Post accident drinking

Convicted Driver Insurance
It's worth remembering that police now have to provide photographic evidence of speeds cameras because some fool with a tall story appealed their decision and got the entire legal system overturned and all the speed cameras in the UK upgraded because ... the police did not have direct evidence of a crime.

But to do that OP, you need hard evidence of you drinking after the crash, and enough £££££s to battle the system all the way up to the High Court. So, best to keep your head down.
 
I just want to add that a few of the regulars are becoming incredible toxic to new members with genuine questions because they believe rightly or wrongly they are getting trolled by a single user making duplicate accounts to wind them up with tall stories. I'd just say policing that is best left to the moderators who have IP information of new posters, and it's probably better that people assume new posters are genuine or else this forum will devolve into a worthless hellhole that gatekeeps everything.
 
Djk85 said:
Had two pints at the pub and had a minor collision on the way home, would of been 100% under the limit so swapped details and left the scene on foot, proceeded to drink more beer thinking nothing of it and returned to the car 2hrs later to find police all over it, blew 98 in the end and a vast majority of that was consumed after the incident although I have little to no evidence of this, there was 1 hour between starting to drink and then leaving the pub, thoughts on plea?
Click to expand...

Back to the OP.

Two pints of what? And how can you be 100% sure you were under the limit.

Two pints of something at 5% would be marginal. Throw in a slightly wonky liver or something and who knows?
 
JamesH2122 said:
Back to the OP.

Two pints of what? And how can you be 100% sure you were under the limit.

Two pints of something at 5% would be marginal. Throw in a slightly wonky liver or something and who knows?
Click to expand...
Birta Moretti so 4.6 abv so yeah I’m probably stretching it a bit to say 100% sure but normally it’s two pints of medium strength lager and you generally absorb 1 drink per hour so I was fine to drive.
 
12eason said:
But to do that OP, you need hard evidence of you drinking after the crash, and enough £££££s to battle the system all the way up to the High Court. So, best to keep your head down.
Click to expand...

The Police used to refer to this as the hip flask defence that makes sod all different to the case - it will still result in conviction.

CJ
 
The police used to refer to rape victims and their parents as racists too, now there are hundreds of groomers in prison thanks to a single Times articles and a thousand men they labelled far right. I don't care what the police think, they are not the law. Most of them are dumb as dishwater and evil to boot. Literally F them.
 
12eason said:
Remember that Hitler never killed a single Jew. The police did it for him. They rounded them up, they put them on trains, they sent them to camps. They did it all because they thought they were doing the right thing. They were way too stupid to realise that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Click to expand...
I’ll give it a try bro but I don’t think the judge will buy it 😕
 
Gilln1 said:
@12eason I know we had our little 'agree to disagree' moment on another thread, but I have to ask.....what in the name of arse are you on about with your last 2 comments?
Click to expand...
The guy is a troll who is trying to incite hatred and arguments. Rape victims and the holocaust?

I mean wtf??? I think some of the aluminium from the foil hat that the obvious flat earther wears has seeped into his bloodstream.

I'd suggest ignoring him like I have so you don't have to put up with his under bridge dwelling nonsense...
 
Last edited:
BigTom said:
The guy is a troll who is trying to incite hatred and arguments. Rape victims and the holocaust?

I mean wtf??? I think some of the aluminium from the foil hat that the obvious flat earther wears has seeped into his bloodstream.

I'd suggest ignoring him like I have so you don't have to put up with his under bridge dwelling nonsense...
Click to expand...
Bat Sh!t crazy ......was a term often applied to people like that.
 
BigTom said:
The guy is a troll who is trying to incite hatred and arguments. Rape victims and the holocaust?







I mean wtf??? I think some of the aluminium from the foil hat that the obvious flat earther wears has seeped into his bloodstream.







I'd suggest ignoring him like I have so you don't have to put up with his under bridge dwelling nonse...



The guy is a troll who is trying to incite hatred and arguments. Rape victims and the holocaust?



I mean wtf??? I think some of the aluminium from the foil hat that the obvious flat earther wears has seeped into his bloodstream.



