41mg breath test

[andy mac]

hi i was involved in a crash where the other driver was at fault and i had a couple of pints 1hour 30min before driving. i got arrested and blew 41 the officers took me to a old police station that the hardly use they went to that staion because they new i would be close to getting away with dd so alot of rushing about they didn't no how to use or codes for the breathalyser but got it working. because i blew 41 i was offered a blood test or urine test they said it was up to me i wasn't sure but then the male officer piped up that the blood tests would be back calculated and be worse? is this true? but thats not the end of it. i noticed a small bottle of whisky beside the breath tester i pointed it out officer and looking at each other the said they test the machine with mouth alcohol ha ha this must be a good for me they could have poured in the machine to catch me out who knows what. any help would be good

 

[bristol.red]

i noticed a small bottle of whisky beside the breath tester i pointed it out officer and looking at each other the said they test the machine with mouth alcohol

Have you got evidence of this? Or perhaps they they do test the machine this way but certainly not in a whisky bottle, I think your having a laugh.

 

[andy mac]

Have you got evidence of this? Or perhaps they they do test the machine this way but certainly not in a whisky bottle, I think your having a laugh.

Honestly their was a miniature bottel of whiskey in the room no joke!! Also dampness on wall above the machine now I know this will affect any machine,,

 

[price1367]

hi i was involved in a crash where the other driver was at fault and i had a couple of pints 1hour 30min before driving. i got arrested and blew 41 the officers took me to a old police station that the hardly use they went to that staion because they new i would be close to getting away with dd so alot of rushing about they didn't no how to use or codes for the breathalyser but got it working. because i blew 41 i was offered a blood test or urine test they said it was up to me i wasn't sure but then the male officer piped up that the blood tests would be back calculated and be worse? is this true? but thats not the end of it. i noticed a small bottle of whisky beside the breath tester i pointed it out officer and looking at each other the said they test the machine with mouth alcohol ha ha this must be a good for me they could have poured in the machine to catch me out who knows what. any help would be good

The police do use alcohol when they are training to use a breath test machine. The normal dilution is a capful of whiskey in a full sized bottle of water (750ml)
It would not be possible to pour whiskey into the machine because they have a moisture sensor to detect the moisture content of the breath, to look for another type of dodge that used to be tried. It only works on alcohol molecules suspended in the breath sample.
the moisture on the wall is not relevant. The machine will have performed a self calibration check before and after your samples, and if it is affected by anything it shuts down, saying that it is outside its' tolerances.
You asked about a blood sample being used for a back calculation. This is possible, most police forces do not do this, unless you have been involved in something serious but I am aware the Staffordshire police routinely do this in every case.
Did you provide a blood sample?
the interesting part is the officer apparently suggesting that it was not worth doing one.
The law is every clear on this. The police have to offer you a blood or urine sample if your reading is 50 or below. You can accept or decline the offer, it is for them to chose which sample to require. BUT, the law goes on to say that NOTHING must be said to persuade or dissuade you from providing a sample. If the officer said what you allege, he was clearly in breach of this equipment to be neutral.
you could argue that you did not agree to a sample because of what he said, and therefore the breath test is inadmissible, and they have no blood sample..... No evidence!
i would suggest asking the police for a copy of your custody video (if the custody unit had one?) because if that comment is on tape you are home and dry, CPS will discontinue it.
If there s no tape, it might well have to be a trial, and see who the court believes.

 

[andy mac]

No blood or urine taken. The officer mentioned the back calculations to me and told me that they take it back to the time of the incident so to me it seemed the better option to go with the breath test. I have went to 3 different lawyers that tell me to plead not guilty. What do you think. The officer that was talking to me about the incident comment on that I had obviously not been drinking and put his breathalyser away at the scene the told us that it was routine to check I thot I would be ok! To my disappointment and shame I was over.

 

[price1367]

As I said in my earlier post, you should write to the police and request a copy of the custody video. If that shows the officer telling you it is not worth doing a blood /urine sample, you will probable get CPS to discontinue the case.
If you plead not guilty you can also asked to be given a copy of the MGDDa form that the officer completes with the details of the drink drive procedure. This is likely, however, to just show that you were offered the opportunity of providing samples and you declined. It will not say WHY you declined. You will need a solicitor for a not guilty plea on this. Suggesting to a police officer that he is being 'economical with the truth' takes some practice......

 

[bristol.red]

If all this is true and you are not entitled to legal aid. Forget the solicitor for now. Plea not guilty on your 1st hearing. The cps will hand you advanced disclosure papers. Have a read of them, even scan them and post them on this thread omitting any reference to you, your vehicle or any other obvious details that you don't want the world to see. Before your trial the cps will either discontinue the case or they will send you every bit of evidence they have, evidence they are using and evidence they will not be using, even evidence that helps your defence. Have a good read of this, then take it all to a solicitor if you still think you got a chance. But I am sure the cps will discontinue the case unless the police are conspiring to get you done.

