I am going to go with the "Devils Advocate" here!
Where is the
objective evidence that he "Was not in adequate control of the vehicle" ??
Seems to me that his prosecution/conviction is essentially an....
"I cannot walk and chew gum at the same time, so therefore I don't believe You can either!"
type argument!
Him driving his car with his knees isn't
so much different from the situation that many disabled drivers in "Adapted" cars find themselves in (I doubt if a disabled driver controlling his car with a joystick will be able to react as well to a "Ninja Badger" or blow out as an "able bodied" one either, but does that mean he is "Dangerous"?? )
ISTR a story from some years ago. It is probably no longer the case but, according to the story, the Germans didn't, at that time, have specific DUI legislation. the rule was about whether or not the driver was in "control" of the vehicle.
This particular case involved a driver who the police attempted to stop because they thought that he had had too much. However he then managed to evade the police for over three hours!
Now, I have no doubt that he subsequently had his ass nailed to the wall for many other reasons but.....!
He was acquitted of DUI on the grounds that somebody who was capable of evading the Police for such a period of time was clearly in "control" of his Vehicle!
