Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
Fail To Provide Specimen For Analysis - Vehicle Driver. Lots Of Questions.
I'm thinking about pleading not-guilty but have questions which I have to find answers to before I go ahead.
1. Am I able to ask the police to disclose the details of the case they plan to make against me?
2. The reason I plan to plead not-guilty is that I don't believe I'm guilty of the actual charge which is 'Fail to provide specimen for analysis - vehicle driver'
In my mind the spirit of the law in this case dictates that to attract this charge you must have been failing to cooperate with the police so they had no choice but to apply this charge. That you might have been refusing to take a breath test because you knew you were very guilty and wanted to try and avoid a charge so refused to give a sample.
Where I believe there is an issue is in the fact that whilst remaining silent (as is my right) I did fully cooperate with every request, including roadside breath test, no resistance during arrest, agreeing to finger-printing, photographs, strip-search and all other requests. I was not actually asked if I would provide a breath sample at the station.
3. Having established in my mind that I had fully cooperated and was not asked to provide a breath sample I am now stuck with the question of whether or not a judge will have any interest in believing me ahead of whichever representative the police send to make the case against me. I believe having cooperated with every other request (including a roadside breath test) that my insistence that I was not asked to provide a sample at the station carries some weight. How will the police claim I refused when I cooperated with everything else?
4. I was kept in the cell for the night, in the morning the custody sergeant asked a member of the staff to take my finger prints and photographs. I said you already did that last night. The custody sergeant insisted that we went through the process anyway. When they tried to upload a second set of prints to the system the system refused to accept them because the prints had already been uploaded the night before. I watched them try and do this and the system wouldn't allow them to repeat the procedure. The officer taking my prints reported this to the sergeant.
5. I could see on the screen of the roadside testing device the figures of 1, 3 and 5 but was looking at the screen from an angle and they did not show it to me or tell me anything about the result. I had smoked 10 cigarettes in the previous couple of hours and just eaten a McDonalds although did not disclose this to the police at any time. I remember the older devices had a traffic light system giving you a red, amber or green indicator. I don’t remember seeing any lights on the device so really unsure what reading they had.
6. The police could not find the keys for the car either about my person or anywhere in the vehicle.
7. Could points 5 & 6 have contributed to a decision by the police to attempt to present this situation as if I had failed to provide a specimen because there were weakenesses in the evidence for supporting other potential charges?
8. Assuming I am unable to see what evidence the police are planning to use against me is it at all likely that they will attempt to use reports and video footage from the roadside scene to sully the waters and bolster their case even if the charge is ‘failing to provide’ – I would have thought it should be all about what happened at the station but can see that they might want to paint a picture of events including observation leading to arrest and everything which followed. I am a fast driver naturally so am always at risk of being caught on video doing all of the things the police love to talk about.
1. Am I able to ask the police to disclose the details of the case they plan to make against me?
2. The reason I plan to plead not-guilty is that I don't believe I'm guilty of the actual charge which is 'Fail to provide specimen for analysis - vehicle driver'
In my mind the spirit of the law in this case dictates that to attract this charge you must have been failing to cooperate with the police so they had no choice but to apply this charge. That you might have been refusing to take a breath test because you knew you were very guilty and wanted to try and avoid a charge so refused to give a sample.
Where I believe there is an issue is in the fact that whilst remaining silent (as is my right) I did fully cooperate with every request, including roadside breath test, no resistance during arrest, agreeing to finger-printing, photographs, strip-search and all other requests. I was not actually asked if I would provide a breath sample at the station.
3. Having established in my mind that I had fully cooperated and was not asked to provide a breath sample I am now stuck with the question of whether or not a judge will have any interest in believing me ahead of whichever representative the police send to make the case against me. I believe having cooperated with every other request (including a roadside breath test) that my insistence that I was not asked to provide a sample at the station carries some weight. How will the police claim I refused when I cooperated with everything else?
