Serious Incident - Shropshire Union Nr Chester 11/03/2015

[Markinaboat]

You still don't get a breath test, and you need to be disorderly.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

My point - no breath test required. And from the original posts, she was most definitely disorderly, abusive etc.

[mayalld]

Some years ago a "boater" on the K & A near Devizes caused havoc, colliding with a number of boats and causing considerable damage. He was breathalysed by the police and DID end up in court as a result. I can't recall what his sentence was. (I do know the name of the boat though, but I think it has since been changed.)

 

Dave

 

Do you have actual first hand knowledge that he was breathalysed?

 

The reason that I ask is that reporting of such things tends to embellish. A conviction for navigating whilst intoxicated, and a lazy reporter ASSUMES that there must have been a breath test.

 

"How else", the man on the Clapham Omnibus asks, "could they establish that he was intoxicated"

 

Let us look to the history of drink driving.

 

The first offence was created in the 1872 Licencing Act, and over the next 95 years (with various additional offences created), people were prosecuted without any scientific evidence of Blood Alcohol content. It was only in 1967 (as I say, 95 years after the first offence relating to alcohol and a mechanical vehicle), two years after Bye-law 44 created an offence of navigating whilst intoxicated, that the breath test was introduced.

 

If we look at the present law (Road Traffic Act 1988), section 5 provides the relevant offence of driving whilst over the limit, but section 4 continues the older offence of driving under the influence.

 

Clearly, the newer offence is the preferred offence to bring, because it is a cut and dried, strict liability thing. Somebody was over the limit, guilty.

 

However, the older offence is not obsolete.

 

It is the only offence available for driving under the influence of drugs.

 

It is still available for cases where somebody is under the limit, but whose driving was clearly impaired.

 

For boates, proving the offence involves a subjective view from the magistrates as to whether the person was "under the infuence of drinl to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the Vessel"

[furnessvale]

My point - no breath test required. And from the original posts, she was most definitely disorderly, abusive etc.

However, if she remained orderly when the police arrived she would not be arrested as the evidence of "disorderly" available would be secondhand to the police and a court would be looking very carefully at it.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

Do you have actual first hand knowledge that he was breathalysed?

 

For boates, proving the offence involves a subjective view from the magistrates as to whether the person was "under the infuence of drinl to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the Vessel"

Exactly. The breathalyser is incorporated into a specific piece of road based legislation and is not available for the police to use for other purposes as they see fit.

 

It the circumstances outlined in post 225 above, someone has a cast iron not guilty available and a good case for wrongful arrest.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Edited March 23, 2015 by furnessvale

[mrsmelly]

My point - no breath test required. And from the original posts, she was most definitely disorderly, abusive etc.

 

The police in this country have very few powers, most powers of arrest are identical to any member of the public provided an offence carrying a power of arrest has been commited. The breathaliser powers appertain to the driver of a vehicle and under those specific powers a boat does not comply.

As for being found drunk and incapable or drunk and disorderly this is the only time that any pc without specific further expert witness training can claim to be an expert witness in other words they can decide and give evidence in court to wether or not that person was indeed drunk.

I know nothing whatsoever of this case so would not even make a guess at the true facts other than to state several options will have been considered by the first police on the scene. Breathalising the suspect would not be one of them.

 

Tim

[nicknorman]

Although one does hear of pilots (of the aviation kind) being breathalysed, ditto train drivers etc so there must also be specific legislation allowing for that (railway and transport safety act, presumably). Perhaps the confusion is that this same act includes narrowboats but that section was never enacted. That act was dated 2003 so may I humbly suggest that it post-dates some of the ex-coppers on here!

Edited March 23, 2015 by nicknorman

[MtB]

Although one does hear of pilots (of the aviation kind) being breathalysed, ditto train drivers etc so there must also be specific legislation allowing for that (railway and transport safety act, presumably). Perhaps the confusion is that this same act includes narrowboats but that section was never enacted. That act was dated 2003 so may I humbly suggest that it post-dates some of the ex-coppers on here!

