Driver asleep in car is done for drunk in charge

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 3:20:36 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
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.

Or reading the report of the court proceedings:

=====Quote=====
"He [the police officer] asked her for the keys to the vehicle. She was unable to locate them and eventually found them on the floor of the foot well."
=====/Quote=====

So she didn't have them, and furthermore, appeared not to know where they were, when asked by an officer of the law - according to evidence given by a policeman.

Or do you claim that the officer was lying, and she had them all along?


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.

On 24/02/2016 22:40, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 3:20:36 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
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.

Or reading the report of the court proceedings:

=====Quote=====
"He [the police officer] asked her for the keys to the vehicle. She was unable to locate them and eventually found them on the floor of the foot well."
=====/Quote=====

So she didn't have them,

Yes, she did.

No=-one else had them.

and furthermore, appeared not to know where they were, when asked by an officer of the law - according to evidence given by a policeman.

Right now, I don't know exactly where are the keys to any of the three
cars parked on the drive. I am in charge of two of them.

Does that mean I don't have the keys?

Or do you claim that the officer was lying, and she had them all along?

The officer is merely reporting what he was told, perhaps after
administering the caution.

Th defendant had the keys all along. Being (or claiming to be) "unable
to locate them" and/or "[appearing] not to know where they are" does not
extinguish her possession of them.

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.

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:23:24 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Right now, I don't know exactly where are the keys to any of the three
cars parked on the drive. I am in charge of two of them.

Does that mean I don't have the keys?

Put your hand in your pocket, if they are there, or somewhere else on your person, you have them. If not, you don't.

Earlier today my wife asked me to open the car, I said, "I don't have the keys". I knew exactly where they were, but I didn't have them.

Or do you claim that the officer was lying, and she had them all along?

The officer is merely reporting what he was told, perhaps after
administering the caution.

Th defendant had the keys all along. Being (or claiming to be) "unable
to locate them" and/or "[appearing] not to know where they are" does not
extinguish her possession of them.

On 24/02/2016 23:36, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:23:24 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Right now, I don't know exactly where are the keys to any of the three
cars parked on the drive. I am in charge of two of them.
Does that mean I don't have the keys?

Put your hand in your pocket, if they are there, or somewhere else on your person, you have them. If not, you don't.

I have a collection of CDs (quite a lot of them).

They aren't in my pocket and AAMOF, I could never lift them all in one
go, not even in a very big box with handles.

Does that mean I don't have them?

Earlier today my wife asked me to open the car, I said, "I don't have the keys". I knew exactly where they were, but I didn't have them.

That's a turn of phrase.

Law and legal cases do not turn on such trifles.

Or do you claim that the officer was lying, and she had them all along?

The officer is merely reporting what he was told, perhaps after
administering the caution.

Th defendant had the keys all along. Being (or claiming to be) "unable
to locate them" and/or "[appearing] not to know where they are" does not
extinguish her possession of them.

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:57:37 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 24/02/2016 23:36, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:23:24 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Right now, I don't know exactly where are the keys to any of the three
cars parked on the drive. I am in charge of two of them.
Does that mean I don't have the keys?

Put your hand in your pocket, if they are there, or somewhere else on your person, you have them. If not, you don't.

I have a collection of CDs (quite a lot of them).

They aren't in my pocket and AAMOF, I could never lift them all in one
go, not even in a very big box with handles.

Does that mean I don't have them?

Earlier today my wife asked me to open the car, I said, "I don't have the keys". I knew exactly where they were, but I didn't have them.

That's a turn of phrase.

Law and legal cases do not turn on such trifles.

Wrong - they can and do.

A recent (and important) high court collective enfranchisement case turned on the interpretation of the term "residential".
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/2433.html

On 25/02/2016 00:14, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:57:37 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 24/02/2016 23:36, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:23:24 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Right now, I don't know exactly where are the keys to any of the three
cars parked on the drive. I am in charge of two of them.
Does that mean I don't have the keys?

Put your hand in your pocket, if they are there, or somewhere else on your person, you have them. If not, you don't.

I have a collection of CDs (quite a lot of them).
They aren't in my pocket and AAMOF, I could never lift them all in one
go, not even in a very big box with handles.
Does that mean I don't have them?

Earlier today my wife asked me to open the car, I said, "I don't have the keys". I knew exactly where they were, but I didn't have them.

That's a turn of phrase.
Law and legal cases do not turn on such trifles.

Wrong - they can and do.
A recent (and important) high court collective enfranchisement case turned on the interpretation of the term "residential".
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/2433.html

Court cases frequently turn upon the meaning of words used in the law.

But let's see whether you can find a case where the verb "to have" was
interpreted so as to be negated by having dropped the item from the
hands onto the floor of a car.

On Thursday, February 25, 2016 at 2:33:55 AM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 25/02/2016 00:14, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:57:37 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 24/02/2016 23:36, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:23:24 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Right now, I don't know exactly where are the keys to any of the three
cars parked on the drive. I am in charge of two of them.
Does that mean I don't have the keys?

Put your hand in your pocket, if they are there, or somewhere else on your person, you have them. If not, you don't.

I have a collection of CDs (quite a lot of them).
They aren't in my pocket and AAMOF, I could never lift them all in one
go, not even in a very big box with handles.
Does that mean I don't have them?

Earlier today my wife asked me to open the car, I said, "I don't have the keys". I knew exactly where they were, but I didn't have them.

That's a turn of phrase.
Law and legal cases do not turn on such trifles.

Wrong - they can and do.
A recent (and important) high court collective enfranchisement case turned on the interpretation of the term "residential".
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/2433.html

Court cases frequently turn upon the meaning of words used in the law.

