On 24/02/2016 13:30, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 1:32:00 AM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 23/02/2016 22:11, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 5:21:17 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 23/02/2016 15:52, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 12:52:45 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 23/02/2016 08:08, Alycidon wrote:

Didn't even have the keys and was asleep.

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Drink...ail/story.html

Nonsense (as usual, given the source).
The driver *had* the keys and was clearly in charge of the vehicle.

She didn't have the keys. They were on the floor in the foot well. But clearly she was in charge of the vehicle, because that is the judgement of the court.

There's no getting round that (and she didn't try to, according to the
report). The incident happened in the middle of the day (some of the
drinking actually taking place in the car) and is not some random
accidental miscalculation of the amount drunk in a social situation. She
was three times over the limit.

The court's order that she "complete a three-month residential stay at
... a addiction rehabilitation centre" is probably the more important
part of the story.

And an excellent decision by the beak.

Indeed. But a driving ban as well. Anyone else would get one.

All in all, it's just another example of Mason's constant vain attempts
to read stories in a way to which they just don't lend themselves.

"She didn't have the keys. They were on the floor in the foot well".

That is risibly pathetic!

Do I have my car keys if they are not on my person, for example in my coat pocket hanging up on the back of the door while I am asleep in bed?

Yes.
If they are not in your possession, in whose possession are they?

I said she did not have them.

Yes, you did say that.

But she *did* have the keys. Having dropped them onto the floor in front
of the driver's seat is not different from having placed them in the
glove compartment, or on the passenger seat.

It would take an incredible subversion of language and logic to lead to
a (faulty) conclusion that she didn't have the keys.

The offence of "drunk in charge" (or however it is worded) subsists even
where the person in charge of the vehicle is in bed, asleep after a
skinful - *if* his vehicle is on the highway.

OTOH, there is a statutory defence of it not being likely that he will
drive whilst under the influence.
Whether that is a useful defence for a person found drunk asleep
*inside* the vehicle (and in charge of it) I leave to you.

If the law didn't apply in those circs, it's hard to see how it would
ever apply.

It applies (for instance) when a motor vehicle is parked on the highway
outside a house at about 03:00 and the person in charge of it has sunk a
bottle or two of red and and is sound asleep in bed.

In order to be completely immune from the "drunk in charge" law, it's
best to put the car away in the garage or, at least, on the driveway if
the garage is full of junk.