Good job police

[Andy]

Being in the driving seat with the keys is being 'in control of a vehicle' as far as the law is concerned.

True, but i can't understand why such a law is in place.

 

[Skilid]

If he was asleep in the back/passenger seat, or had his keys in the glove box or something, would he have gotten the same treatment?

 

[steve-h]

What's the problem? Law says you can't be drunk in charge of a motor vehicle, he was drunk and in charge of a motor vehicle. Case closed, justice done.

I agree. The law is always 100% right and should never be changed.

 

[~Divine~Wind~]

I'm guessing the main issue here was being over the limit, rather asleep.

Still seems harsh though, Police trying to meet targets and not using common sense?

Over the limit yet not using the car?
diudnt realise being drunk sitting in your car was against the law?
would it have been the same if he was in the back seat i wonder?

 

[platypus]

True, but i can't understand why such a law is in place.

For people's safety really. I'm not sure if you missed it but he had the igntion turned on to the "electrics on" state.

If he was asleep in the back/passenger seat, or had his keys in the glove box or something, would he have gotten the same treatment?

No.

 

[233]

and after seeing this story some berk will decide against sleeping it off in their car and just drive home instead.

way to go for encouraging responsible behaviour police, well done.


surely if he was sleeping he wasnt "in charge" of his motor vehicle.

 

[Andy]

He was on a private carpark though, not a public highway. Why is the law even applicable?

 

[platypus]

I'm guessing the main issue here was being over the limit, rather asleep.

Still seems harsh though, Police trying to meet targets and not using common sense?

It has absolutely nothing to do with meeting targets, the police were correct. As I said above, its a shame the court didn't apply a little more common sense.

 

[Mat]

and after seeing this story some berk will decide against sleeping it off in their car and just drive home instead.

way to go for encouraging responsible behaviour police, well done.


surely if he was sleeping he wasnt "in charge" of his motor vehicle.

The definition of 'in charge' has already been covered.

 

[platypus]

He was on a private carpark though, not a public highway. Why is the law even applicable?

Are you familiar with the car park in question?

Supermarket car parks are classed as public highways, and therefore subject to the Road Traffic Act like any other road.

 

[stuman]

but what you have to think is if he woke up and wanted to drive and was still drunk.

then if he killed someone and the police had had a word with him, then they would be to blame.

in the coppers position i would have to do the same.

 

[Mat]

Some interesting points here:

http://www.drinkdrivinglaw.co.uk/offences/in_charge_of_a_vehicle_with_excess_alcohol.htm

and

"
Being 'drunk in charge' of a vehicle

If someone is over the alcohol limit, they could be arrested even if they are not driving or trying to drive. For example, a person could be arrested if they are over the alcohol limit and in possession of car keys, if their car is nearby.
There is no legal definition for being ‘in charge’ of a vehicle, but some examples might be:

• sleeping in a car while over the alcohol limit and in possession of the keys
• supervising another driver while over the limit (eg, if the driver only has a provisional licence)"

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Yourchildshealthandsafety/Youngpeopleandalcohol/DG_10026211

 

[Fred]

The definition of 'in charge' has already been covered.

If your asleep you dont really have the ability to drive though do you.

 

[platypus]

but what you have to think is if he woke up and wanted to drive and was still drunk.

then if he killed someone and the police had had a word with him, then they would be to blame.

in the coppers position i would have to do the same.

Exactly. Imagine the public outrage if the police had failed to arrest him and he had then gone on to hit someone.

If your asleep you dont really have the ability to drive though do you.

Petition your MP to lobby that the law be changed if thats how you feel.

 

[Burnsy2023]

But if he 'isn't in control of a vehicle whilst drunk' (Ie. No keys) then he doesn't have to supply a breathe specimen.

A constable only has to reasonably suspect that they are in charge of the vehicle to require the specimen of breath. Therefore, they can require the breath test even if no keys are later found.

 

[neil_g]

For people's safety really. I'm not sure if you missed it but he had the igntion turned on to the "electrics on" state.

i would imagine the jag has electric recline on the seats or he wanted the windows open..

silly decision to charge him to be honest. he'd clearly made the decision to sleep it off so had some control over his thought process not to start the engine etc.

 

[Burnsy2023]

He was on a private carpark though, not a public highway. Why is the law even applicable?

It's a public place which is what the law states.

 

[Andy]

Are you familiar with the car park in question?

Most supermarket car parks are classed as public highways, and therefore subject to the Road Traffic Act like any other road.

But even then the engine wasn't running. It wasn't in gear. Where and why do you draw the line?

 

[ShadowMan]

Read the BBC article :

The actor was discovered with the seat reclined, key in the ignition and the radio on, asleep behind the wheel of his green Jaguar.

Correct action by police. Sleep in the rear seat with keys in your bag if needed. He was in charge of his vehicle whilst drunk.

 

[neil_g]

in addition to my last about electric recline seats and windws also some vehicles auto lock and arm the alarm with the ignition off.