|
Drink Driving Cases In Scotland |
Drink Driving consequences in Scotland
include job loss, business failure, loss of home,
loss of car, relationship melt down!! We won the
Mylo case and could win yours.

Drink driving in Scotland is treated, as you
may expect, as a serious offence and an offence where the court
will consider whether a custodial sentence is necessary. Repeat
drink drivers can expect their vehicle to be forfeited and sold.
We are all aware that the consequences for victims of drink
driving can be a source of tragedy particularly when some
innocent person is injured or killed.
Generally the police and the Crown prepare
drink driving cases very well in Scotland as these cases are
serious matters and are worthy of public resources but mistakes
can and do occur in drink driving cases. Mistakes in Crown
preparation and in defence preparation.
No one wants to face a drink driving charge
alone. It is therefore all the more important to seek out
professional help at the earliest opportunity. Mistakes do occur
in Drink driving
cases. Often these cases involve technical defences where evidence
requires to be secured at the earliest opportunity. (Even before
you appear in court on the drink drive charge)
We can help provide peace of mind. We guarantee prompt
response to your e-mail, texts, phone calls. We use the net not
just to promote our service but to keep in touch with you and to
deliver information and results. We have a vast experience in
representing people from all walks of life faced with a drink
driving charge. If a mistake has occurred in your drink driving
case, we will find it and we will advise you about what it might
mean to your case.
Drink driving charges carry a significant
social stigma but that does not mean that everyone charged with
such an offence is guilty. WE believe in the presumption of
innocence and we will have no hesitation in testing the Crown
case in a full and forthright manner. There is a
method of reducing any
period of ban by up to 25% in such cases. We frequently deal with delicate situations. You may rest
assured that we are committed to communicating with you and
having a dynamic impact on your case.
A 2nd or subsequent drink
driving case in Scotland is dealt with in a different way than
the rest of the UK. In Scotland the Crown can move the court to
forfeit your car and have it sold off with ZERO being paid back
to you. This is not the only difference. If acquitted in
Scotland you will NOT be able to recover your court costs.
A huge amount of expertise comes from
practical court experience. Either by prosecuting or defending
individuals or businesses. That is what we have been doing for
more than 30 years.
Drink Driving and Speeding cases, can
involve a great deal of technical and scientific information in
addition to knowledge of the basic governing laws, our
experience may be the most critical thing.
Road Traffic cases can be among the most
difficult to defend. Because of the complexity, several mistakes
can be made when it comes to defending Road Traffic cases.
The
outcome can mean being jailed, losing you licence, losing your job, paying
considerable fines, , losing your car, having a huge hike in your
insurance premium, and the current and future effect on your job
and prospects.
|
10 Mistakes In Drink Driving Cases... |
|
Mistake 1- Assuming The Case Is A Loser |
After getting the breath analysis test
result and the copy complaint, some people might simply give up
and plead guilty.
The breath test, the alcohol blood level
test, and the roadside tests that the arrested person has to
perform all have potential built-in flaws. Flaws which can make
the difference between losing your licence or not.
For example, the results of a breath test
can be challenged. The Log Book detailing all tests that day can
be examined by the defence to check for signs of flaws or
tampering. Experts can be instructed to check the analysis
machine itself and checks can be made reading the police
procedures at time of testing. We have even had experience of an
entry that had been "tippexed" then changed.
Of course it is more costly to defend a
case than to plead guilty but this is because of all the extra
work and court time that will be involved.
But with so much at stake (including
considerable insurance penalty fees), the possibility of winning
should not be dismissed.It may cost less than you think.
|
Mistake 2- Assuming The Police Always Get It Right |

* the sample was not taken properly.
* the results indicate that the
analysis device was not properly calibrated
* your breath sample was interrupted
e.g. sickness
* you had something in your mouth, such
as chewing gum, tobacco etc.
* you were on a special diet.
* you have diabetes, asthma, other
relevant medical condition.
* you have ill fitting dentures.
* you had close contact in a confined
space with paint or solvents.
* an alcohol antiseptic was used when
blood was drawn.
By not contesting the evidence you don’t
get to question the arresting officers. If a Trial is set the
defence will get the chance to interview the police officers and
examine the physical productions before you attend court. You
will then have the opportunity to attack the results on the
grounds that the technical rules weren’t followed.
|
Mistake 3-Assuming The Breath Analysis Machine Is
Infallible |
Wrong. I can't think of a machine that
hasn't broken down sometime. All the defence require to do is
show the Sheriff that there is room for a "reasonable doubt"
regarding the reliability of the machine and your licence is
saved.
Laymen and even lawyers are sometimes
guilty of failing to read the piece of legislation that the case
relates too. All the statutes and the regulations governing the
use of technical equipment requires to be read and understood.
Those that don’t know the laws and
regulations don’t realise that violations of the rules
introduce into evidence matters that can be suppressed from the
trial on the grounds of fairness to the accused.