4. I was kept in the cell for the night, in the morning the custody sergeant asked a member of the staff to take my finger prints and photographs. I said you already did that last night. The custody sergeant insisted that we went through the process anyway. When they tried to upload a second set of prints to the system the system refused to accept them because the prints had already been uploaded the night before. I watched them try and do this and the system wouldn't allow them to repeat the procedure. The officer taking my prints reported this to the sergeant.
5. I could see on the screen of the roadside testing device the figures of 1, 3 and 5 but was looking at the screen from an angle and they did not show it to me or tell me anything about the result. I had smoked 10 cigarettes in the previous couple of hours and just eaten a McDonalds although did not disclose this to the police at any time. I remember the older devices had a traffic light system giving you a red, amber or green indicator. I don’t remember seeing any lights on the device so really unsure what reading they had.
6. The police could not find the keys for the car either about my person or anywhere in the vehicle.
7. Could points 5 & 6 have contributed to a decision by the police to attempt to present this situation as if I had failed to provide a specimen because there were weakenesses in the evidence for supporting other potential charges?
8. Assuming I am unable to see what evidence the police are planning to use against me is it at all likely that they will attempt to use reports and video footage from the roadside scene to sully the waters and bolster their case even if the charge is ‘failing to provide’ – I would have thought it should be all about what happened at the station but can see that they might want to paint a picture of events including observation leading to arrest and everything which followed. I am a fast driver naturally so am always at risk of being caught on video doing all of the things the police love to talk about.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by helpme12. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
After turning a couple of corners (urban setting) I realised the lights were getting closer and so pulled over. Lost my keys.
----------------------------------------------------
Tip: The Magistrate was not born yesterday. Get used to not driving for 12 months and increased insurance premiums for the next few years.
----------------------------------------------------
Tip: The Magistrate was not born yesterday. Get used to not driving for 12 months and increased insurance premiums for the next few years.
I was not asked at any stage to blow into a device at the station. Either in the evening or the morning. TBH I'm not sure the morning breath test is a requirement. Are we sure that is true?
I think some of the contributions on here are very childish and unhelpful. Just because the police stop you and take you to the station it does not automatically mean you are guilty and that you must expect a severe punishment. I can't understand why anyone would contribute to a thread in the criminal law section of this website without understanding that basic principle.
I think some of the contributions on here are very childish and unhelpful. Just because the police stop you and take you to the station it does not automatically mean you are guilty and that you must expect a severe punishment. I can't understand why anyone would contribute to a thread in the criminal law section of this website without understanding that basic principle.
Yes I think all the stuff about losing your keys isn't relevant since you don't seem to deny that you were driving. Your defence should rest on your point that you believe you were never asked to give a sample at the station so you need to be absolutely sure of your facts and that you were in a position to remember everything clearly.
What does your solicitor say? I don't think you have mentioned him/her yet
What does your solicitor say? I don't think you have mentioned him/her yet
All is not at all clear to me and unless you can help me I cannot contribute further. Can you clarify:
Have you actually been charged with anything?
If so, what, and have you been bailed to appear in court?
If not, have you been warned that you may be charged and bailed to return to the police station at a later date? If so, what?
Could you, by any chance, have been charged, not with failing to provide, but driving or being in charge of a vehicle whilst unfit through drink or drugs?
You need to concentrate on what you believe you have been or may be accused of and further concentrate on the defence you will offer to those allegations. Your description of events, whilst very full, does not seem to explain your current position (i.e. have you been charged and if so what with).
Have you actually been charged with anything?
If so, what, and have you been bailed to appear in court?
If not, have you been warned that you may be charged and bailed to return to the police station at a later date? If so, what?
Could you, by any chance, have been charged, not with failing to provide, but driving or being in charge of a vehicle whilst unfit through drink or drugs?
You need to concentrate on what you believe you have been or may be accused of and further concentrate on the defence you will offer to those allegations. Your description of events, whilst very full, does not seem to explain your current position (i.e. have you been charged and if so what with).
