Pleading not guilty to drink driving

Benzanna

TooManyPoints wrote: »

I simply don't know, George. I don't know what evidence they have. We were told he had pleaded guilty (though I doubt it) and so should have seen the evidence against him. We don't know what he was charged with. We don't know whether he was represented by the duty solicitor on his first appearance (as he would have been entitled to do) and if so how he was advised. We don't know whether he gave a "no comment" interview. We don't know whether any alcohol was found in his car (so making a "hip flask" defence to driving more feasible). We don't know what, if any statements were taken from others. There's probably an awful lot more we don't know.

What the OP posed as (in her understanding) a fairly simple question is not simple at all and is almost impossible to answer with the very limited information available. My mind keeps changing as I learn the next drip of information and whilst it's an interesting debate, it will not lead (me, at least) to a proper conclusion.

He was advised at his first interview (once sober) by his duty solicitor to not give a statement. He pleaded guilty. He was charged with both drink driving, and drunk being in charge of a vehicle. After the arrest I saw 2 bottles of unopened wine in the passenger footwell.
I didn't give a statement at the time as I wasn't sure if the repercussions and was pretty upset. I called 2 days later to give a statement and was told I didn't have to as he had pleaded guilty.

Benzanna

DUTR wrote: »

We don't want tit for tat either, too many all blokes are bad type threads floating about.
You could just leave him be and late fate and the law deal with him.

Yes, that is the conclusion I have come to. I am not trying to make this into something more than it needs to be. He has his belongings. I am just trying to understand everything that has happened. He has had a drinking problem for 15 years. I only found out last Christmas and have done everything I can to support him. He has admitted to me he had regularly drunk driven. I am concerned for his safety and for others. He now has his car until the trial date in March, I just hope this while situation has been enough to help him message a change.
He has sent me messages saying he's watching me online. I just want this to be over and to move on.

George333

AdrianC wrote: »

"Intent" and "likelihood" are certainly in the same direction, so "irrelevant" is more than a little strong.

Not really as he didn't have the keys.

Dr_Crypto

He wouldn’t have “plead guilty” at the Police Station. He may have given an indication of plea or a response to the charge, I suppose.
I don’t think drunk in charge will run here - he didn’t have the keys.
The drink drive will be more interesting. We have a witness (the OP) who will testify that the defendant drive to her address and appeared intoxicated. There will be her 999 call to the Police, which could confirm the time of his arrival. The attending officers will testify that they found him seated in the vehicle. They may have happened to notice that the engine was still warm. How could he have consumed alcohol in the period prior to arriving there in the car (assuming it wasn’t usually kept there) and the police arriving? The police officers may have noted that they did not observe any open vessels of alcohol in the vehicle, but they may have seen the unopened wine bottles.
Added to this a back calculation of alcohol levels can be made by a suitable expert, which will guide to court as to the likely level at the time he drive.
Now it isn’t impossible that the case will be dropped but I’d say there is a very high chance of conviction at trial.

George333

Dr_Crypto wrote: »

He wouldn’t have “plead guilty” at the Police Station. He may have given an indication of plea or a response to the charge, I suppose.
I don’t think drunk in charge will run here - he didn’t have the keys.
The drink drive will be more interesting. We have a witness (the OP) who will testify that the defendant drive to her address and appeared intoxicated. There will be her 999 call to the Police, which could confirm the time of his arrival. The attending officers will testify that they found him seated in the vehicle. They may have happened to notice that the engine was still warm. How could he have consumed alcohol in the period prior to arriving there in the car (assuming it wasn’t usually kept there) and the police arriving? The police officers may have noted that they did not observe any open vessels of alcohol in the vehicle, but they may have seen the unopened wine bottles.
Added to this a back calculation of alcohol levels can be made by a suitable expert, which will guide to court as to the likely level at the time he drive.
Now it isn’t impossible that the case will be dropped but I’d say there is a very high chance of conviction at trial.

We don't have a witness until the OP gives a statement.

Dr_Crypto

Did I misread it? I thought she said he was going to provide one.