I'd suggest ignoring him like I have so you don't have to put up with his under bridge dwelling nonsense...
Click to expand...

BigTom said:
The guy is a troll who is trying to incite hatred and arguments. Rape victims and the holocaust?

I mean wtf??? I think some of the aluminium from the foil hat that the obvious flat earther wears has seeped into his bloodstream.

I'd suggest ignoring him like I have so you don't have to put up with his under bridge dwelling nonsense...
Click to expand...
somewhat comical that he actually liked this comment... :ROFLMAO:
 
It’s amazing how common it is to get shit faced after a crash following only a couple of pints. I mean the magistrates must think it’s some kind of phenomenon.
 
Sundog said:
It’s amazing how common it is to get shit faced after a crash following only a couple of pints. I mean the magistrates must think it’s some kind of phenomenon.
Click to expand...
What’s amazing is the amount of solicitors saying they’ll get you out of it for 2k, anyway went guilty instead 18 month ban and a £200 fine plus community service, done and dusted now, my advice for anybody reading this…don’t try and beat the system….
 
Djk85 said:
Birta Moretti so 4.6 abv so yeah I’m probably stretching it a bit to say 100% sure but normally it’s two pints of medium strength lager and you generally absorb 1 drink per hour so I was fine to drive.
Click to expand...
You metabolise 1 Unit of alcohol per hour, not 1 drink per hour.

So you have had 4 pints in say a 4 hour period, which is the equivalent of 10 units. It takes 15 minutes for the first unit to begin metabolising, so you had 3 hours and 45 minutes to metabolise alcohol before you were breathalysed.

That would mean that there were 1.25 units of alcohol in your bloodstream from the initial drinking session after the remainder had metabolized. The additional 5 units you say you drank after the accident would definitely put you over the limit.

The difficulty you have is proving you only had 2 pints in the first session and 2 pints after the accident.
 
Luna2000 said:
You metabolise 1 Unit of alcohol per hour, not 1 drink per hour.

So you have had 4 pints in say a 4 hour period, which is the equivalent of 10 units. It takes 15 minutes for the first unit to begin metabolising, so you had 3 hours and 45 minutes to metabolise alcohol before you were breathalysed.

That would mean that there were 1.25 units of alcohol in your bloodstream from the initial drinking session after the remainder had metabolized. The additional 5 units you say you drank after the accident would definitely put you over the limit.

The difficulty you have is proving you only had 2 pints in the first session and 2 pints after the accident.
Click to expand...
No mate, I had 2 pints prior to the accident and 4 pints after, the fact that my car was undriveable from 2.15pm and I was breathalysed at 17.40pm…first being being 98 and second being 100 which in some terms says that there has to have been alcohol consumed between the accident and being charged as the alcohol level is still rising, doesn’t matter anyway like I said to the judge I wouldn’t feel comfortable trying to argue my way out of any of a drink driving charge either way, admit i ****ed up, deal with the consequences and learn from it
 
Djk85 said:
No mate, I had 2 pints prior to the accident and 4 pints after, the fact that my car was undriveable from 2.15pm and I was breathalysed at 17.40pm…first being being 98 and second being 100 which in some terms says that there has to have been alcohol consumed between the accident and being charged as the alcohol level is still rising, doesn’t matter anyway like I said to the judge I wouldn’t feel comfortable trying to argue my way out of any of a drink driving charge either way, admit i ****ed up, deal with the consequences and learn from it
Click to expand...
Djk85 said:
No mate, I had 2 pints prior to the accident and 4 pints after, the fact that my car was undriveable from 2.15pm and I was breathalysed at 17.40pm…first being being 98 and second being 100 which in some terms says that there has to have been alcohol consumed between the accident and being charged as the alcohol level is still rising, doesn’t matter anyway like I said to the judge I wouldn’t feel comfortable trying to argue my way out of any of a drink driving charge either way, admit i ****ed up, deal with the consequences and learn from it
Click to expand...
And what I meant by the units is that when I drank two pints and stayed there for an hour I would of almost certainly been under the limit, however proving it is very very difficult
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top