Drunk in charge - are procedural errors really a thing?

Convicted Driver Insurance

lordnolo

Member
Hi - I was recently arrested for being drunk in charge ( I was not driving the vehicle and had no intention to drive it but because the engine was running I was arrested). In the police station I was unable to provide an evidential breath test despite attempts due to difficulties breathing (i suffer from asthma) and couldn't provide a blood test as the medical professional could not find a vein. So submitted a urine sample. This was one sample into a bottle (the practice sample) and then a minute later I was asked to provide another sample. Before my breathlyser test I do not recall the police asking me whether In the last 20 minutes I'd done any of the following:
"Have you in the last twenty minutes:
consumed any alcohol?
used any mouth spray?
used any mouth wash?
used any medication?
eaten anything?
inhaled anything?
taken anything?
I have now been released without charge pending the results of an investigation while the police wait for the urine sample.
Reading various websites on the internet it seems that not asking me the above questions and making me provide urine samples so quickly indicates procedural errors which would lead me to having a defence. Is this right?
 
They should certainly allow more than one minute between the two samples.
I would say an absolute minimum of 10 minutes but preferably longer.
The issue about the questions being asked for the breath test is not relevant as they accepted you could not supply for medical reasons.
You should write to the police station where you were detained asking to be supplied with a copy of your custody record and the videos covering your booking in and any custody related videos. (you may find that there was no recording in the medical room if that was where the urine sample was provided)
Give your name, address and date of birth plus the approximate time you were detained.
This can then be reviewed to confirm what you say about the whole procedure.
 
price1367 said:
They should certainly allow more than one minute between the two samples.
I would say an absolute minimum of 10 minutes but preferably longer.
The issue about the questions being asked for the breath test is not relevant as they accepted you could not supply for medical reasons.
You should write to the police station where you were detained asking to be supplied with a copy of your custody record and the videos covering your booking in and any custody related videos. (you may find that there was no recording in the medical room if that was where the urine sample was provided)
Give your name, address and date of birth plus the approximate time you were detained.
This can then be reviewed to confirm what you say about the whole procedure.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I will write to them as you suggest. The urine test was provided in my cell so not sure if there would be cctv covering that or not.
 
lordnolo said:
Thank you. I will write to them as you suggest. The urine test was provided in my cell so not sure if there would be cctv covering that or not.
Click to expand...
That will vary from force to force. only one way to find out..... good luck and let us know how you get on.
 
Ok so I've put a subject access request in with the police for their custody records and any CCTV footage, including bodycam footage they have of me.
Feeling pretty anxious today even though I know from the research I've done that the correct procedures weren't followed (as well as me not having any intent to drive as well).
So to try and help manage my anxiety I'm trying to plan out my next steps.
I've contacted my insurance company to claim under my legal expenses cover if I need to get a solicitor but they have a probability of success clause so I'm not sure if they will fund me or not and in any case will only fund me after proceedings have been issued.
So I have the following questions.
1. If I review the CCTV and it shows the procedures where not correctly followed do I need to ask them to retain the CCTV etc or will the copy they've sent me be sufficient to use in court?
2. If it does show procedures have not been followed is it worth contacting the police to ask them to consider dropping the investigation? Or will that prejudice any defence I mount if they refuse to drop the investigation and decide to proceed with pressing charges?
3. It it worth appointing a solicitor prior to any charges being made? I've seen a lot talking about pre-investigation stages that they do prior to court and of course they all recommend appointing them straight away!
4. If it is worth appointing a solicitor does anyone have any recommendations for one? Happy to take these via PM as not sure what the rules are concerning making recommendations.

Hope that all makes sense. It's beginning to take over my life a bit!
 
You may have a problem.....
Did you write to the police station making a Subject Access request..... as in that was the title of the request?
If you did then it will fail. An exemption to supplying information under the Data Protection Act is I’d the material you are asking is subject of criminal proceedings that have not yet been resolved, so if the request goes to the Data Protection Officer at the force, you will get a reply saying that they do not have to supply it.

What I advised was writing to the police station to request a copy of your custody record and the video relating to all your detention. This is a request that you are entitled to make, having been in custody.... it has nothing to do with Subject Access requests. If you did sent it as a SAR then you would write again, following what I put before.
The Bodycam footage IS evidence, and as such you are not entitled to see that until (if) you have put in a plea at court.
There is no point in entering an argument with the police about anything that you see in the custody video, but it could be something to take up with the Crown Prosecution service who conduct the court stuff.
You have to understand that minor breaches can be of no consequence and it requires a degree of knowledge of legal matters to interpret whether sion the video and the relevance to a possible defence, not just that errors can be seen which may be of no consequence.
There is no point in getting a solicitor prior to being charged, you could run up a bill with one and then find that you are not charged....... which would be silly.
If you do want a solicitor there will be time to consult one between being charged (or summonsed) and appearing in court. All the solicitor will do is request a copy of the custody record and video, which the suspect can do themselves.
 
