Drink Driving and urine samples

colbully

No apoligy from her..well a half hearted one anyways but i knew it meant f all.

ROSSKI

colbully wrote: »

No apoligy from her..well a half hearted one anyways but i knew it meant f all.

What a biaatch - Time to bury her under an apple tree me thinks !

Best of luck anyway

ResearchWill

MagicSean wrote: »

Yes but I understood she also reported him as being in possession of a load of drugs. It brings me back to a thread I started a while back. Can qualified privilege be a defence to a purely vexatious complaint?

No, it can not be used if the complaint is totally vexatious, the problem in this case is the OP may have been breaking the law, defamation is about lowering a persons rep in the minds of right thinking people, so can a convicted criminal be defamed by someone saying they committed a crime they did not commit but they had in fact committed another crime.

I would doubt a judge of the circuit court would really find defamation a jury in the high court may but that's a very very risky case to take.

colbully

Im going to discuss everything with my solictor as soon as the results come back..theres alot of under lying sceanarios in this whole episode that i dont really want to get into but it turns out my x gf was in close contact with a member of the garda on a few occasions on different sibjects not relating to what happened me.before she came clean to me about all this she claimed that she had a phone call from a "gard" the night i was arrested to inform her of what had just happened ... AND YOU THINK YOU KNOW SOMEONE !!! Lol

garancafan

colbully wrote: »

all in all i was stopped at 12.35am and provided my urine at around 3.30am

It seems to me that the gardaí were killing time in order to maximise your chances of passing the test.

ABajaninCork

colbully wrote: »

Im going to discuss everything with my solictor as soon as the results come back..theres alot of under lying sceanarios in this whole episode that i dont really want to get into but it turns out my x gf was in close contact with a member of the garda on a few occasions on different sibjects not relating to what happened me.before she came clean to me about all this she claimed that she had a phone call from a "gard" the night i was arrested to inform her of what had just happened ... AND YOU THINK YOU KNOW SOMEONE !!! Lol

Don't discuss it on here any more then. In view of what's happened, you don't know WHO knows WHAT and what they might be checking up on.

Put everything you know in the hands of your brief. Let them tell you the nest steps.

Good luck!!

colbully

I acutally got that feeling aswell to be honest .but with urine samples i dont think time delay is an advantage..i could be wrong though? I reckon by 3.30 if i had used the inoculyser in the station i would hav blew under the limit or at least on the limit as i was 100% by then!

ResearchWill

colbully wrote: »

I acutally got that feeling aswell to be honest .but with urine samples i dont think time delay is an advantage..i could be wrong though? I reckon by 3.30 if i had used the inoculyser in the station i would hav blew under the limit or at least on the limit as i was 100% by then!

Time has two advantages in these case the first is that on average the body processes 1 unit of alcohol per hour so in 3 hours that 3 units less in the system the second advantage is the test must be done within 3 hours of the driving, not the arrest but the time the person was observed driving. If the test is not done within 3 hours it is invalid and the case must be thrown out.

colbully

Ive read.that urine samps can sometimes give false high readings an false low readings.i asked could i use the toilet after i was told the inoculyser machine was faulty and the gard told me i wasnt allowed!! as a doctor was being called..the doc arrived.1hr and 30min later..so what may come back in the readings might not be an accurate reading of my alcohol levels... Ps i think im spending too much time online reading into.this as my brain feels fried

colbully

Ive read.that urine samps can sometimes give false high readings an false low readings.i asked could i use the toilet after i was told the inoculyser machine was faulty and the gard told me i wasnt allowed!! as a doctor was being called..the doc arrived.1hr and 30min later..so what may come back in the readings might not be an accurate reading of my alcohol levels... Ps i think im spending too much time online reading into.this as my brain feels fried

ThreeLineWhip

Just wait for the results and see where you stand.

ResearchWill

colbully wrote: »

Ive read.that urine samps can sometimes give false high readings an false low readings.i asked could i use the toilet after i was told the inoculyser machine was faulty and the gard told me i wasnt allowed!! as a doctor was being called..the doc arrived.1hr and 30min later..so what may come back in the readings might not be an accurate reading of my alcohol levels... Ps i think im spending too much time online reading into.this as my brain feels fried

The offence is having a certain reading above a set minimum. The reading will be an accurate reflection of the alcohol level in your urine at the time it was taken.

Different people will have different readings even if they drank exactly the same amount and the tests took place at the same time. While both results may be different they are both accurate in that they record the level of alcohol at that time.

