Drink Driving Penalties
April 29th, 2005 at 6:41 am by David FarrarA Judge tells a Nelson driver that his alcohol level of 1551 is the highest he has ever seen.
The driver is obviously lying when he says he had just drunk two handles of beer. Maybe two handles of chartreuse!
But then he only gets sentenced to 120 hours community service, and disqualified for a measly eight months. I would have thought someone showing the highest level the Judge has ever seen, should have the book thrown at them? I mean he was doing u-turns in front of traffic and passing trucks on bends. Suicidal.
No tag for this post.
April 29th, 2005 at 7:33 am
He was lucky to get that penalty I must say even on a first conviction. A level like that suggests this person is a cronic drunk because he may well have had very little that day but what about the previous day and so on. That suggests the Judge should have asked for an alcohol assessment at least, and the disqualitifation is a bit light.
Vote:April 29th, 2005 at 7:36 am
WTF!?!
‘Judge Whitehead told Connew he would not fine him as any fine would be “off the scale” with such a high drink-drive reading.’
So, is there a precedent set here?
If, for example, I don’t want a speeding fine I should drive at 250kph instead of 111kph – yes, I am tired of speeding tickets between 111 and 113kph!
Vote:April 29th, 2005 at 8:53 am
I’ve seen 1880. You are practically dead at about 2000.
Vote:April 29th, 2005 at 10:49 am
One can’t be certain from the article (though I suspect it would have been mentioned if otherwise) but this appears to be a first offence.
*no-one* ever gets a sentence this harsh for a first drink-driving offence. The basic rule, and it usually works, is:
Vote:first offence fine,
second offence community service,
third offence prison.
[unless you've got a lawyer who can make something of your personal situation, e.g. his last DD conviction was 11 years' ago]
April 29th, 2005 at 11:02 am
Nick – Absolutley!
Of course it’s a precedent – community service is one step below prison – people who commit more serious crimes get more seriour punishments.
Get caught driving at 250km/h and you won’t get a speeding fine – you’ll lose your licence for a damn long time and probably go to prison.
Don’t want a fine for a minor assault, make it an injuring with intent, or manslaughter…
Vote:April 29th, 2005 at 3:03 pm
DPF,
You’re using the wrong word. I don’t give a damn that his driving was “suicidal”.
That kind of drunk driving is homicidal. Which is why they should throw the book at him…
(Since becoming a dad I’ve got a lot less tolerant of very dangerous drivers. I know the stats and those bastards are the biggest existing danger to my kids lives).
Vote:April 29th, 2005 at 3:42 pm
I bet he was abused by family members as a child.
Vote:April 29th, 2005 at 5:09 pm
If not, he should have been
Vote:April 29th, 2005 at 5:51 pm
Seems to be a kiwi cultural thing break the law while being boozed seems to be less of a crime than breaking the law without being boozed. Wonder if they have added drugs to the list of excuses which means leniency.
Vote:April 29th, 2005 at 11:53 pm
The penalties for DD run like this 1st and 2nd a fine (if you can pay) 3rd and 4th community work, unless the 4th is very high and shortly after the third in which case it may be a short prison term, 5th nearly all go to prison 6th+ prison. This approach was approved by the High Court in Clotworthy. For a 1st conviction the fine is roughly the reading in Dlr terms. For a 2ND the fine is about 1.5x the reading.
Vote: