed for failing to provide. I pleaded guilty and got 3 yr ban. In Feb this year after having long periods of complete abstinance and receiving psych therapy for child abuse and domestic abuse I started to get panic attacks and started drinking again. On the day before my arrest i had realised that i was in trouble with alcohol and had reduced to 4 cans of cider finished them off at 7pm. Woke up the next morning after a horrible nite (i have ptsd) and woke up in a major panic went to the loca shop in the car and on the way back bumped someones bumper. We all got out of the vehicle and agreed there was no accident. I went home and spent the next hour downing the wine and cider. there was a know on the door and a cop came in a breathalised me at 91 and i went to the police station and an hour later also still blew 90. I had also taken a massive overdose of tranquilisers 9 x 10mg Temazepam, with the drink but was left in the cell for 12 hours and had to drink out of the toilet. there was a nurse who kept taking my vital signs. about 12 hours later the solicitor came and i gave a statment. on going to court today to plead not guilty there were so many errors in what i said and what was recorded, eg. i gave the police empty somersby cans out of the recycling instead of the strongbow id bought and also during my interview under the influence of temazepam id thought id had cointreau aswell ? if you dont know ptsd / severe panic disorder what can happen and along with tranquiliser abuse you can get mixed up memories and complete blanks. Well ive pleaded not guilty but my solicitor thinks becuase i have a previous from 2009 (even though not actually drink driving) it will go against me. The worst case is 4 - 5 yrs ban but im hoping to be found not guilty if they do a hip flask defence, does anyone have any experience of this as my mental health is begining to suffer and even though ive been doing so well getting over the trauma of abuse im starting to really struggle thinking of not being able to drive. Im currently registered disabled due to ptsd, panic, trauma, fibromyalgia and clyothmia (bipolar) and im getting really sad and low. Please help, thanks, Red.
 
Red,
''They" don't have to do a hip flask defence, YOU do. There is a presumption in law that what was in your system when you were breath tested is what was in your system when you were driving. It is up to you to satisfy the court that this was not the case. To do this you would have to commission, and pay for, a specialist report. This could then trigger the prosecution into producing their own specialist report. If you lose, they would want that cost recovering.
You say that the 2009 conviction was 'not actually drink driving' but failing to supply amounts to the same thing, and is often treated more seriously.
As to your interview, you had a solicitor present, so presumably he, as well as the police, felt that you were fit for interview. You seem to be intending to put forward the defence that you were so addled through temazepam that you didn't know what you were saying. Driving under the influence of drugs is an offence as well, so that is not a good case to put forward. I also wonder what DVLA might make of your circumstances if they are notified, as they could revoke your licence until they are satisfied that you do not have an alcohol or drugs problem.
In short, your defence seems fragile and fraught with problems. I appreciate the difficulties that you have in your life, but while you sort out the alcohol issues and the drugs misuse, perhaps it would be best if you did not drive anyway, for the sake of other road users.
Sorry if this seems harsh, but it is best that the reality of your situation is spelt out. With your previous, the prosecution are not going to give in easily and just believe you, you will have a costly fight on your hands with a not guilty on the facts that you have set out.
 
redmauger said:
HI Guys, im new to this forum and this is my first post. Im in desperate need of some glimmer of hope really. I best start with the first offence. In 2004 i pleaded guilty to drink driving and was given 14 months. In 2009 I went to the shop and bought copius amounts of wine went home got very drunk and due to a neighbour complaining got breathalised at home and sentensed for failing to provide. I pleaded guilty and got 3 yr ban. In Feb this year after having long periods of complete abstinance and receiving psych therapy for child abuse and domestic abuse I started to get panic attacks and started drinking again. On the day before my arrest i had realised that i was in trouble with alcohol and had reduced to 4 cans of cider finished them off at 7pm. Woke up the next morning after a horrible nite (i have ptsd) and woke up in a major panic went to the loca shop in the car and on the way back bumped someones bumper. We all got out of the vehicle and agreed there was no accident. I went home and spent the next hour downing the wine and cider. there was a know on the door and a cop came in a breathalised me at 91 and i went to the police station and an hour later also still blew 90. I had also taken a massive overdose of tranquilisers 9 x 10mg Temazepam, with the drink but was left in the cell for 12 hours and had to drink out of the toilet. there was a nurse who kept taking my vital signs. about 12 hours later the solicitor came and i gave a statment. on going to court today to plead not guilty there were so many errors in what i said and what was recorded, eg. i gave the police empty somersby cans out of the recycling instead of the strongbow id bought and also during my interview under the influence of temazepam id thought id had cointreau aswell ? if you dont know ptsd / severe panic disorder what can happen and along with tranquiliser abuse you can get mixed up memories and complete blanks. Well ive pleaded not guilty but my solicitor thinks becuase i have a previous from 2009 (even though not actually drink driving) it will go against me. The worst case is 4 - 5 yrs ban but im hoping to be found not guilty if they do a hip flask defence, does anyone have any experience of this as my mental health is begining to suffer and even though ive been doing so well getting over the trauma of abuse im starting to really struggle thinking of not being able to drive. Im currently registered disabled due to ptsd, panic, trauma, fibromyalgia and clyothmia (bipolar) and im getting really sad and low. Please help, thanks, Red.
Click to expand...

Hiya Price, thanks for replying. maybe what ive written did not make clear that I have had long periods of abstinace in the last 6 years, now volunteer within mental health and also that this was a lapse (my going out that day to buy alcohol). The reason i had been prescribed by the gp the tranquilisers was due to some serious psychotherapy i was going thru due to my abuse which was triggering my PTSD. My solicitor seems to think that it is for the court to prove i was over the limit as i am pleading not guilty. However they have offered a deal of a lower reading for an early plea which is why im confused as to what to do. I know i was not over the limit when i drove the car to buy alcohol but as you pointed out and i agree with you my defence is lousy.
 