But let's see whether you can find a case where the verb "to have" was
interpreted so as to be negated by having dropped the item from the
hands onto the floor of a car.

It is interesting to note that you think that every time most people walk down the local high street they have a kitchen knife.

On 25/02/2016 08:35, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Thursday, February 25, 2016 at 2:33:55 AM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 25/02/2016 00:14, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:57:37 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 24/02/2016 23:36, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:23:24 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Right now, I don't know exactly where are the keys to any of the three
cars parked on the drive. I am in charge of two of them.
Does that mean I don't have the keys?

Put your hand in your pocket, if they are there, or somewhere else on your person, you have them. If not, you don't.

I have a collection of CDs (quite a lot of them).
They aren't in my pocket and AAMOF, I could never lift them all in one
go, not even in a very big box with handles.
Does that mean I don't have them?

Earlier today my wife asked me to open the car, I said, "I don't have the keys". I knew exactly where they were, but I didn't have them.

That's a turn of phrase.
Law and legal cases do not turn on such trifles.

Wrong - they can and do.
A recent (and important) high court collective enfranchisement case turned on the interpretation of the term "residential".
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/2433.html

Court cases frequently turn upon the meaning of words used in the law.

But let's see whether you can find a case where the verb "to have" was
interpreted so as to be negated by having dropped the item from the
hands onto the floor of a car.

It is interesting to note that you think that every time most people walk down the local high street they have a kitchen knife.

Insofar as the word simply means "own", than many people will have such
an item.

Nut that is not the term of art meaning of "have" in the context of a
motor vehicle's ignition key when one is found sitting in the vehicle
whilst over the blood alcohol limit.

Neither, to her credit (and very wisely), did the defendant seek to rely
upon the sort of advice she might have received had she only consulted
Crispin Legal Services (SE).

On Thursday, February 25, 2016 at 1:38:38 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 25/02/2016 08:35, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Thursday, February 25, 2016 at 2:33:55 AM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 25/02/2016 00:14, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:57:37 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 24/02/2016 23:36, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:23:24 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Right now, I don't know exactly where are the keys to any of the three
cars parked on the drive. I am in charge of two of them.
Does that mean I don't have the keys?

Put your hand in your pocket, if they are there, or somewhere else on your person, you have them. If not, you don't.

I have a collection of CDs (quite a lot of them).
They aren't in my pocket and AAMOF, I could never lift them all in one
go, not even in a very big box with handles.
Does that mean I don't have them?

Earlier today my wife asked me to open the car, I said, "I don't have the keys". I knew exactly where they were, but I didn't have them.

That's a turn of phrase.
Law and legal cases do not turn on such trifles.

Wrong - they can and do.
A recent (and important) high court collective enfranchisement case turned on the interpretation of the term "residential".
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/2433.html

Court cases frequently turn upon the meaning of words used in the law.

But let's see whether you can find a case where the verb "to have" was
interpreted so as to be negated by having dropped the item from the
hands onto the floor of a car.

It is interesting to note that you think that every time most people walk down the local high street they have a kitchen knife.

Insofar as the word simply means "own", than many people will have such
an item.

Nut that is not the term of art meaning of "have" in the context of a
motor vehicle's ignition key when one is found sitting in the vehicle
whilst over the blood alcohol limit.

Neither, to her credit (and very wisely), did the defendant seek to rely
upon the sort of advice she might have received had she only consulted
Crispin Legal Services (SE).

I couldn't possibly better the legal advice she seems to have had. Plead guilty and plead guilty at the earliest possible opportunity.

I simply dispute your claim:
=====Quote=====
The driver *had* the keys
=====/Quote=====

Clearly she didn't anymore than I *had* a kitchen knife last time I went through airport security.

On 26/02/2016 00:27, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Thursday, February 25, 2016 at 1:38:38 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 25/02/2016 08:35, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Thursday, February 25, 2016 at 2:33:55 AM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 25/02/2016 00:14, Tom Crispin wrote:

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:57:37 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 24/02/2016 23:36, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 11:23:24 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Right now, I don't know exactly where are the keys to any of the three
cars parked on the drive. I am in charge of two of them.
Does that mean I don't have the keys?

Put your hand in your pocket, if they are there, or somewhere else on your person, you have them. If not, you don't.

I have a collection of CDs (quite a lot of them).
They aren't in my pocket and AAMOF, I could never lift them all in one
go, not even in a very big box with handles.
Does that mean I don't have them?

Earlier today my wife asked me to open the car, I said, "I don't have the keys". I knew exactly where they were, but I didn't have them.

That's a turn of phrase.
Law and legal cases do not turn on such trifles.

Wrong - they can and do.
A recent (and important) high court collective enfranchisement case turned on the interpretation of the term "residential".
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/2433.html

Court cases frequently turn upon the meaning of words used in the law.

But let's see whether you can find a case where the verb "to have" was
interpreted so as to be negated by having dropped the item from the
hands onto the floor of a car.

It is interesting to note that you think that every time most people walk down the local high street they have a kitchen knife.

Insofar as the word simply means "own", than many people will have such
an item.

Nut that is not the term of art meaning of "have" in the context of a
motor vehicle's ignition key when one is found sitting in the vehicle
whilst over the blood alcohol limit.

Neither, to her credit (and very wisely), did the defendant seek to rely
upon the sort of advice she might have received had she only consulted
Crispin Legal Services (SE).

I couldn't possibly better the legal advice she seems to have had. Plead guilty and plead guilty at the earliest possible opportunity.

I simply dispute your claim:
=====Quote=====
The driver *had* the keys
=====/Quote=====

Clearly she didn't anymore than I *had* a kitchen knife last time I went through airport security.

She was a few inches from them. And she knew it.