 

[price1367]

If all this is true and you are not entitled to legal aid. Forget the solicitor for now. Plea not guilty on your 1st hearing. The cps will hand you advanced disclosure papers. Have a read of them, even scan them and post them on this thread omitting any reference to you, your vehicle or any other obvious details that you don't want the world to see. Before your trial the cps will either discontinue the case or they will send you every bit of evidence they have, evidence they are using and evidence they will not be using, even evidence that helps your defence. Have a good read of this, then take it all to a solicitor if you still think you got a chance. But I am sure the cps will discontinue the case unless the police are conspiring to get you done.

i agree, you can get a lot of the stuff yourself without paying a solicitor to get it, but you only get the advance disclosure when you enter a not guilty plea.
BUT, I doubt the officers will agree that they said not to bother with a blood / urine sample, so CPS will not discontinue, just allow the trial to go ahead and see which side the magistrates believe......hence the need to also request the custody video which you should do NOW, as unless there has been a complaint or something contentious happen during that time, the tapes may well be recycled.,in my force they used to be routinely recycled for use again after 28 days.

 

[bristol.red]

hence the need to also request the custody video which you should do NOW, as unless there has been a complaint or something contentious happen during that time, the tapes may well be recycled.,in my force they used to be routinely recycled for use again after 28 days.

price as you already know, i have the highest respect for everything you have ever posted. Once again if the original poster is telling the truth then i fully agree with you again. However if this evidence does get recycled before a trial. Then in my opinion the only outcome any court could make would be a not guilty verdict.

 

[andy mac]

i agree, you can get a lot of the stuff yourself without paying a solicitor to get it, but you only get the advance disclosure when you enter a not guilty plea.
BUT, I doubt the officers will agree that they said not to bother with a blood / urine sample, so CPS will not discontinue, just allow the trial to go ahead and see which side the magistrates believe......hence the need to also request the custody video which you should do NOW, as unless there has been a complaint or something contentious happen during that time, the tapes may well be recycled.,in my force they used to be routinely recycled for use again after 28 days.

Do I just phone the police for the video? Well the mouth piece was put in after testing who is to say that it wasn't dipped in the alcohol?

 

[bristol.red]

Well the mouth piece was put in after testing who is to say that it wasn't dipped in the alcohol?

Andy, I'm starting to think you might be one of Britain's biggest gangsters and the police can't pin anything on you, so they have all conspired to get you a 12 month ban for drinking and driving.

 

[andy mac]

Andy, I'm starting to think you might be one of Britain's biggest gangsters and the police can't pin anything on you, so they have all conspired to get you a 12 month ban for drinking and driving.

Miby clutching at straws ha ha but it shouldn't have been their in the first place.

 

[bristol.red]

clutching at straws ha ha but it shouldn't have been their in the first place.

I think you got a good defence, especially if that CCTV evidence gets recycled. Please keep us informed.

 

[price1367]

price as you already know, i have the highest respect for everything you have ever posted. Once again if the original poster is telling the truth then i fully agree with you again. However if this evidence does get recycled before a trial. Then in my opinion the only outcome any court could make would be a not guilty verdict.

The only way disposal of the tape could affect the outcome of a trial would be if it had been requested as evidence, and then it was recycled, which could be viewed as trying to prejudice the judicial process. Remember that EVERY person coming into custody at a designated custody suite is videoed, and it would be totally impractical to keep all tapes until all the cases have been dealt with. Some cases could take months, or even years (for crown court) to resolve.
What happens is if there is a complaint made by a person in custody, or is something significant happens in terms of the prosecution case, then the recording is preserved in case it is needed. It is for the defence to request a copy of the tape, if they require it, but that window of opportunity is not there after about 28 days. Solicitors often request the recording be preserved in case they need it, rather than because they need it, but with no request made.... bye bye recording.
They have to keep the actual custody record for years, (this records personal details, visits and other procedural matters, but only what the custody officer records on the computer) and this can be requested for up to 12 months after your period of detention. This may well say about the offer of a further sample, and andy mac saying he didn't want to, but he agrees that this is what happened. What he needs to find is the actual words used in the offer, and that could come from the recording. (although not all of the custody suite may be covered, some areas may have just monitoring cameras with no recording, with just the custody desk being constantly recorded)
Andy mac could write to the police, saying that in his view he was persuaded by the officer to not provide an alternative sample, and asking for the custody video to be preserved as evidence in order to be able to see what the officer said. Then he would have a case for a not guilty result if they recycled it, because he has indicated that he views it as evidence. But he is then showing his hand too early in the proceedings and might 'assist' the officer when he is writing his statement. All he has to do is write saying: Name, date of birth, address. I was taken into custody at XXX police station at about xxxx hrs on DATE. I request that you supply me with a copy of my custody record and a copy of the custody video relating to my time in custody.
Once he has viewed the custody video he will know if what the officer is said to have told him about not bothering with further samples is on record. If it is... a win is assured.It will also help remind him what he said.... so that his recollection in court does not prove to be at odds with what is on the video, and the police use it as evidence themselves.
Just in case I am only quoting local policy, I have had a quick search for guidelines on the keeping of custody recordings. West Mercia and Thames Valley both quote 28 days. The Met, however, say 12 months on division, then 7 years at the central archive, so there is a variance force by force.