Red,
it is not so much that your defence is lousy (it is) but your solicitor is lousy if he says that it is up to the police to prove that you were over the limit.
You can refer him to this quote from he CPS guidance document, which quotes the legal position and the act that covers it:
Post Driving Consumption and Back Calculations

If a driver claims that the proportion of alcohol in a breath or laboratory specimen provided by him is above the legal limit because he had consumed alcohol after he had ceased to drive, he will need to rebut the presumption contained in section 15(2) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 that the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine at the time of the alleged offence was not less than in the specimen. The presumption will be rebutted if the driver proves the matters set out at section 15(3) on a balance of probabilities. In order to do so he will usually rely upon expert scientific evidence to establish that his alleged post driving consumption of alcohol accounts for the excess found in his sample, which took him over the legal limit.

Has your solicitor commissioned an experts report?

if you agree your defence is lousy, it is open to you to instruct your solicitor to enter a guilty plea - it is YOUR case, not his - if this is communicated to CPS quickly, then the court may tread your case as a guilty plea, which will attract costs of about £100, rather than the costs from a not guilty plea where, if found guilty, they start at over £600.
 
redmauger said:
Hiya Price, thanks for replying. maybe what ive written did not make clear that I have had long periods of abstinace in the last 6 years, now volunteer within mental health and also that this was a lapse (my going out that day to buy alcohol). The reason i had been prescribed by the gp the tranquilisers was due to some serious psychotherapy i was going thru due to my abuse which was triggering my PTSD. My solicitor seems to think that it is for the court to prove i was over the limit as i am pleading not guilty. However they have offered a deal of a lower reading for an early plea which is why im confused as to what to do. I know i was not over the limit when i drove the car to buy alcohol but as you pointed out and i agree with you my defence is lousy.
Click to expand...

thanks again. I have a processing disorder autism so find it difficult to process all the information at once. I've been told that because I am under mental health services for ptsd and other I should have had a support worker with me to interpret the information and help me decide. The not guilty plea has gone in but I can change my mind after my meeting with him and my support worker tomorrow. I will bring up this conversation and ask if my solicitor is completely aware of the consequences. He is supposed to advice me but on what we have talked about he has advised me to plead not guilty. However the prosecution seemed flabbergasted that I didn't take the offer of a lower offence and plead guilty. I'm just not happy to plead guilty when I know I wasn't over the limit. I was breathalysed at home an hour later. I'm on disability so not worried about the fine but more worried about the ban. I have limited means and but will be able to pay the fine from not having driving costs. Maybe I should just plead guilty anyway as it seems I'm lost either way. :(
 
If you stopped after the accident, and swapped details with the other driver, presumably he only phoned the police because he felt you were affected by alcohol. That will be taken into account by the magistrates.
Good luck for tomorrow, let us know how you got on.
 
price1367 said:
If you stopped after the accident, and swapped details with the other driver, presumably he only phoned the police because he felt you were affected by alcohol. That will be taken into account by the magistrates.
Good luck for tomorrow, let us know how you got on.
Click to expand...
thank you we didn't swap details because wee both agreed no damage as less than 1mph and insurance have passed it to fraud as they agree no accident took place and that they were probably trying to get a claim in. They r trying to claim for whiplash which isn't possible undee the speed and circumstances :(
 
redmauger said:
thank you we didn't swap details because wee both agreed no damage as less than 1mph and insurance have passed it to fraud as they agree no accident took place and that they were probably trying to get a claim in. They r trying to claim for whiplash which isn't possible undee the speed and circumstances :(
Click to expand...

Hi again. I saw my solicitor yesterday with a friend and he is still keen for me to plead not guilty. He said I can apply for liscence back half way thru if I get guilty and charged. Is this correct at all please price ? Thank you for your info so far claire
 
Claire,
it is correct that you can apply for your licence back after serving half of your ban, subject to a minimum of 2 years served. But that does not mean it will be granted. You would have to show a change in your circumstances and that there would be a benefit, particularly to others, by you getting your licence back early. Because this would be your third conviction, you would have to certainly show you had put you r drink, and medication, problems behind you for at least a year.
what evxdence is the solicitor proposing to put forward about your drinking post driving? As I said before, it is not enough to say it happened, you have to produce evidence, and that would have to include a specialist report. What has he said about that?
I must admit I an sceptically about your solicitors capabilities. He thought the police have to prove that you didn't have a drink, he has put your costs up by £500 by putting in a not guilty plea with no real evidence, then says "don't worry, you can apply for your licence back early if you are convicted" ( and you would need a solicitor for that..... Whose interests is he serving?
if you do not believe what I am telling you, you could ask the same question about needing expert opinion, not just your word, to Sean, the solicitor who posts on the 'ask a solicitor' on this forum. He is an expert on drink driving cases, whereas many solicitors just treat drink driving like any other case, they are not aware or the intricacies involved.
 
Last edited:
H guys me again. I have an update and wld appreciate any help. My existing solicitor has bailed on me as he realised that 1.because I have a mental illness I should have had an appropriate adult and 2. He should not have let me be interviewed without a blood test as I had admitted to taking a high number of tranquilisers and along with the promethazine in the nite nurse I swallowed I should really have been in a hospital rather than a police cell. Do u know the law around this and if therefore the interview can be squashed please ?. I have proof of purchase of the alcohol and the forensic report put me in the clear however they tell me thay the prosecution r going to say I had alcohol in my system before I drove and also that there were anomalies in my interview because quite clearly I should not have been interviewed after having take a prescription drug overdose (after diving) any ideas on the interview being thrown out please. I got my info from mind the mental health charity thanks claire
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top