Drink driving

Convicted Driver Insurance

Skinner

New Member
On the 22/06/20 my stepdaughter phoned police and made a false alagation and told police that I had been drinking and driving. I had been out in my car early hours in the morning and my car was seen on CCTV when I got home I parked my car on the kerb and went into the house I drank about half a litre of jack Daniels whisky and two cans all within about twenty minutes I had no food for two days the police came to my home address and arested me @2:45 but they didn't catch me in the car and didn't have keys on me I blow 107 and 111 on the machine at police station but I didn't have any alcohol when I was driving can they really charge me
 
JMR21 said:
If u admit it they can charge you, hope u didnt , and get a solicitor to help defend u
Click to expand...
I didn't admit nothing but they are charging me just have to wait for papers to come through with court date I have a solicitor I just don't understand how they can charge when they never stopped me in the car and I didn't have keys on me yes I had alcohol but my car was parked up fo the night my stepdaughter waited until I had consumed alcohol and phoned police and told them I was drink driving I consumed about half a litre of Jack Daniels whisky and two cans of larger within about twenty minutes
 
If u can convince your stepdaughter to go to court and say she wrongfully accused you of drink driving , i think your solicitor can rid of the charges easily
 
JMR21 said:
If u can convince your stepdaughter to go to court and say she wrongfully accused you of drink driving , i think your solicitor can rid of the charges easily
Click to expand...
She won't do that but is unwilling to give statement
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Skinner said:
I didn't admit nothing but they are charging me just have to wait for papers to come through with court date I have a solicitor I just don't understand how they can charge when they never stopped me in the car and I didn't have keys on me yes I had alcohol but my car was parked up fo the night my stepdaughter waited until I had consumed alcohol and phoned police and told them I was drink driving I consumed about half a litre of Jack Daniels whisky and two cans of larger within about twenty minutes
Click to expand...
They are not going to believe that as a defence, too convenient that you had that much to drink within 20 mins of getting in, and not having any before!?!?! Did you tell them this at the time and have a blood test at the station so they could do a back calculation? If not, you will be charged as you have no proof of not drink driving.

If this is your first offence, the calculator says as follows;

Details of offence as provided by you:
  • Specimen Type: breath
  • Alcohol Level: between 90 and 119
  • No previous drink driving related convictions within the proceeding 10 years
  • You have not been disqualified two or more times for 56 days or more within the proceeding 3 years
Based on the information you provided above, upon conviction of driving with excess alcohol, Magistrates' sentencing guidelines suggest:
  • A driving disqualification of 23 - 28 months; and
  • A Low to high level community order
Classed as High Risk Offender
Because the level of alcohol in your system exceeded 87.5 microgrammes per 100 millilitres of breath, or 200 milligrammes per 100 millilitres of blood, or 267.5 milligrammes per 100 millilitres of urine you will be classed as a high risk offender.

High risk offenders are required to take and pass a DVLA Medical before their driving licence will be returned to them upon expiration of their driving driving disqualification.
 
Thats the law if been caught driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle, By skinners side of the story, the police have a no proof even if he did drink drive, he was at home drinking and only one witness to say someone was drink driving who arent going into court to testify, innocent till proven guilty , lots of holes in the case tbh
 
JMR21 said:
Thats the law if been caught driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle, By skinners side of the story, the police have a no proof even if he did drink drive, he was at home drinking and only one witness to say someone was drink driving who arent going into court to testify, innocent till proven guilty , lots of holes in the case tbh
Click to expand...
He says there is CCTV showing he was driving. If he was arrested and breathalysed at the station, had he given the defence of driving after drinking (the hip flask defence) then a blood sample could be taken and analysed to see what the reading would have been at the time of driving. I doubt this was the case, therefore it is not down to the CPS to prove the guilt, it is down to the defendant to prove innocence.
 
Skinner said:
I didn't admit nothing but they are charging me just have to wait for papers to come through with court date I have a solicitor I just don't understand how they can charge when they never stopped me in the car and I didn't have keys on me yes I had alcohol but my car was parked up fo the night my stepdaughter waited until I had consumed alcohol and phoned police and told them I was drink driving I consumed about half a litre of Jack Daniels whisky and two cans of larger within about twenty minutes
Click to expand...
I was parked up for the night and drinking, when the police called...also blew 111 ..plead guilty, and spare yourself a further third on your ban and fine...
 
If they have evidence that you drove the vehicle (the CCTV?) then what the legal position is that what was in your body when you were tested IS what was in your body when you were driving.
You have what is called the “hip flask” defence which is that the alcohol you consumed after you drove put you over the limit.
It is a defence, so it is your job to convince a court, on the balance of probabilities, that you did drink the alcohol you claim and it was after you drove.
If the police can show that you had driven a vehicle
On a road, and that a subsequent breath test showed you were over the limit, they have all the proof they need, that is the law. You now have to prove your innocence....
Your stepdaughter could be summonsed to give evidence, but if she admits that she made the story up, she is open to prosecution herself. Wasting Police time comes to mind, but also Perverting the course of justice by making a false allegation that got you arrested. That is a Crown Court and prison time type of offence.
Did you tell the police at the time that you had consumed the alcohol after you drove? Did they see the cans and the bottle? Did they seize them?

