First read this (is a few months old, probably posted before)...
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/tayside_and_central/7...m
Then read this....
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/tayside_and_central/8...m
And try not to feel a satisfying glow inside.
|
|
This is probably not the best place to give my opinion of the first aquittal.
Edited by Old Navy on 25/01/2010 at 21:26
|
|
It is a defence in law actually.
|
"I had no intention of driving. I am a procurator fiscal and I know the law."
I think the correct word is 'hubris'.
Considering people have been convicted of 'being in control of a vehicle while unfit through drink and drugs' by simply sleeping in their car (while drunk), even with keys placed in the exhaust pipe or glovebox....
|
|
|
It is a defence in law actually.
Sorry, I'm feeling a bit dumb at the moment - could you explain further?
|
|
It's a statutory defence actually mentioned in the legislation that if the driver can show that they weren't going to drive they can be found not guilty...maybe different in Scotland, burden of proof is different.
|
Thanks Pug - it sounds like a terribly grey area - how do you prove what your intentions are?
Either way sounds like she pulled it off first time round.
|
|
|
The burden of proof for that defence is upon the defence, rather than the prosecution I think.
In Scotland drink driving is a crime of "strict liability", meaning if you are "in control" of a vehicle, and "exceeding statutory breath/blood alcohol levels" then you are guilty.
The sheriff seems to suggest the defence raised a "reasonable doubt" which is the normal burden of proof.
The Crown took the decision to appeal, presumably around this point, and the appeal failed (ie. she remained not guilty).
Amusingly this appeal happened 6 weeks after the arrest for the second charge 8-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am sure it is, it's a pity that guilt isn't judged by the likelyhood of the accused killing someone. Odd she is in the "trade".
Edited by Old Navy on 25/01/2010 at 21:41
|
|
|
It is a defence in law actually.
No doubt, but it does seem rather unlikely that someone would stop their car, then down a 1/4 bottle of spirits while in the vehicle. I worry about going to the car to get something from it when I'm over the limit. I'm sure I've read of cases where someone does just that, and gets nicked. Maybe if you are in your jim jams and slippers it makes the story more believable. :)
|
|
|
|
Absolutely disgusting. Someone who without any doubt shold have known better.
Considering the circumstances, she seems to have got off very lightly as well.
|
Without getting into a debate on her first acquittal there are two sayings that come to mind here.
"Don't worry they will come again."
"What goes around comes around."
|
|
|
Absolutely disgusting. Someone who without any doubt shold have known better.
I'd suspect in the circs she'd forgotten or overwritten a lot of what she knew. Loss of her mother and marriage got on top of her and tragically she treated the symptoms with alcohol. On one occasion she had the option of calling her brother and was sufficiently "with it" to use that facility. The second time she either ran out of choices or was so far gone she couldn't exercise them sensibly.
In addtition she's now lost her job and the professional reputation needed to find another one.
I'd happily swing for people who drive to the pub and return with the planned skinfull. Much less willing to be judgmental about what looks closer to a psychiatric issue.
Edited by Bromptonaut on 25/01/2010 at 22:53
|
|
Having been through the most extreme stress you could imagine, hitting the bottle was an option. I didn't through the good and timely counselling (with a small c) of a Police Officer - but sometimes the bottle is the only option that people take with all the consequences - it's easy to judge others at times without knowing the dynamics of a situation. There but for the good grace of God go I.
|
There but for the good grace of God go I.
... and many another PU... amen brother...
|
|
|
|
Alas she did not seek (or was not provided with) the required psychiatric help after the first very clear warning message (to her and others) and the result was an accident that could have involved others.
|
|
Yes - easy enough I suppose. Sometimes the mind doesn't work that logically under stress ( I mean real stress) I'm not defending her, personally I'm glad she's off the road. Just saying what I feel I guess.
|
>Having been through the most extreme stress you could imagine, hitting the bottle was an option.
>Sometimes the mind doesn't work that logically under stress..
Respect PU.
My uncle was an otherwise very intelligent man, recruited by Northrop for the Stealth project (despite being a Brit.) and a regular guest lecturer at UMKC. He took the easy option and crawled into a bottle to escape the loneliness. It took him two years to kill himself.
Kevin...
|
|
|
|
I have been wanting to ask this for as long as I can remember.
What about if I have camper van, get legless and get back in it and go to sleep or play cards or carry on drinking etc.. I still have the keys..........?????
MD
|
What about if I have camper van get legless and get back in it and go to sleep (...) I still have the keys..........?????
