Anyone know the Answer

Johnmcl7

greenface wrote: »

I have thanked you but we are missing the point . Tilt also mentioned a truck with a sleeper cab . What i am asking is you have had a drink and sleeping it off . We have keys in our possesion and potentialy can drive off anytime. (i suppose we can get out of our beds at home lashed go down the drive and get into our cars too) Grey area agreed but is there an answer ? What is the difference between a camper van/motorhome/truck with a sleeper & the back of my big car with its seats removed.

The answer to your original post is quite simple - yes you could be charged with being drunk and in charge of a vehicle. There is no straight answer to whether you'd be convicted or not as it would be up to the magistrates (at least initially) to decide on the balance of probabilities whether you were likely to drive or not. Clearly it's going to be much more difficult to convince them that you were only going to sleep in a car than convincing them you were only going to sleep in a motorhome.

John

Rover_Driver

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

The answer to your original post is quite simple - yes you could be charged with being drunk and in charge of a vehicle. There is no straight answer to whether you'd be convicted or not as it would be up to the magistrates (at least initially) to decide on the balance of probabilities whether you were likely to drive or not. Clearly it's going to be much more difficult to convince them that you were only going to sleep in a car than convincing them you were only going to sleep in a motorhome.

John

It would have to be 'proved beyond reasonable doubt', not 'balance of probabilities'.

Angry_Fanboy

greenface wrote: »

...seater citreon picasso...

Irony wrote: »

You were still drunk in charge of your keyboard.

Alco to buy Citroen in first place.

Can't beat a spelling mistake in a post pointing out another person's spelling mistake can you?

Johnmcl7

Rover_Driver wrote: »

It would have to be 'proved beyond reasonable doubt', not 'balance of probabilities'.

No it isn't in this case - a successful defence is to prove on a balance of probabilities, the defendant was not going to drive therefore it doesn't require proof beyond reasonable doubt for a successful conviction.

John

cooldude255220

Angry_Fanboy wrote: »

Can't beat a spelling mistake in a post pointing out another person's spelling mistake can you?

Muphry's law in action.

The name of the poster is also funny, given the circumstances.

agrinnall

Anyone know the Answer - well, obviously, it's 42. More to the point, what is the question (of Life, the Universe, and Everything)?

Irony

It's irony. Reterds.

skivenov

Put the keys somewher not on your person and if plod comes knocking, tell him you don't know, you can never find your keys when you're !!!!ed.

But in theory, yes, you can get in trouble for drunk in charge of a campervan.

vikingaero

There's no definitive answer. People have been charged whilst sleeping in cars to wear off the effect of alcohol. Less so with motorhomes. For example a motorhome that is on a campsite with an electric hookup, chocks, step, gray waste container, bed converted to sleeping position etc is far less likely to be used for driving.

Angry_Fanboy

Irony wrote: »

It's irony. Reterds.

Nah. You made a spelling mistake. Accept it, move on.