You will have to get a technical expert to prepare a report to indicate if what you say you drank would account for the reading. (It would, but you need an expert to say so) Thar will cost about £3-400.
 
AndyJG said:
at least half an hour..
Click to expand...
I had a back test performed that agreed with my hip flask defence. The judge decided that it was invalid and convicted me all the same. I also had a drink drive solicitor defending me at quite some cost.
 
TPR said:
I had a back test performed that agreed with my hip flask defence. The judge decided that it was invalid and convicted me all the same. I also had a drink drive solicitor defending me at quite some cost.
Click to expand...

The problem with any hip flask defence is that whilst the report may ‘prove’ that a person was under the limit when they drove a vehicle, the report is based solely on the information supplied by the defendant. So if he / she has supplied misleading information, the result is flawed. It therefore comes down to the credibility of the defendant when they give evidence, and the circumstances of the alleged drinking.
in this case, Skinner has given details of the amount he drank that would support a reading of 107, BUT when you look at the circumstances he gives ‘I had nothing to drink all evening, came back, had a row with my stepdaughter, drank half a litre of JD and drank 2 cans in 20 minutes, then the police arrived....’ seems to not be very credible In my view. Others may think differently but at the end of the day it it a matter for what the magistrates make of it, including what they hear - or don’t hear - from the stepdaughter who is in a bit of a hole either way.
it would be interesting to know if the step daughter phoned the police before Skinner got home or after. If before, how did she guess that he was going to come home and drink?
 
price1367 said:
The problem with any hip flask defence is that whilst the report may ‘prove’ that a person was under the limit when they drove a vehicle, the report is based solely on the information supplied by the defendant. So if he / she has supplied misleading information, the result is flawed. It therefore comes down to the credibility of the defendant when they give evidence, and the circumstances of the alleged drinking.
in this case, Skinner has given details of the amount he drank that would support a reading of 107, BUT when you look at the circumstances he gives ‘I had nothing to drink all evening, came back, had a row with my stepdaughter, drank half a litre of JD and drank 2 cans in 20 minutes, then the police arrived....’ seems to not be very credible In my view. Others may think differently but at the end of the day it it a matter for what the magistrates make of it, including what they hear - or don’t hear - from the stepdaughter who is in a bit of a hole either way.
it would be interesting to know if the step daughter phoned the police before Skinner got home or after. If before, how did she guess that he was going to come home and drink?
Click to expand...
I agree. Many may think it’s a loophole that they may be able to get through. Ultimately, it’s a very difficult defence to mount. Were I to have my time again, it would probably be easier and more useful to try and plead guilty but ask the cps to accept some drinking after the event to try and bring the number down below 87.5....
 
price1367 said:
The problem with any hip flask defence is that whilst the report may ‘prove’ that a person was under the limit when they drove a vehicle, the report is based solely on the information supplied by the defendant. So if he / she has supplied misleading information, the result is flawed. It therefore comes down to the credibility of the defendant when they give evidence, and the circumstances of the alleged drinking.
in this case, Skinner has given details of the amount he drank that would support a reading of 107, BUT when you look at the circumstances he gives ‘I had nothing to drink all evening, came back, had a row with my stepdaughter, drank half a litre of JD and drank 2 cans in 20 minutes, then the police arrived....’ seems to not be very credible In my view. Others may think differently but at the end of the day it it a matter for what the magistrates make of it, including what they hear - or don’t hear - from the stepdaughter who is in a bit of a hole either way.
it would be interesting to know if the step daughter phoned the police before Skinner got home or after. If before, how did she guess that he was going to come home and drink?
Click to expand...
It was the early hours of the morning, i highly doubt any cctv would "clearly" catch the vehicle with the mr skinner inside
 
TPR said:
I agree. Many may think it’s a loophole that they may be able to get through. Ultimately, it’s a very difficult defence to mount. Were I to have my time again, it would probably be easier and more useful to try and plead guilty but ask the cps to accept some drinking after the event to try and bring the number down below 87.5....
Click to expand...
thats what I did...or my lawyer did.....judge very sympathetic...she was very reasonable and stated she would like to ban me for less..but her hands were tied..very high reading..discount for early guilty plea...3 years reduced to 2 years for early guilty plea.....fine also reduced by a third also....ban reduced by 6 months for attending drink driving awareness course..i regard myself as lucky...
 
JMR21 said:
It was the early hours of the morning, i highly doubt any cctv would "clearly" catch the vehicle with the mr skinner inside
Click to expand...
If they have charged him I think they are confident enough of a conviction. He has already admitted driving prior to this, so presume told dibble this as well. How come you only comment on this thread? Have you got a vested interest?
 
AndyJG said:
thats what I did...or my lawyer did.....judge very sympathetic...she was very reasonable and stated she would like to ban me for less..but her hands were tied..very high reading..discount for early guilty plea...3 years reduced to 2 years for early guilty plea.....fine also reduced by a third also....ban reduced by 6 months for attending drink driving awareness course..i regard myself as lucky...
Click to expand...
wher
BigTom said:
If they have charged him I think they are confident enough of a conviction. He has already admitted driving prior to this, so presume told dibble this as well. How come you only comment on this thread? Have you got a vested interest?
Click to expand...
I've literally joined a day ago, this thread seems good for
debate and get some opinions tbh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top