Tell your solicitor about not being allowed to use the toilet.

colbully

I will indeed WIll ..thanks for your help..who knows.this could work out ok.. Im foolish for what ive done an i will take ny punishment head in..im not a big drinker at all an what i did was totally out of character for me ,. Even though i havent been convicted of anything yet.ive more than learned my lesson

Dublinstiofán

colbully wrote: »

I will indeed WIll ..thanks for your help..who knows.this could work out ok.. Im foolish for what ive done an i will take ny punishment head in..im not a big drinker at all an what i did was totally out of character for me ,. Even though i havent been convicted of anything yet.ive more than learned my lesson

Firstly OP id like to sayi feel incredibly sorry for you. While i dont condone
drink driving we've all been there wanting to get away from an argument
in a hurry. Its a disgrace for any girlfriend in a mood with you or not to
have reported you and used the gards for her own insideous reasons.
Or to not have tried to stop you from driving home haven taken a drink.
Any girlfriend with even an ounce of respect or feeling for you wouldnt
have let you cross the door and at the very least you have exposed
her for the vindictive b1tch she is, if nothing else.

By the sounds of it, it seems that the guards were trying to give you
the greatest chance possible by allowing you maximum time to reduce
your initial reading.

I personally would suggest that this would be the doing of your gf's
ex. After finding no drugs id say he remembered what a bitch she was
and decided to cut you a break. Or alternatively didnt want to stand up
in front of a judge and look like a gob****e prosecuting his ex's new fella
over a fight they had.

Id suggest go back to living you life worry free as its too late to change
it now. Id be shocked if this ended in prosecution.

Oh and if you ever find yourself in this position again turn on the heaters
inthe car, lock the doors and grab an hour or two's kip to save yourself
the hassle in future.

Stheno

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

Oh and if you ever find yourself in this position again turn on the heaters
inthe car, lock the doors and grab an hour or two's kip to save yourself
the hassle in future.

Could still be pulled in that instance is the keys were in the car! And they'd have to be in the ignition to have the heaters on.

Dublinstiofán

Stheno wrote: »

Could still be pulled in that instance is the keys were in the car! And they'd have to be in the ignition to have the heaters on.

Knew somebody would say that.

To avoid the miniscule chance of this happening turn the engine on but
under no circumstances sit in the front seat (you have to be in the drivers
seat to technically be incharge of the vehicle, keys in the ignition or not)

Let the car heat up and remove keys.

Get in the back seat or passenger seat, lock the doors and have a sleep.

colbully

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

Firstly OP id like to sayi feel incredibly sorry for you. While i dont condone
drink driving we've all been there wanting to get away from an argument
in a hurry. Its a disgrace for any girlfriend in a mood with you or not to
have reported you and used the gards for her own insideous reasons.
Or to not have tried to stop you from driving home haven taken a drink.
Any girlfriend with even an ounce of respect or feeling for you wouldnt
have let you cross the door and at the very least you have exposed
her for the vindictive b1tch she is, if nothing else.

By the sounds of it, it seems that the guards were trying to give you
the greatest chance possible by allowing you maximum time to reduce
your initial reading.

I personally would suggest that this would be the doing of your gf's
ex. After finding no drugs id say he remembered what a bitch she was
and decided to cut you a break. Or alternatively didnt want to stand up


in front of a judge and look like a gob****e prosecuting his ex's new fella
over a fight they had.

Id suggest go back to living you life worry free as its too late to change
it now. Id be shocked if this ended in prosecution.

Oh and if you ever find yourself in this position again turn on the heaters
inthe car, lock the doors and grab an hour or two's kip to save yourself
the hassle in future.

Thanks for your sympathy mate and your words of advise... I never thought anybody could be that vindictive..an i think your right about the gards delaying things a wee bit..to be honest the gards that dealt with me that night were very sound an i knew they felt sorry.for me..ive had a run of bad luck the last while an this just capped it all off for me...i know i will deal with this to the best of my ability.. Ps my ex gf knows i need my license, she knows i love my cars an she knows i love to drive, an although i should not have beeen behind the wheel that night, i dont think she should hav done what shr did.but like u said, whats done cant be changed

godtabh

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

Knew somebody would say that.

To avoid the miniscule chance of this happening turn the engine on but
under no circumstances sit in the front seat (you have to be in the drivers
seat to technically be incharge of the vehicle, keys in the ignition or not)

Let the car heat up and remove keys.

Get in the back seat or passenger seat, lock the doors and have a sleep.

I had to this before. Was advised to disconnect the batter so the car couldnt move. If you are in the car with keys you are in control of it.

Maysa07

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

Knew somebody would say that.

To avoid the miniscule chance of this happening turn the engine on but
under no circumstances sit in the front seat (you have to be in the drivers
seat to technically be incharge of the vehicle, keys in the ignition or not)

Let the car heat up and remove keys.

Get in the back seat or passenger seat, lock the doors and have a sleep.

