Isn’t it about time someone got caught? Martyn Gibson spent entire days running up a huge tab on “expenses” in the golf club before (presumably) having it signed off by the BL Director of Finance. Yet he he seemed to drive there and back. Today we heard Fagash and Matt - both driving - going for a drink before the 3.30 talk, then stopping off for dinner before going home. Are we to believe that they didn’t have a bottle of wine with the meal? Probably cocktails too.
They all seem to make a habit of it, yet I don’t think anyone’s ever been done apart from Nigel.
Maybe they don’t drink enough to take them over the limit? Or maybe they are just sensible enough in their driving not to get pulled over by a cop?
I have been driving for umpty-wibble years and have yet to be pulled over and breathalysed, so presumably it would be possible to drive after a couple of drinks without getting caught. Of course, if you had an accident when you’d had a drink then the book would be thrown, and if you went and speeded past a police car ditto, but if you were just being ordinary, there are not enough cops in the country to stop everyone. You need to give them an excuse.
Certainly wasn’t the case for Martyn - he had an open-ended tab and felt entitled to help himself. And I wonder how much had Matt had the other night before he remembered he had to drive? Brian and Justin seem not to be strangers to the liquid lunch, either. Do all the people who turn up for the shoots walk home, or take taxis?
Fair enough, but the police presence in Ambridge is un-PC Harassing; it’s not as though he has much else to do.
For a RL perspective, one (ex-)publican explained to me the futility of the legal limits. He had a pub in the country, on a commuter route between two reasonable-sized towns. He used do a good trade with people calling in for a meal and a glass of wine or pint on their way home from work. When the limit was reduced, that business dried up as people were more cautious - in the end it closed him down. The irony, of course, is that it made no difference to the ones who were the real problem; the legal limit now equating to one pint rather than two made no difference if they were in the habit of having half a dozen.
Well, maybe, like me, they are just lucky. I have never been breathalysed.
Stay away from Ireland - random testing introduced a few years ago! Set up checkpoints just as they would for checking tax and insurance. Quite keen on “morning after” tests - breathalysing drivers on their way into work.
I’d be ok.
We were once breathalysed while leaving the Booze Cruise from Helsinki when we got to Sweden: they were breathalysing everyone who drove off the ship rather than let them loose on the Swedish roads if they were drunk.
They’ve done it in the other direction too a couple of times.
They get quite startled by seeing no steering wheel where they expect there to be one.
That happened to us in Italy -officious looking policeman with rather a lot of ‘Egg & Bacon’ on his uniform was totally deflated when he asked for my driving licence
His younger, trimmer sidekick was trying not to laugh…
Was not Mark Hebden done for dui?
Being a ‘goody two shoes’ I never drink when driving, or anticipating driving.
I don’t remember Mark ever being done for dui. Nigel was. (He wasn’t anticipating driving when he had the drink, but his mother was too idle to take a taxi home from Felpersham.)
Well, Tom was stopped after that accident, but he hadn’t been drinking. Ahem.
(Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, anyone?)
For fear that it might interfere with drinking, I find it simplest not to drive at all.
How about Shula, Fishy. I just had a vague memory of somebody being done for drinking and Phil being his usual pompous self. Worrying about it not looking good for him as a J.P.
There is a provision for what amounts to random breath tests in E & W, too.
Section 163 of the 1988 RTA, allows for the police to stop vehicles at random. If you have been stopped and the officer believes he can smell alcohol. He can require you to give a breath test. Additionally, if he finds anything wrong with your vehicle or in the way you’ve been driving, he can require you take a test.
Shula was done for being party to taking and driving away, when Nigel thought he was borrowing Tim Beecham’s car and had in fact stolen one belonging to a stranger.
I think the police in E&W are not supposed any longer to set up a stall by the road and stop motorists for no particular reason in order to breathalyse them, though?
They’re not doing that. Sec. 163 of the Road Traffic Act. 1988 (above) specifically gives Police, authority for general stops of any and all road vehicles. If this authority didn’t exist, you would not be able to have the various multi-agency stops. Involving HME&C, DWP, Border Agency and Police etc. - Where the police may stop and instruct a driver to take his vehicle for inspection by other agencies, who do not have this Sec. 163
The actual wording of that section of the Act is:
163 Power of police to stop vehicles
(1) A person driving a motor vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.
(2) A person riding a cycle on a road must stop the cycle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.
(3) If a person fails to comply with this section he is guilty of an offence.
Following on from that, if a police officer smells alcohol (in the car, or on the driver), or notices something wrong with the vehicle, or the driver/driving. He can then require the driver to take a BT
Two different and separate bits of law, may be and regularly are, legally combined in this manner.
Thank you for that, Fishy. At least she has a criminal record then. That probably would annoy old Phil.
She was found not guilty, I think. Or possibly not prosecuted in the end.
I never knew Phil - or was it Mark - was a Freemason. But it would explain a lot of things.