 

[andy mac]

The only way disposal of the tape could affect the outcome of a trial would be if it had been requested as evidence, and then it was recycled, which could be viewed as trying to prejudice the judicial process. Remember that EVERY person coming into custody at a designated custody suite is videoed, and it would be totally impractical to keep all tapes until all the cases have been dealt with. Some cases could take months, or even years (for crown court) to resolve.
What happens is if there is a complaint made by a person in custody, or is something significant happens in terms of the prosecution case, then the recording is preserved in case it is needed. It is for the defence to request a copy of the tape, if they require it, but that window of opportunity is not there after about 28 days. Solicitors often request the recording be preserved in case they need it, rather than because they need it, but with no request made.... bye bye recording.
They have to keep the actual custody record for years, (this records personal details, visits and other procedural matters, but only what the custody officer records on the computer) and this can be requested for up to 12 months after your period of detention. This may well say about the offer of a further sample, and andy mac saying he didn't want to, but he agrees that this is what happened. What he needs to find is the actual words used in the offer, and that could come from the recording. (although not all of the custody suite may be covered, some areas may have just monitoring cameras with no recording, with just the custody desk being constantly recorded)
Andy mac could write to the police, saying that in his view he was persuaded by the officer to not provide an alternative sample, and asking for the custody video to be preserved as evidence in order to be able to see what the officer said. Then he would have a case for a not guilty result if they recycled it, because he has indicated that he views it as evidence. But he is then showing his hand too early in the proceedings and might 'assist' the officer when he is writing his statement. All he has to do is write saying: Name, date of birth, address. I was taken into custody at XXX police station at about xxxx hrs on DATE. I request that you supply me with a copy of my custody record and a copy of the custody video relating to my time in custody.
Once he has viewed the custody video he will know if what the officer is said to have told him about not bothering with further samples is on record. If it is... a win is assured.It will also help remind him what he said.... so that his recollection in court does not prove to be at odds with what is on the video, and the police use it as evidence themselves.
Just in case I am only quoting local policy, I have had a quick search for guidelines on the keeping of custody recordings. West Mercia and Thames Valley both quote 28 days. The Met, however, say 12 months on division, then 7 years at the central archive, so there is a variance force by force.

This police station was as old as the hills their is no chance theirs a video But I will request for 1 thanks

 

[price1367]

Do I just phone the police for the video? Well the mouth piece was put in after testing who is to say that it wasn't dipped in the alcohol?

See my other post about getting the video, with a short letter. You or a solicitor can request this.

Each mouthpiece is individually sealed in a plastic wrapper, and should be unwrapped in front of the person before the test is administered. I presume you would have noticed if it was not done this way, and definately if the top was removed from the miniature bottle and the mouthpiece was dipped in it....
Incidentally, I have tried putting a small amount of mouthwash in my mouth, spitting it out and immediately blowing into a Lion breath test device and it recorded 118, then by the time the machine had reset and I blew again, it recorded 15, so 'mouth alcohol' does have an effect, but the difference in readings as the alcohol evaporates is dramatic.
This is a side issue, you should concentrate on your main chance, which is the suggestion by the officers that you do not bother taking the option of a further sample.

 

[price1367]

This police station was as old as the hills their is no chance theirs a video But I will request for 1 thanks

Can you tell us which police station it was? PM me if you do not want to do this on a public forum

 

[price1367]

No custody video recording there, have replied to your PM

 

[andy mac]

No custody video recording there, have replied to your PM

yes got that thanks. now i signed loads of papers and they said that i had to sign papers to say that they hadn't persuaded me in anyway to the blood and urine tests then told me that my girlfriend was waiting outside and i signed in a rush. will this affect anything?

 

[price1367]

Andy mac,
you signed the document being grateful to the officers for their help with the decision you made to not bother providing further samples. It was only later that you realised that they should not offer any advice, and without their 'explanation' you would have opted for a further sample..... Advice isn't persuading.... But it is NOT allowed and can make the process fatally flawed.