Happened to me 2 years ago. I had a lot to drink and went to my car to sleep it off about 2am.Two guards knocked on the window around 7 and arrested me. The engine was running and the heater was on full blast with driver seat back. Cut a long story short it went to court and i got off because i was able to prove i had no intention of driving the car when i woke up and a good barrister at legal cost of 2 grand.

What i learned was once your in a vehicle with the car keys on you or in the car you're still responsible for the vehicle.

ResearchWill

Maysa07 wrote: »

Happened to me 2 years ago. I had a lot to drink and went to my car to sleep it off about 2am.Two guards knocked on the window around 7 and arrested me. The engine was running and the heater was on full blast with driver seat back. Cut a long story short it went to court and i got off because i was able to prove i had no intention of driving the car when i woke up and a good barrister at legal cost of 2 grand.

What i learned was once your in a vehicle with the car keys on you or in the car you're still responsible for the vehicle.

Yup 100% correct, your Barrister was right to keep the issue about intention. Well worth the fees.

Dublinstiofán

Fair enough, if that's the law but I still maintain you would want to be very unlucky for the gards to find you asleep in your car and prosecute you.

Also no matter what I was simply making the point that it would have been a better option to sit in the car and not to have moved it than the OP chose, to drive home!

ThreeLineWhip

Fair enough, if that's the law but I still maintain you would want to be very unlucky for the gards to find you asleep in your car and prosecute you.

It is a routine prosecution as far as they are concerned. I have heard of it happening many times and they always get convicted also.

ResearchWill

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

Fair enough, if that's the law but I still maintain you would want to be very unlucky for the gards to find you asleep in your car and prosecute you.

Also no matter what I was simply making the point that it would have been a better option to sit in the car and not to have moved it than the OP chose, to drive home!

I have see such many such prosecutions in the DC and on Appeal it in fact is very very common.

A Primal Nut

godtabh wrote: »

I had to this before. Was advised to disconnect the batter so the car couldnt move. If you are in the car with keys you are in control of it.

That seems crazy. So if I'm in a bar and not feeling well, and my friend offers me his car ( because I don't have one)to go lie down in with the heating on, the gardai can breathalyse me? That's really crazy. As a previous poster said, the issue of intent easily comes into play.

ResearchWill

A Primal Nut wrote: »

That seems crazy. So if I'm in a bar and not feeling well, and my friend offers me his car ( because I don't have one)to go lie down in with the heating on, the gardai can breathalyse me? That's really crazy. As a previous poster said, the issue of intent easily comes into play.

In that situation you may be in charge of the vehicle, but as you have no intention to drive either then or while you remain in charge then no offence.

The section

5.— (1) A person commits an offence if, when in charge of a mechanically propelled vehicle in a public place with intent to drive or attempt to drive the vehicle (but not driving or attempting to drive it), he or she is under the influence of an intoxicant to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle.

Zambia

A Primal Nut wrote: »

That seems crazy. So if I'm in a bar and not feeling well, and my friend offers me his car ( because I don't have one)to go lie down in with the heating on, the gardai can breathalyse me? That's really crazy. As a previous poster said, the issue of intent easily comes into play.

Regardless of its legal status don't do this, the car could easily catch fire no lawyer can fix that.

faceman

Zambia wrote: »

Regardless of its legal status don't do this, the car could easily catch fire no lawyer can fix that.

At least he'll definitely stay warm tho :pac:

dewsbury

Some years ago a friend of mine failed the breath test.
He was taken to the Garda station where he gave a urine sample.
That sample was put in 2 small bottles.
My friend was given one sample for independent analysis (if he wanted to do this).
However, the guards got distracted by other activities in the station.
So, my friend took advantage of putting both samples in his pocket and walking out the door of the station.

He was delighted as he got off with the drunken driving.
...Unfortunately, some time later he got done for taking the piss.

colbully

Well..got my urine sample results back this morn...110mg of urine per 100..!! Im a full license driver the last 8 years an have no previous drink drivibg convictions..what does this result mean for me

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

As per seamus post (post #2). More details on the RSA website - Drink Driving Limits and Changes

Realistically, you were 60% over the limit - 3 hours after you'd had your last drink. So when you were driving you must have been fairly "tipsy".

If you were as co-operative as you say, you'll probably end up with a fine and points however you do fall into the 6 month ban category.

Edit: Urine Limit (mg/100ml)108 to 135 [Fixed Charge Penalty] - 6 month disqualification and €400 fine

seamus

Sorry to hear that.

That result puts you (just barely) in the 3rd band, requiring a court appearance. It's a minimum one-year ban on a first offence with a maximum penalty of €5,000 and/or six months in prison.

