Sunday, 17 July 2011

Ordered to break the law

There’s a strange case reported here, where a driver suspected of drink-driving was told by the police to drive to the police station as they didn’t have the necessary roadside breath-testing equipment. He was eventually convicted, but surely a decent defence lawyer could have secured an acquittal by arguing that the police had in effect instructed him to commit the offence in the first place. And, in such a situation, he would have been fully entitled to stand his ground and demand that the police either give him a lift to the station, or wait until they had managed to find the necessary equipment.

As always with such reports, though, it may be that there is more to it than meets the eye.


  1. This ...

    "However, pressure group Campaign Against Drink Driving has slammed the decision, saying: 'What if he'd had an accident? The police should hang their heads in shame.'"

    ... proves that CADD are ridiculously over-reactive (but then I suppose they have to be to maintain their funding).

  2. Any amount of alcohol makes someone a worse driver and more likely to kill or injure someone else. The Police in this instance made a mistake if, as you say, the story can be believed. Drink drivers do no-one any good.


Comments, especially on older posts, may require prior approval by the blog owner. See here for details of my comment policy.

Please register an account to comment. To combat persistent trolling, unregistered comments are liable to be deleted unless I recognise the author. If you intend to make more than the occasional comment using an unregistered ID, you will need to tell me something about yourself.