Ah ok. I wrote to the police force to request the information as you stated and they replied back to say it had to be a subject access request. Which is why I submitted one as per their direction. It seems nigh on impossible to get hold of an actual email address for the police station but I will have a look again tonight.
Thanks for getting back to me and your help so far.
 
Dont email, write to ‘the officer in charge’ police station wherever and say you are exercising your right as a person in custody to be supplied with a copy of your custody record and the custody video.
The flaw will be that you asked for the bodycam footage that you cannot ask for under your custody rights.
 
price1367 said:
Dont email, write to ‘the officer in charge’ police station wherever and say you are exercising your right as a person in custody to be supplied with a copy of your custody record and the custody video.
The flaw will be that you asked for the bodycam footage that you cannot ask for under your custody rights.
Click to expand...
No problem. Will do. I have also got a PCN for my car overstaying in the car park and they’re asking for a copy of my custody record too so I will get straight on it. Thanks again
 
I’ve now had a message recalling me to the police station as the police say they have additional cctv footage from the council that they want to show me. Is this normal in these cases?
 
I am speculating that they now have you driving the vehicle on video and they want to put that to you.
This is quite normal as you have not been charged and further evidence has (apparently) come to light.

I would advise you to take a solicitor with you when you do go to advise you.
If you do not have a solicitor you could contact the officer asking for the duty solicitor to be present but generally this can only be done while you are at the station, with the navigable wait for them to attend after the request has been made.
I know this sounds daft, as it seems obvious to boot the duty solicitor in advance, but generally the view is taken it that the duty solicitor is only available for people AT the police station, not people who are DUE there.
If you have a solicitor, he will ask the police to disclose the evidence that they are going to use in the interview, and he will discuss iit with you and give advice on answering the questions or going ‘no comment’.
If you are not represented, you will be going in blind and just be confronted with the evidence the police have.
 
Last edited:
price1367 said:
I am speculating that they now have you driving the vehicle on video and they want to put that to you.
This is quite normal as you have not bee charged and further evidence has (apparently) come to light.

I would advise you to take a solicitor with you when you do go to advise you.
If you do not have a solicitor you could contact the officer asking for the duty solicitor to be present but generally this can only be done while you are at the station, with the navigable wait for them to attend after the request has been made.
I know this sounds daft, as it seems obvious to boot the duty solicitor in advance, but generally the view is taken it that the duty solicitor is only available for people AT the police station, not people who are DUE there.
If you have a solicitor, he will ask the police to disclose the evidence that they are going to use in the interview, and he will discuss iit with you and give advice on answering the questions or going ‘no comment’.
If you are not represented, you will be going in blind and just be confronted with the evidence the police have.
Click to expand...
No problem. I think I’ll take your advice and get a solicitor to review it with me. Thank you so much for getting back to me so quickly
 
You will have to look at the footage and see how close any possible camera footage shows you driving against when the police arrived. Did this present the opportunity for you to have consumed enough alcohol to put you over the limit. (Only if you did)
The police only have to show that you were, or have been, the driver of a motor vehicle, so if they have video evidence of you driving earlier and your sample comes back over the limit, you will be guilty (subject to the issues of the urine sample of course) of drink driving unless you can show that you consumed alcohol after you drove, and that amount made the difference to you being over the limit.
 
price1367 said:
You will have to look at the footage and see how close any possible camera footage shows you driving against when the police arrived. Did this present the opportunity for you to have consumed enough alcohol to put you over the limit. (Only if you did)
The police only have to show that you were, or have been, the driver of a motor vehicle, so if they have video evidence of you driving earlier and your sample comes back over the limit, you will be guilty (subject to the issues of the urine sample of course) of drink driving unless you can show that you consumed alcohol after you drove, and that amount made the difference to you being over the limit.
Click to expand...
I’ve found a solicitor to represent me (that’s not costing 10k) and is a sore list motoring solicitor. So I guess the only option I have is to review the footage with them and then wait for the urine test to come back. See what it shows and go from there.
 
price1367 said:
Ok, just pointing out that the duty solicitor would be free (and perfectly capable of advising you)
Click to expand...
I guess my only concern is with them not being a specialist in motoring offences is it more advantageous to have a specialist motoring solicitor involved?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top