Arrested Drink Driving

[jpc]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I got stopped and the roadside breath test failed (no numbers on the device). I was arrested for drink driving and they said the breath machine at the station was not working so would have to provide a blood sample.

I was signed in etc & told both PC & custody sargeant about having Crohn's & the medication I take regularly. I finally saw the doctor and provided a sample, one of which I kept to send off to an indepedent lab.

About 15 minutes after giving the blood sample I was given another hand held breath test, this time it had numbers and stopped at 31 & then they put me on bail. Afterwards I had my fingerprints etc taken & then I was given a lift back to my car to drive home.


At no time did anyone read me my rights. Is that correct procedure? Also, I had pain from my crohn's & asked to use the toilet. I was finally allowed to go but the PC left the door open with his back turned as he said he had to even though I had been searched & all possessions removed?

Really appreciate your help. I've never drunk drove before & very rarely drink because of my illness

 

[jpc]

also, they never actually told me I was under arrest. When I failed the roadside the officer just said, "sorry it's gone to red. & then that the machine at the station was broken so they need to find somewhere to take me."

They took me to the station with the broken machine & gave blood as posted above. But no one ever said "you are under arrest" nor read my rights. Is that normal or would a solicitor be able to argue that in court?

Many thanks

Chris

 

[SeanJoyceStephensons]

First of all, I just want to start by explaining that the law in relation to excess alcohol cases is very complex and vast. Therefore it is important that technical defences are run by true motoring law experts, who have experience of putting forward such cases.

The fact that you were not properly arrested could result in complex legal arguments about whether or not the Prosecution are entitled to rely on your specimen. If the Prosecution were not permitted to rely on it you would be found not guilty.

In defending blood cases, there are often techical arguments which can be raised in relation to the extraction of the blood specimen in question. If the Court accepted these arguments the Prosecution would be unable to rely on any evidence of the blood specimen. In such a case you would be found not guilty.

If you wanted to contact me for further advice you can click on the link below.