No MGDD/D submitted by CPS

Convicted Driver Insurance

Cam93

New Member
I had my first court date today and pleaded not guilty. The CPS only had the fact the police charged me and did not investigate my hip flask defence at all before charging me. They did not provide the back calculations for my court appearance as they thought I would plead guilty. Has this happened to anybody before. I have a case review in 3 weeks time and hoping it may get thrown out because of lack of evidence (no back calculations) and my mental health reasons for the incident.
 
The police are not obliged to do back calculations. The can do, to refute your claim, but do not have to.
It is a hip flask DEFENCE.
It is quite common that there is only basic information available at a first hearing, with further evidence being submitted if necessary, once the defence case has been set out.

In law, the presumption is that your reading when you were put on the breath test machine IS what was in your system when you drove.
YOU have to satisfy the court, on the balance of probability, that you drank after driving, AND it made the difference to you being over the limit.
Have you instructed a defence expert to give an opinion on your hip flask defence? Without that, you are almost certain to fail as you will have no evidence other than your word about what you drank making the difference to you being over the limit.
Your mental health reasons will also need some evidence to back it up, but be careful about putting too strong a case forward about your poor mental health when driving as DVLA could decide to revoke your licence.
 
I feel compelled to respond, I ran the hip flask with a toxicology report a witness and let me tell you all my credibility went out the window I ended with big ban a large fine and a larger solicitor bill £8k.

it also took 9 months of unrest and stress in hindsight I really wished I had pleaded guilty at the first opportunity and I would be well into my ban by now. X
 
I feel compelled to respond, I ran the hip flask with a toxicology report a witness and let me tell you all my credibility went out the window I ended with big ban a large fine and a larger solicitor bill £8k.

it also took 9 months of unrest and stress in hindsight I really wished I had pleaded guilty at the first opportunity and I would be well into my ban by now. X
I was a victim of a violent crime (arson attack), a front line covid worker, relationship breakdown and I am getting an autism diognosis. I should have had an appropriate adult for my interview. I drove to the motorway to commit suicide
 
I have to be blunt and say that, from a legal standpoint, none of what you say counts for anything.
If you should have had an appropriate adult and the interview is excluded, so long as there is evidence of you driving then it is irrelevant. (And you admit to driving in your post)
If you were fleeing from an arson attack that had just happened, that could be relevant, but only for you to drive as far as necessary to get to safety.
Being a front line covid worker is totally irrelevant, as is a relationship breakdown.
Driving to commit suicide whilst over the legal limit is still drink driving.

Be very careful about throwing in an autism assessment as you may well find that DVLA could revoke your licence.
 
Last edited:
Cam93

I have every sympathy with your situation, but drink driving is an 'absolutely' offence - there is no defence or mitigation that will get the offence acquited at court. It is very much a black and white offence.

Just some strong examples of when people have still been convicted of drink driving -

- Domestic violence victims fleeing a violent attack from their partners.

- A person driving to someone's address to stop them committing suicide.

- Someone moving their car away from the scene of a fire to prevent it being damaged.

These are just three examples of extreme situations, where the people concerned where over the DD limit and acted in good faith in difficult circumstances. However, they all lost their licences despite rock solid defences.

As I said, I have every sympathy with your situation and I wish you all the best in getting the right degree of support and help, but it will not prevent a ban trying to emphasise problems with your mental health.

CJ
 
I was a victim of a violent crime (arson attack), a front line covid worker, relationship breakdown and I am getting an autism diognosis. I should have had an appropriate adult for my interview. I drove to the motorway to commit suicide
I am sorry to hear about your situation, given I went to trial I can tell you the mitigation I had meant very little it was read out right at the end of the case, by then magistrates has deemed me dishonest by not pleading guilty at the first opportunity, my fine was £1300 I am single parent a care worker with 2 small children one with learning difficulties I ended up with a 26 month ban I was 89 over the limit.
 
I have to be blunt and say that, from a legal standpoint, none of what you say counts for anything.
If you should have had an appropriate adult and the interview is excluded, so long as there is evidence of you driving then it is irrelevant. (And you admit to driving in your post)
If you were fleeing from an arson attack that had just happened, that could be relevant, but only for you to drive as far as necessary to get to safety.
Being a front line covid worker is totally irrelevant, as is a relationship breakdown.
Driving to commit suicide whilst over the legal limit is still drink driving.

Be very careful about throwing in an autism assessment as you may well find that DVLA could revoke your licence.
I drove the car to the site and drunk after. There is no evidence I drunk drove at all. Which I didn't. I drunk after the car was parked.