You will not go to prison and you will not be fined €5,000. But I would recommend getting yourself a solicitor, who can guide you on the best way to play this.

colbully

Does 110mg not mean 6 months of a ban an 400euro fine??

seamus

Holy ****, my apologies!

I was looking at the wrong figures. You're right.

colbully

Jesus i had a heart attack there seamus !!!!!!!

colbully

Im just wondering is it possible to get a ban deffered? I could do with still being on the road until april or may at the latest due to family an work commitments...id take my ban then if i could

Newaglish

colbully wrote: »

Im just wondering is it possible to get a ban deffered? I could do with still being on the road until april or may at the latest due to family an work commitments...id take my ban then if i could

I certainly know of cases where it has been allowed before

ThreeLineWhip

You may want to fight on the basis of the samples being taken too late.

seamus

Newaglish wrote: »

I certainly know of cases where it has been allowed before

For a FPN? I've heard of it in court alright.

ThreeLineWhip wrote: »

You may want to fight on the basis of the samples being taken too late.

This is where engaging a solicitor would be the best course of action to determine whether this defence would actually work. If the times on the document(s) are within the 3-hour window then there's not much point in fighting it.

SiegfriedsMum

colbully wrote: »

MagicSean wrote: »

turns out this was the case.my girlfriend (ex now) admitted to me that she rang one of her ex boyfriends in the garda station an informed him that a car matching the description of my Car was on its way through the town with drink and drugs on board !!!!!

I hope the gardaí will prosecute her for wasting their time. I am surprised as usually the Gardaí are quite astute as spotting this sort of malicious accusation.

ThreeLineWhip

He would have to reject the FPN and go to court. At court he could plead guilty and ask for the disqualification to be delayed. With the FPN the period is automatically awarded with it's own start date.

colbully

I could do that but if that failed..it could go pear shaped for me ..i was pulled at 12.30am an according to the report the sample was taken at 3.17am....i was told i could take my sample of urine as a souvenier of the occasion...myself ,the doctor an the guard present at the time of giving the sample, we all had a laugh at this as i said i didnt want to remember this occasion..little did i know i could hav taken that sample an have it tested myself as i wasnt told that on tjhe night by the doc or gard

ResearchWill

SiegfriedsMum wrote: »

colbully wrote: »

I hope the gardaí will prosecute her for wasting their time. I am surprised as usually the Gardaí are quite astute as spotting this sort of malicious accusation.

You must have missed the fact that the OP was in fact over the limit, no matter her intention the OP was over the limit and driving.

seamus

ThreeLineWhip wrote: »

He would have to reject the FPN and go to court. At court he could plead guilty and ask for the disqualification to be delayed. With the FPN the period is automatically awarded with it's own start date.

In court it's a minimum one-year ban though, and he risks a larger fine. Whereas with the FPN you're guaranteed a six-month ban and €400.

ThreeLineWhip

seamus wrote: »

In court it's a minimum one-year ban though, and he risks a larger fine. Whereas with the FPN you're guaranteed a six-month ban and €400.

Indeed, but by accepting the FPN he is at the mercy of the RSA as to when the disqualification period starts.

ThreeLineWhip

colbully wrote: »

Im just wondering is it possible to get a ban deffered? I could do with still being on the road until april or may at the latest due to family an work commitments...id take my ban then if i could

I think you have 56 days to pay and then the disqualification starts on a date at least 28 days after that. So you could hang on to the notice until the 55th day and then pay it.

ResearchWill

colbully wrote: »

Does 110mg not mean 6 months of a ban an 400euro fine??

Ya its 6 months €400 if fixed notice issues, if not and the matter is in Court then its 1 year, so you can fight it on a few points and take risk of 1 year instead of 6 months. Get good advice from a good road traffic solicitor who knows the judges etc.

The relevant sections

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2010/en/act/pub/0025/sec0029.html#sec29

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2010/en/act/pub/0025/sec0065.html#sec65

ResearchWill

ThreeLineWhip wrote: »

Indeed, but by accepting the FPN he is at the mercy of the RSA as to when the disqualification period starts.

If he fights it its a 1 year ban if found guilty.

ThreeLineWhip

ResearchWill wrote: »

If he fights it its a 1 year ban if found guilty.

Would my suggestion to delay paying the FPN work as to delay the ban?

ResearchWill

ThreeLineWhip wrote: »

Would my suggestion to delay paying the FPN work as to delay the ban?

its risky, if they do not receive the payment etc. within the time allowed, then it goes to court. Its a simple choice take 6 months now (if I was doing that I would send off FPN ASAP rather than risk post problems or some other issue) or fight it and risk 1 year.

colbully

Any ideas when the FPN would arrive ? Whos discretion is that at ? Rsa ? Gardai?