Drink and drive.... My bad

[MS]

0.06, that's kind of little

 

if 35u is the maximum, den 0.06u is only 0.17% of 35u. that's not even 1%

 

people can have alcohol content if they ate alcoholic chocolates or even jolly shandy. Den, you can tell the TP, i didn't drink, i juz ate alcohol chocolates!!

 

I think we should let the TS talk to a lawyer before making statements. For every word he says to the IO or judge is a step made in a minefield. Like what Shark said, don't plead guilty to the charges. I think the TS should seek legal advise from a professional first. If what the TS said were all true, it will be very very unfair to charge him for drink driving which normally carries a more severe penalty.

[jaredl]

well, I went thru the statuees of chapter 276 liao. my chances actually quite good. Furthernore, some of my friend got this b4. The judge will actually look into the level of alcohol content before he or she makes a verdict on wheather the accused is innocent or guilty. this is wat i found:

Evidence in proceedings for offences under sections 67 and 68

71A. —(1) In proceedings for an offence under section 67 or 68, evidence of the proportion of alcohol or of any drug or intoxicating substance in a specimen of breath or blood (as the case may be) provided by the accused shall be taken into account and, subject to subsection (2), it shall be assumed that the proportion of alcohol in the accused"s breath or blood at the time of the alleged offence was not less than in the specimen.

[11/96]

 

(2) Where the proceedings are for an offence under section 67 (1) (a) or 68 (1) (a) and it is alleged that, at the time of the offence, the accused was unfit to drive in that he was under the influence of drink, or for an offence under section 67 (1) (b) or 68 (1) (b), the assumption referred to in subsection (1) shall not be made if the accused proves —

 

(a) that he consumed alcohol after he had ceased to drive, attempt to drive or be in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or any other public place and before he provided the specimen; and

 

(b) that had he not done so the proportion of alcohol in his breath or blood —

 

(i) would not have been such as to make him unfit to drive a motor vehicle in the case of proceedings for an offence under section 67 (1) (a) or 68 (1) (a); or

 

(ii) would not have exceeded the prescribed limit in the case of proceedings for an offence under section 67 (1) (b) or 68 (1) (b).

 

 

 

You guys can also have a look at the attached url to have a better understanding. enjoy: )

 

http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_getdata.pl?actno=2004-REVED-276&doctitle=ROAD+TRAFFIC+ACT%0A&date=latest&method=part&segid=1104745819-002231

[EK]

how about failure to keep a proper following distance?

[Ev0xiaoboy]

So many hours rest? Maybe they can take that into consideration. But tell us, were u dizzy when u drove a not?

[jaredl]

So many hours rest? Maybe they can take that into consideration. But tell us, were u dizzy when u drove a not?

 

hahahaha. that's a good wan. definitely not? iknow that it takes a few shots to fail the breathe test, but it certainly does take more to male me dizzy. As for the following distance rule, i think will kena. more or less for careless driving. I had that charge abt 10 years ago on CTE

[GuiNNeSS]

So now, it leaves the insurance companies whether they are willing to pay out or not.

 

Mind you, they are actually the most difficult portion to get thru. If they still decide to uphold that you have alcohol in your breath so they can dont follow thru to compensate the other rider. Only a court order can make them comply.

 

Talk to your lawyer, just in case. I dont think you want to be suddenly slapped with a $10k lawsuit.

[BlackBandit]

Yup,

The most you kena is for careless driving. Small fine & some demerits.

 

But like kitty said, the problem arises when the other party is claiming for damages. That is unless you wanna compensate him yourself. Reduces all the hassle of going through lawyers and shite...

[Guest Quincy]

..........

Edited March 8, 2009 by Quincy

[jaredl]

So now, it leaves the insurance companies whether they are willing to pay out or not.

 

Mind you, they are actually the most difficult portion to get thru. If they still decide to uphold that you have alcohol in your breath so they can dont follow thru to compensate the other rider. Only a court order can make them comply.

 

Talk to your lawyer, just in case. I dont think you want to be suddenly slapped with a $10k lawsuit.

 

 

hahaha, if really give me a 10k claim, i declared myself bankrupt take off pants and run away. I dun think will be so much lah. the other party is a 200cc phantom. the only damage he suffered was a broken rear fender. further more, not much injuries. also eat a bit of bak kwa at most.

[jaredl]

Life scenario (not me lah)

 

Fren drinking.

Sober & was driving home.

Roadblock

Pass breath test

Brought back HQ (???)

Conclusion = drink driving

sentence = S$3K summon with license hanging by a thread

 

duh?? what was his breathe reading?? I mean normally if you pass the initial breathe test at the roadblock, they normally let you go wan. Unless the roadblock was set up especially for drink drivers, then a bit more stringent.

[popmynutsy]

speedy recovery bro. think u can fight, cause u did not drink driving, u took the step to at least rest 10 hours, u can emphasize on that. anyway, why when u get 0.06 mg they still want to charge u for drink driving?

[jaredl]

speedy recovery bro. think u can fight, cause u did not drink driving, u took the step to at least rest 10 hours, u can emphasize on that. anyway, why when u get 0.06 mg they still want to charge u for drink driving?

 

 

no lah, they have not officially tell me my charge yet, but the drink driving charge was stated on the bail form. so i took reference from there lor. when i took the breathe test that day, the sergent also said my reading looks ok and ask me why they bring me back for breathe test.