My guess is that if you a policeman happens by, and even if you say you have no intention of driving until the day after tomorrow, that you will lose your licence.
|
What about if I have camper van get legless and get back in it and go to sleep (...) I still have the keys..........?????
If you're on the hard shoulder of he M1 you'll lose your license. If you're on a campsite the copper wil never even find you. In between the court will decide, on the facts.
Edited by Bromptonaut on 25/01/2010 at 23:40
|
|
|
Strictly speaking 'In charge whist unfit'. Whilst in law the defence have to prove that there was no likelyhood of the vehicle being driven there is now a CPS requirement for the prosecution to rebutt that defence and provide evidence that there was a likelyhood of the vehicle being driven otherwise its a non starter.
Discretion is therefore the order of the day. So if someone is tucked up in their sleeping bag on a bed in the back then there is a reasonable assumption that they are not going to drive imminently. Same scenario applies to HGV drivers with a purpose built bunk.
I think its fair to say that for someone who has been arrested for 'in charge' there is a strong belief that they have either recently driven or they are about to.
There is flexibility in the sentencing in that disqualification is not mandatory. So whilst the offence is absolute the defence might argue a reasonable case about the non likelyhood of driving and a fine only could be imposed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your kids are unlikely to be crossing the road when Jimmy Sixbellies is chugging home several sheets to the wind. This was at 5pm.
3 times the legal limit and shunted a parked car...
£400/18mth ban is a joke.
And someone with the wherewithal to park their car, then consume a quarter bottle of vodka, then phone their brother, then fall asleep...
Nah - little sympathy for her behaviour up to this point - now she has a chance to take control I hope she does. Alcoholism and mental health problems once conquered will not be a lifelong bar on her restarting her career in due course.
|
It surprises & rather disgusts me that peoples' all too human frailties seem to be gleefully picked over by the media & others. Not anyone's business except hers.
She's had her problems & paid a price, the fact that she's in the law profession is completely irrelevant - although I imagine that's why this story has been picked up.
|
>> the fact that she's in the law profession is completely irrelevant <<
I'm sure it had no bearing whatsoever upon the original sheriff's decision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And try not to feel a satisfying glow inside.
No glow here. Sadness that someone who used to be a useful and responsible citizen has handed control of her life to the bottle. Relieved that only cars were damaged.
|
>> No glow here. Sadness that someone who used to be a useful and responsible citizenhas handed control of her life to the bottle. Relieved that only cars were damaged.
I couldn't have put it better myself. I've been facing all sorts of personal problems recently, some of them serious and can fully understand how someone can turn to the bottle.
Also, am I missing something here, or did the judge in the original case make his own decision on whether to acquit the defendant without any influence from her? It's not her fault that judge chose to do that, whatever her postion may have been. I'd suggest that the warm glow of satisfaction stems from action of the 'system', not the defendant.
|
|
|
|
few months old, probably posted before >>
Yes, posted before by Falkirk Bairn
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=81109
The news story then concluded " .... deferred sentence to January 25, for social inquiry and community service reports, and a report from TAPS."
Edited by jbif on 25/01/2010 at 23:46
|
Thank jbif - nothing new here then other than the sentence.
|
...I've been facing all sorts of personal problems...
This woman's personal problems are unique to her, but personal problems are common to many people.
If everyone reacted to these difficulties the way she did, there would be hardly anyone left in the country with a clean licence.
The brewers and distillers would be making good profits - if they could find anyone sober enough to deliver their goods.
Edited by ifithelps on 26/01/2010 at 10:28
|
|
The vast majority of people get through their problems without impacting on others, some don't it's a fact of life sadly.
|
|
Exactly, PU. Most people think that they can deal with extreme stress but only ever find out for sure when they're faced with it. It's very easy to maintain that you'd never do what this woman did, but you can never be sure. And anyone that says they categorically wouldn't is kidding themselves.
Edited by Badwolf {P} on 26/01/2010 at 10:35
|
|
|
...without impacting on others...
Agreed, it might not look llike it, but I do have some sympathy with this woman.
Get sloshed if you really need to, but where we part company is combining the drinking with the driving.
|
>> Get sloshed if you really need to but where we part company is combining thedrinking with the driving.
I'm not trying to excuse her behaviour as drinking and driving is wrong, we all know that. All I'm saying is that when you're in that state of mind you make odd and illogical (as well as out of character) decisions.
|
...All I'm saying is that when you're in that state of mind you make odd and illogical (as well as out of character) decisions...
Fully agree.
Happily, this example of illogical decision making had no serious consequences for anyone else.
Although I'm sure the owner of the parked car she smashed up was hacked-off about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