 

Didn't someone earlier in the thread say commercial boat skippers are subject to specific alcohol limits? Therefore breathalysing skippers of commercial narrowboats must be available as an option. I wonder if a hire boat is 'commercial'.

[Guest]

 

She gets off fairly lightly, because the lift bridge question is seldom raised these days!

 

Very good.....

[Sabcat]

Although one does hear of pilots (of the aviation kind) being breathalysed, ditto train drivers etc so there must also be specific legislation allowing for that (railway and transport safety act, presumably). Perhaps the confusion is that this same act includes narrowboats but that section was never enacted. That act was dated 2003 so may I humbly suggest that it post-dates some of the ex-coppers on here!

Is it the police who carry out the initial breath tests in these situations or do they just turn up when the person has been caught by company/airport testing policy?

[mayalld]

Although one does hear of pilots (of the aviation kind) being breathalysed, ditto train drivers etc so there must also be specific legislation allowing for that (railway and transport safety act, presumably). Perhaps the confusion is that this same act includes narrowboats but that section was never enacted. That act was dated 2003 so may I humbly suggest that it post-dates some of the ex-coppers on here!

 

Correct (the sections for pilots were brought into force by The Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003 (Commencement No. 2) Order 2004)

 

Didn't someone earlier in the thread say commercial boat skippers are subject to specific alcohol limits? Therefore breathalysing skippers of commercial narrowboats must be available as an option. I wonder if a hire boat is 'commercial'.

 

Not for the purposes of the Act

[mrsmelly]

 

Didn't someone earlier in the thread say commercial boat skippers are subject to specific alcohol limits? Therefore breathalysing skippers of commercial narrowboats must be available as an option. I wonder if a hire boat is 'commercial'.

 

We can be breathalised I am told. There was a skipper in Falmouth around 2010 I believe who was found guilty at Truro crown court for carrying passengers commercialy whilst opl.

Speaking personaly I never have even so much as a quick half whilst at work or indeed for many hours before going to work and nor does the other two skippers at work.

 

Tim

[nicknorman]

Is it the police who carry out the initial breath tests in these situations or do they just turn up when the person has been caught by company/airport testing policy?

Yes it seems to be the police (probably the airport police for pilots). Not that I have any personal experience, thankfully!

[Sabcat]

Yes it seems to be the police (probably the airport police for pilots). Not that I have any personal experience, thankfully!

 

That would make sense, you wouldn't expect your average copper to know the law specific to pilots. Or boats for that matter.

[lostnortherner]

Railway staff are tested via an independent company (eg Bupa for routine screenings), there is another company who come out to breathalise staff involved in incidents, but thankfully I've not found out who they are. It's not the police though.

[Graham Davis]

Although one does hear of pilots (of the aviation kind) being breathalysed, ditto train drivers etc so there must also be specific legislation allowing for that (railway and transport safety act, presumably). Perhaps the confusion is that this same act includes narrowboats but that section was never enacted. That act was dated 2003 so may I humbly suggest that it post-dates some of the ex-coppers on here!

 

To clarify, as a railway worker:

We are subject to random alcohol testing, which is normally done using a urine test.

If there is an "incident" then a breath test can be used to give an instant reading but it has to be followed up with a urine test if anything is found by the breath test.

 

EDIT.

There are now other companies providing the testing alongside BUPA, because they weren't able to provide testing within a reasonable time in some areas.

Our work limits are much lower than the road limits!

Edited March 23, 2015 by Graham Davis

[DaveC]

 

Do you have actual first hand knowledge that he was breathalysed?

 

Well I didn't witness it myself but it was widely reported at the time so I have no reason to believe that the reporting was anything but accurate. I have tried to find the report in the local paper but so far unsuccessful, I will keep looking but haven't time at the moment.

