Client Acquitted After Pleading Not Guilty To Drink Driving

Being charged with drink driving can happen to anyone, including professionals who have never had any previous dealings with the police and always try to do the right thing. Such was the case with a recent client of mine who was accused of being in charge of a motor vehicle with 128 microgrammes per 100 millilitres of breath, exceeding the legal limit. If convicted, he faced receiving (based on his breathalyser reading) a community order or six weeks in custody and a driving ban of six to twelve months. I was able to achieve a complete acquittal.

Following a tough week in which he received a medical diagnosis and suffered from anxiety and stress, my client drove to a sports club where he was due to play a game the next day. He packed a bag as he had made loose arrangements to stay overnight with a friend.

On the way to his destination, my client stopped to purchase two bottles of wine to share with his friend later in the evening. He parked his car in a quiet lane and walked to a local golf club where he drank two pints of lager. He believed that this was the most alcohol he could consume if he was to remain within the prescribed drink driving limits.

My client’s friend text him some time later and said that due to personal circumstances she was unable to meet him. He had other friends in the area as well as provisions which would allow him to sleep the night in his car.

Whilst deciding what to do, my client had another pint at the golf club and then walked back to his parked car. He knew he would not be seeing his friend that night, so he decided to open one of the bottles of wine he had bought. He admitted that with the benefit of hindsight this was an unwise decision.

My client’s phone needed charging, and this required the car’s ignition being switched on. As it was cold, he put the heating on and drank the wine whilst listening to a podcast. In due course he fell asleep.

At the trial, it was revealed that a van driver who was unable to pass my client’s car got out of his vehicle, walked to my client’s car, and opened the door only to find him asleep. My client’s next memory was being woken up by a man while he was in the driver’s seat. The man said my client’s car needed to be moved as it was blocking the road. My client knew he had had too much to drink and gave his keys to the man who then duly moved the car and sat my client back in the driver’s seat. The man’s companion asked if there was someone she could call to assist my client. He gave her his phone and asked her to ring the friend who he had originally planned to stay the night with. Upon answering the phone call, my client’s friend confirmed she knew him and said she would “sort something out.”

My client’s recollection of what happened next was hazy, but he vaguely recalled the woman who called his friend telling him not to drive and him replying that he had no intention of doing so as all he desired to do was go back to sleep.

At about 21.00 hours a police officer woke my client. He was confused and half asleep with the seat reclined and a pillow behind his head. He also had no shoes on, and he told the officer that he had taken them off as he had no intention of driving until the next morning.

My client co-operated with the police when asked to take a breath test. As the reading showed he was over the drink driving limit, my client was arrested.

Under section 4(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988, it is an offence for a person to be in charge of a motor vehicle when under the influence of drink or drugs. At trial, I presented to the Magistrate that the term ‘in charge’ of a vehicle is not defined by statute. In Haines v Roberts [1953] 1 WLR 309 it was held that a person remains in charge of their vehicle until they take positive steps to put someone else in charge. In DPP v Watkins [1989] QB 821 the court suggested that if you are “in control” of a vehicle, you are considered to be in charge of it. That invites the question of what ‘in control’ means.

I stated that the following points were relevant when deciding whether or not a person was ‘in charge’ of a vehicle:

Where the defendant was found in the vehicle, or how far away from the vehicle they were when discovered.
What they were doing at the relevant time.
If they were in possession of a key that fitted the ignition.
Was there evidence that the person attempted to drive the car?

CPS v Bate [2004] EWHC 2811 (Admin) states that subject to any satisfactory explanation, defendants found in a car in possession of the keys to that vehicle are viewed as ‘in charge’ of that vehicle. My client therefore had to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that he had no intention of driving the car.

I emphasised to the Magistrate that the timeline was important. My client drank between 18:00 hours and 20:00 hours. Evidence shows that the couple that stopped to check on him and moved the car called 999 at 20:44 hours and the police arrived at 20:47 hours. A sample of my client’s breath was taken at 22.16 hours and this specimen of breath measured 128 microgrammes.

My client provided substantial evidence to the court that he had no intention of driving his vehicle until the following day when he was due to play a sporting match. He was found by (a) the couple who moved his car, and (b) police officers—who found him asleep, with his head on a pillow and no shoes on. It is clear from the BWC footage that he repeatedly told the police officer he had no intention of driving.

I also pointed out several inconsistencies with the witness statements and the fact that no statements were requested until four months after the event. Given these facts, the statements could not be relied on.

Finally, I asked for an expert witness to provide an opinion on when my client would have reached the legal limit to drive. She confirmed this would be between 06:47 hours and 19:53 hours the following day. He would have reached the legal limit around 10:00 hours. This timescale fits with my client’s stated intentions concerning when he planned to drive again.

I pointed out to the court that both my client and his friend who confirmed he originally planned to spend the night at her house, were of excellent character.

The Magistrate accepted my final argument that there was no possible basis for finding any evidence that my client intended to drive on the night in question: he was acquitted.

Client Acquitted after Pleading Not Guilty to Being Drunk in Charge of His Car

The facts of the case

How I achieved an acquittal for my client

Wrapping up