Autistic people are still able to drive?
 
I drove home from my ex husbands house 3 miles away, I clipped a car entering my drive way around an hour later the police knocked on my door I was breathalysed at home no evidence, my toxicology matched my statement yet I was still charged and found guilty at trial.
 
I have to be blunt and say that, from a legal standpoint, none of what you say counts for anything.
If you should have had an appropriate adult and the interview is excluded, so long as there is evidence of you driving then it is irrelevant. (And you admit to driving in your post)
If you were fleeing from an arson attack that had just happened, that could be relevant, but only for you to drive as far as necessary to get to safety.
Being a front line covid worker is totally irrelevant, as is a relationship breakdown.
Driving to commit suicide whilst over the legal limit is still drink driving.

Be very careful about throwing in an autism assessment as you may well find that DVLA could revoke your licence.
I was a victim of a violent crime (arson attack), a front line covid worker, relationship breakdown and I am getting an autism diognosis. I should have had an appropriate adult for my interview. I drove to the motorway to commi
I was a victim of a violent crime (arson attack), a front line covid worker, relationship breakdown and I am getting an autism diognosis. I should have had an appropriate adult for my interview. I drove to the motorway to commit suicide
I drove the car to the site and drunk after. There is no evidence I drunk drove at all. Which I didn't. I drunk after the car was parked.

Autistic people are still able to drive?
Price did not say that autism was a bar to driving but simply pointing out , correctly , that it could lead to the DVLA revoking a licence. Further , I don’t know if you’ve looked at other threads , but if you were to be convicted and categorised as a High Risk Offender , your assertion that you were driving with a view to commit suicide will certainly prompt umpteen enquiries being made if you apply for your licence back at the end of any ban . From what you say you are firmly f the view that you are not guilty so hopefully a solicitor will be able to persuade a Court that that is the case. Good luck with everything.
 
I drove the car to the site and drunk after. There is no evidence I drunk drove at all. Which I didn't. I drunk after the car was parked.

Autistic people are still able to drive?
As II said before, it is for you to satisfy the court that you drank after driving and it put you over the limit.
The law presumes that what was in your system when you blew into the machine IS what was in your body when you drove. The police do not have to prove that you did drink before you drove, it is the other way round. Therefore there IS evidence that you 'drunk drove' and it is for you to disprove it - on the "balance of probability."
I accept that autistic people can drive, but you were putting it forward as one of your reasons why you are not guilty "and I am getting an autism diognosis"
I was pointing out that it is not part of a defence and it it is put forward as to your state of health, it could trigger a DVLA revoke. You admit that you drove the car to commit suicide, that indicates that you should not be driving due to your mental state.

I am not trying to be nasty to you, just giving you a dose of reality as to what you face taking this forward as a not guilty, as well as the increased costs involved which can be considerable.
 
Price did not say that autism was a bar to driving but simply pointing out , correctly , that it could lead to the DVLA revoking a licence. Further , I don’t know if you’ve looked at other threads , but if you were to be convicted and categorised as a High Risk Offender , your assertion that you were driving with a view to commit suicide will certainly prompt umpteen enquiries being made if you apply for your licence back at the end of any ban . From what you say you are firmly f the view that you are not guilty so hopefully a solicitor will be able to persuade a Court that that is the case. Good luck with everything.

No one said autism is a bar to driving, but a fresh diagnosis can lead to a revoke until the scope of your autism is established. Price is bang on here and the other advice regarding the hip flask defense is both correct and from the mouth of someone who has actually tried to run the defense. The entire burden of proof of a hip flask defense falls on the defendant not the prosecution, you need to pay a toxicologist to prove you were not over the limit at the time of the crash. The police do not bring a back calculation to court, they only perform a back calculation if a lot of time had passed between the crash and the bloods being taken and the police not being satisfied with say a low reading coming back but you being clearly very drunk at the time of initial arrest. So the police were never going to be brining a back calculation to court if your results already came back over the limit. Your two "hopes for it being thrown out" are lack of evidence (back calculation), a back calculation is not evidence so this is out and the other is your mental health, which is out because drink driving is a strict liability offence. The magistrates take a very dim view on this defense, you've been warned plenty here so I won't repeat them.

As someone who suffers from a mental health problem for the past 10 years, driving a car to a suicide attempt is a revokable offence. The DVLA require you to be 6 months free from suicidal ideation and 12 months free from an attempt in order to hold a licence. Your defense itself may result in your licence being revoked.
 
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top