Recent Judicial Decisions
| Date | 01 April 2004 |
| Author | William J. Priestley |
| DOI | 10.1350/pojo.77.2.174.39123 |
| Published date | 01 April 2004 |
| Subject Matter | Recent Judicial Decisions |
WILLIAM J. PRIESTLEY
Legal Correspondent
Email: aretecs@hotmail.com
RECENT JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Standard of Evidence and the Offence of Excess Alcohol
R (Huntley) v Director of Public Prosecutions
High Court of Justice, Queens Bench Division,
Administrative Court
April 2004
Suspicion of driving: excess alcohol: driving: evidence:
standard of proof: hearsay: adducing evidence: electronic
screening device: continuity of evidence
This was an application before the High Court against conviction
at Haringey Magistrates’ Court for driving a motor vehicle on a
road having consumed alcohol above the legal limit on 9 June
2003.
The law
5(1) (a) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 states:
If a person–
(a) Drives or attempts to drive a motor vehicle on a road
or other public place, or
(b) is in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or other
public place,
After consuming so much alcohol that the proportion of it in
his breath, blood or urine exceeds the prescribed limit he is
guilty of an offence.
Section 9, Criminal Justice Act 1967 provides:
that if the conditions in that section are satisfied, a written
statement can be admissible in evidence in the same way as
oral evidence.
Even where a statement has been served under Section 9
of the Act and all the conditions are satisfied, it remains open
to the parties serving the statement to call a witness to give
oral evidence. The court may of its own motion, or on
174 The Police Journal, Volume 77 (2004)
To continue reading
Request your trial