News

Carl Millar recently read an article on the BBC News Oxford website.  An ambulance boss had crashed his work car into a shop window in Oxford and was given a 4 month curfew.

Robert King, 48 was almost three and a half times over the drink drive limit.

The Court heard that Mr King had a reading of 247ųg of alcohol per 100ml of blood.  The legal limit is 80ųg.

His defence was on the basis that he was never in the car and there was no blood in the vehicle to connect him to it.

District Judge Tim Patterson told the defendant that he had committed a shameful offence.  Mr King was convicted and the Judge stated that he was satisfied beyond any reasonable doubt about all the elements of the prosecution case.  Mr King was disqualified from driving for a period of 28 months and ordered to pay £1,000 costs.

The leading case is Clark v DPP 1992 156 JP 605.  In that case, the Divisional Court held that in any criminal case the question for decision in respect of the driver of the vehicle was and remained throughout, is whether the Court was sure that the appellant was the driver.  In some circumstances, but in far from all, the presumption might, together with those circumstances, be sufficient to make the sure inference.  Clearly, in this particular case, the Judge was satisfied to be sure that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle.

If you do require representation for any drink driving offence on a nationwide basis covering cases in Manchester, Birmingham, Oxford and London then here at Cunninghams Solicitors we can consider any possible technical defences and also represent you if you simply want us to present mitigation on your behalf in the event of a guilty plea.

Please feel free to call us if you are looking for quality advice and representation for any drink driving related matters.