Inexplicably losing the keys to a vehicle you were driving seconds before stopping is probably the most ridiculous I've ever heard, and I've heard a few in similar circumstances.
Shall we start again? Why don't you tell us whether or not you had even had a drink at all that evening, prior to being stopped?
Intoximeters do not give a reading unless there is a presence of alcohol.
It would appear(and I've no doubt the magistrate will form the same opinion) that you are some sort of Walter Mitty type character who is making a poor attempt at splitting hairs over legalities when they are in fact guilty of driving whilst impaired through drink or drugs.
I've no doubt the alcohol or drugs you consumed that night have somewhat clouded your memory of the actual events as they occurred and you became churlish and obstructive once the enormity had dawned on you.
So I'll ask again, had you at any time prior to being stopped, consumed any alcohol or ingested/smoked any illegal substances?
Shall we start again? Why don't you tell us whether or not you had even had a drink at all that evening, prior to being stopped?
Intoximeters do not give a reading unless there is a presence of alcohol.
It would appear(and I've no doubt the magistrate will form the same opinion) that you are some sort of Walter Mitty type character who is making a poor attempt at splitting hairs over legalities when they are in fact guilty of driving whilst impaired through drink or drugs.
I've no doubt the alcohol or drugs you consumed that night have somewhat clouded your memory of the actual events as they occurred and you became churlish and obstructive once the enormity had dawned on you.
So I'll ask again, had you at any time prior to being stopped, consumed any alcohol or ingested/smoked any illegal substances?
New Judge. The charge is the title of this question. The legal advice I have taken has been on a non-professional basis but they agree with factor-fiction that I should stick to the point and defend the point that I wasn't asked to provide a specimen. It's not self-service and I wouldn't have known I would have to provide a sample in order to protect myself from being charged with failure to provide.
Hi helpme
When you were finally charged the custody Sgt would have further Cautioned you after the facts of the offence were read to you. The caution at this stage is slightly different to when arrested and states 'You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention NOW, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.
Did you respond ?
When you were finally charged the custody Sgt would have further Cautioned you after the facts of the offence were read to you. The caution at this stage is slightly different to when arrested and states 'You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention NOW, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.
Did you respond ?
Then the issue is quite straightforward. The allegation of "failing to provide" relates to the procedure which should be undertaken at the police station. If you are sure you were not asked to provide then that should be your defence and before you go to trial you will be provided with the evidence the CPS intend to use to prove their case. This may be in the form of statements made by the officers concerned or a DVD of the process at the police station. In the case of statements you are entitled to request the officers' attendance at court to give live evidence, on which they may be cross examined. If they do not attend their evidence will not be admissable.
Seems quite straightforward to me.
Seems quite straightforward to me.
If you failed a roadside test were arrested and charged with not providing a specimen for analysis, which is the evidential specimen and can be taken by breath, blood or urine you should, of course, plead not guilty as the offence is committed if you fail to provide a specimen when required to do so. If you were not required to provide a specimen and the evidence prepared by the CPS will confirm this you are not guilty as charged and you may find the CPS reluctant to take further action. As has been stated you have the right to see the evidence to be produced against you, but enter your not guilty plea as soon as is possible.
Perhaps you will be kind enough to inform us of the outcome.
Perhaps you will be kind enough to inform us of the outcome.
If you were not asked to provide a specimen, can you answer my last point and tell us if you remember what WAS said at the police station? I assume something must have been said and the police did not just stand around in silence.
Or do you mean you were so drunk you either can't remember being asked or the police realised you were too drunk / drugged to be capable of providing one ?
Just noticed another strange point in your question, you say you were 'stripsearched' that is NOT done just for DD. It IS done if the police suspect you of having illegal drugs on you.
You also still have not answered the question about what if anything you did drink before being stopped .
Or do you mean you were so drunk you either can't remember being asked or the police realised you were too drunk / drugged to be capable of providing one ?