 

Dave

[mayalld]

Well I didn't witness it myself but it was widely reported at the time so I have no reason to believe that the reporting was anything but accurate. I have tried to find the report in the local paper but so far unsuccessful, I will keep looking but haven't time at the moment.

 

I recall seeing reports, and had every reason to believe that the reporting was inaccurate.

 

If a breath test took place, it would have been without legal authority, which would have meant that it would have been inadmissible (unless the accused had seriously incompetent representation), and the prosecution case would have collapsed.

 

I would suggest that my explanation (convicted of navigating whilst intoxicated, plus lazy local hack inserting the breath test, plus other news sources running the same story) is FAR more likely.

[Sabcat]

As someone who has had their death reported in the local press I have very little faith in hacks. Coincidentally it was a drink driving incident although I'm not actually dead, honest.

[Alan de Enfield]

So what would be needed to secure a speeding conviction, as it seems it has happened before? A quick Google suggests that it has happened before. This is a case in Lincolnshire, although it doesn't mention how they knew the boat was speeding.

 

http://m.lincolnshireecho.co.uk/Skipper-fined-speeding-lake/story-11214694-detail/story.html

 

You would have expected that there would be some sort of standard of literacy required for reporters - how on earth did she even get her boat into the magistrate court - let alone be inconsiderate and speed to boot ?

 

...............pleaded guilty to breaking two of British Waterways's by-law offences of speeding and inconsiderate boating at Lincoln Magistrates' Court.

Would it not be correct to say :

............ pleaded guilty at Lincoln Magistrates court to the charge of breaking two of British Waterways's by-law offences - speeding and inconsiderate boating.

[nicknorman]

Didn't someone earlier in the thread say commercial boat skippers are subject to specific alcohol limits? Therefore breathalysing skippers of commercial narrowboats must be available as an option. I wonder if a hire boat is 'commercial'.

Yes I think it is 1/4 the drink drive limit. A holidaying punter driving a narrowboat is not a commercial operator, but if a member of the hire company staff was driving, well maybe it would be, especially if he was accompanying the punters, showing them how to boat etc. On the other hand, since as far as I know, no licence is required for such tasks, maybe not.

[Timleech]

Although one does hear of pilots (of the aviation kind) being breathalysed, ditto train drivers etc so there must also be specific legislation allowing for that (railway and transport safety act, presumably). Perhaps the confusion is that this same act includes narrowboats but that section was never enacted. That act was dated 2003 so may I humbly suggest that it post-dates some of the ex-coppers on here!

 

The PLA has its own byelaws which cover driink, they allow the use of breathalysers, their patrol boats are equipped with breathalyser kits. My reading is that their rules cover private pleasure boats in the same manner as commercial craft, with the same limits as for motorists.

 

Tim

[nicknorman]

 

The PLA has its own byelaws which cover driink, they allow the use of breathalysers, their patrol boats are equipped with breathalyser kits. My reading is that their rules cover private pleasure boats in the same manner as commercial craft, with the same limits as for motorists.

 

Tim

Not having been on PLA waters (yet) I haven't studied the bylaws so couldn't comment, however considering the nature of the tidal Thames I think an alcohol limit is sensible. It is a far cry from the Shroppie on a sunny afternoon!

[Timleech]

Not having been on PLA waters (yet) I haven't studied the bylaws so couldn't comment, however considering the nature of the tidal Thames I think an alcohol limit is sensible. It is a far cry from the Shroppie on a sunny afternoon!

 

I don't disagree.

 

Tim

[Colin Smith]

I have been informed by the Police that the defendant in this case has now been formally charged with 3 x Criminal Damage and 1 x Recklessly Endangering Life. She has been bailed and is due in court in July.

[Starcoaster]

That is interesting, the latter charge is very rarely used for cases other than arson!

Clearly the police were as unimpressed as everyone else and really aren't fecking about.

Looks like one for Crown Court, and a prison sentence if found guilty...

[Keeping Up]

Makes me think maybe I should report our Birmingham incident last week to the police too.