26-11-2014, 19:33
Thanks for the explanation Salop.
However, it still doesn't explain the SUSPICION of drink driving. When tested at the roadside he would have been either positive or negative with the same at the follow up test in the nick so how can it be suspicion.
He could of course have refused to take a test or, he wasn't actually stopped at the time, only reported by a member of the public and the rozzers didn't get to him wherever he was for some hours which, give the elapsed time, a breathtest may have been pointless. (Bit like our last two games !) Maybe it would then involve a bloodtest to establish a longer time-line based on the level of sherbets found in his blood.
Silly boy.....
However, it still doesn't explain the SUSPICION of drink driving. When tested at the roadside he would have been either positive or negative with the same at the follow up test in the nick so how can it be suspicion.
He could of course have refused to take a test or, he wasn't actually stopped at the time, only reported by a member of the public and the rozzers didn't get to him wherever he was for some hours which, give the elapsed time, a breathtest may have been pointless. (Bit like our last two games !) Maybe it would then involve a bloodtest to establish a longer time-line based on the level of sherbets found in his blood.
Silly boy.....