Just noticed another strange point in your question, you say you were 'stripsearched' that is NOT done just for DD. It IS done if the police suspect you of having illegal drugs on you.
You also still have not answered the question about what if anything you did drink before being stopped .
If you had imbibed with other substances, which by your agreement to other searches being requested from you, then use of the Intoximeter is unlikely to show the actual substance in your system, therefore the field test for Driving whilst under the influence, as in http://
So you are convinced that the most important event in this never happened?
If you were never required to provide a sample at the station, there's absolutely no apparent reason, bearing in mind that the procedure of breath test at the roadside did happen and so the whole case started as an excess alcohol one, why the police would utterly disregard, and not bother with, requiring the sample at the police station, is there? And all that within a short time of you being taken from the roadside. Why would they start the procedure and not go on with it when the only reason for you being at the police at all was the breath test at the outset?
But you will see the evidence if you are charged and then see that your defence consists there being a reasonable doubt whether police officers have invented the key part of the story and , further, falsified records. if there is such a doubt about their account, you will be acquitted.
You need a solicitor to act for you.
If you were never required to provide a sample at the station, there's absolutely no apparent reason, bearing in mind that the procedure of breath test at the roadside did happen and so the whole case started as an excess alcohol one, why the police would utterly disregard, and not bother with, requiring the sample at the police station, is there? And all that within a short time of you being taken from the roadside. Why would they start the procedure and not go on with it when the only reason for you being at the police at all was the breath test at the outset?
But you will see the evidence if you are charged and then see that your defence consists there being a reasonable doubt whether police officers have invented the key part of the story and , further, falsified records. if there is such a doubt about their account, you will be acquitted.
You need a solicitor to act for you.
Hi EDDIE51. You asked "You also still have not answered the question about what if anything you did drink before being stopped ."
I don't think that is the issue and I don't think the question could be asked in court if the charge is simply 'failure to provide...)
As for the strip search, maybe that was just a search to see if he had the car keys..
I would be interested to see the outcome of this and do wonder what the video evidence or police statements say. It does seem odd though that the police would bring someone in and then forget to ask to test them.
I know it's not the main issue, but I am curious though, help12, to know whether you ever found your car keys
I don't think that is the issue and I don't think the question could be asked in court if the charge is simply 'failure to provide...)
As for the strip search, maybe that was just a search to see if he had the car keys..
I would be interested to see the outcome of this and do wonder what the video evidence or police statements say. It does seem odd though that the police would bring someone in and then forget to ask to test them.
I know it's not the main issue, but I am curious though, help12, to know whether you ever found your car keys
Does sound odd doesn't it factor
But it also seems odd that the Police would try and take and upload his finger prints twice and then get confused about why it didn't work
Not a detail that someone would naturally invent - could be not the most organised Police Station
I'd also be interested to hear how this plays out
But it also seems odd that the Police would try and take and upload his finger prints twice and then get confused about why it didn't work
Not a detail that someone would naturally invent - could be not the most organised Police Station
I'd also be interested to hear how this plays out
One thing everyone is missing here is the words -"vehicle driver" you are not the driver of that car when you where stopped,in law the word driver is to do with commerce so if your not a taxi or hire car you are not the driver.When handling the police you need to be up to speed with the law from the get go otherwise they will just stemroller you.I would do some research first then go to court and wait to you are asked where you the driver of that vehicle on that date and reply no,you where the operator of that car,not the driver as you are not in business/commerce.Remember there is no spirit in law,law is law.
princemac- you keep posting on motoring law threads that the police etc must use the term operator rather than driver and therefore people can 'get off' on a technicality. This sounds like nonsense to me but as you seem so sure about it I'd be interested to find out more. Do you have a link to an official site? Thanks
Latest Posts
ChatterBank12 mins ago
ChatterBank14 mins ago
Technology26 mins ago
Are The West In The Grip Of The Woke...
News28 mins ago
ChatterBank46 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.