Thus, to defend you properly, a lawyer
should get copies of the various logs, maintenance records,
printout of sample taken etc. Sadly, it has been known for
lawyers and unrepresented parties to just have the complaint and
the arrest report.
|
Mistake 4- Not Objecting To Evidence |
If you do not know the law in relation to
what and how evidence is led, how can you possibly tender a
proper and timeous objection? If you don't get this right you
can easily be convicted before you realise the error of your
ways.
|
Mistake 5- Not Personally Checking Out The Arrest
Location |
Many people don’t visit the arrest
location. And this can be crucial. In road traffic offences we
often go to the scene with our clients to take relevant
photographs and draft diagrams. It makes sense of all the left,
right, nearside, offside, middle and don't knows that we will
have to deal with at the trial.
Roadside Tests involving walking a straight
line and the like are becoming increasingly used in Scotland.
Seeing and knowing the locus allows you to bring better cross
examination to court as you can test witnesses on true
conditions that existed. e.g. sloping, ill lit roadside that is
very busy with traffic.....it may be reasonable not to be
walking on the kerb? These things makes it much easier for your
lawyer to ask probing questions about the roadside test, and, in
some cases, point out a physical impossibility to the Sheriff.
We had one case where the police officer admitted that he
requested our client to walk a straight line inches away from a
dual carriageway. Needless to say the Sheriff wasn't too
impressed by this and threw the case out.
|
Mistake 6- Not Questioning Subjective Test Procedures |
An understanding of the psychological basis
for these tests and the methods to be employed when they are
applied is essential for proper cross examination of
officers. At the very least, the police training document
should be studied by you or your lawyer. He or she will then
know exactly what questions to ask the arresting officer to see
if he completely followed the proper method.
You see, if the manual’s directions weren’t
completely followed, the test’s validity can be attacked.
Wherever your lawyer does it, a successful challenge results in
the tested evidence being excluded at trial. Which significantly
weakens the prosecutors case.
Even more important, officers don’t always
use objective scoring. The manual explains how to score the
tests and how to arrive at a final score. All too often the
officer simply subjectively decides whether or not you failed
the tests.
What’s the point? It’s simple: if you or
your lawyer doesn’t know the training manual, how can he/she
attack the way the arresting officer used it? How can he stop
vital prosecution evidence from coming out. It is pretty hard to
un-ring a bell.
|
Mistake 7- Not Explaining The Discount For An Early Plea |
Your lawyer should advise you about the
sanctions resulting from a conviction as opposed to an early
guilty plea. (The Du Plooy case)
Why are these important?
Because they can include a jail sentence,
license suspension or revocation, a significant fine, inability
to rent a car, substantially higher insurance rates, and loss of
your job (particularly if your job involves driving).
And this mistake can happen all to often if
your lawyer is rushed or is a duty solicitor with very little
time for each client. We have acted as Duty solicitor and we
know how tough it is to get through maybe 30 to 40 cases in an
afternoon.
You must take these extra penalties into
account when deciding to plead guilty. If you’re not aware of
these penalties, you cannot help but be the loser.
|
Mistake 8- The Accused Giving Evidence |
Never a good idea for the accused to give
evidence in Road Traffic cases. This is primarily because they
are not experienced witnesses, often appearing to be nervous or
anxious. Police officers often have several years experience of
giving evidence and they tend to keep to the same position in
their evidence throughout.
Is there ever a good time to put the
accused on the stand? Yes, to directly contradict something the
officer said. It will also be required where you intend to rely
upon the "Hip Flask defence"
or post incident drinking defence.
|
Mistake 9- Attempting To Show The Police Officer Lied |
All you really needs to do is show how the
officer might simply be mistaken this time. Check the case
procedures thoroughly and ensure that all the relevant documents
have been lodged to enable you to cross examine on whether the
procedures where carried
out appropriately. This is where an experienced
solicitor is worth his fee!
If he is lying then go head to head with
him and get it out but remember that the Sheriff does not want
to believe that the officer is lying. Willing to risk his
career, his pension, his reputation just to "do" you on a Road
Traffic charge But the Sheriff might just accept that the
officer/s are mistaken. In my 20 odd years doing this I have
never seen an officer break down and admit that he was lying and
I suspect I never will
It’s far better to simply paint the case as
being about an officer who is jumping to conclusions or gilding
the lily and making mistakes.
|
Mistake 10- Not Consulting A Specialist |
Defence lawyers who are experts in Road
Traffic Law say that someone who isn’t a specialist should
consult one. Just as you wouldn’t hire a criminal lawyer to sell
your house or deal with your divorce. Would you employ a plumber
to hang a door?
Knowing how to defend a Road traffic case
case involves considerable preparation, familiarity with the
law, and knowing what motions to make and what objections to
take. .
He or she will quickly be able to spot
potential problems and strengths in your case. He’ll know what
the investigation and disclosure should reveal.
If your lawyer is not a specialist in this
area, you may not be getting the best advice and you may not
have the strongest case.
Hire the best that you can afford.
Remember that if you do get banned it may be possible to
get your licence
back before the end of the period of ban.
|