Passenger being breathalysed

gaf1983

Has anybody ever come across a situation where the guards breathalyse both the passenger and the driver of a vehicle suspected to be drunkenly driven? Do they have a right to breathalyse the passenger as well? If they have, what is the logical explanation for this right?

maidhc

gaf1983 wrote:

Do they have a right to breathalyse the passenger as well? If they have, what is the logical explanation for this right?

Nope, they don't.

Andrew 83

The Monday after random breath testing came in the papers were detailing the procedure and the Irish Times (pretty sure it was the Times anyway), said that it was standard to check the passenger too though didn't say why.

Cerdito

passenger and driver could have swapped seats in the queue for the checkpoint?

maidhc

Andrew 83 wrote:

The Monday after random breath testing came in the papers were detailing the procedure and the Irish Times (pretty sure it was the Times anyway), said that it was standard to check the passenger too though didn't say why.

Perhaps, but it is only an offence to drive while intoxicated, not be driven. People may as well drink and drive if they could still get done after getting a lift from the pub.

Mr. Presentable

maidhc wrote:

Perhaps, but it is only an offence to drive while intoxicated, not be driven. People may as well drink and drive if they could still get done after getting a lift from the pub.

I believe the offence is "drunk in charge". You do not have to be at the wheel, or driving, on a public road to be "in charge"

Avns1s

gaf1983 wrote:

Has anybody ever come across a situation where the guards breathalyse both the passenger and the driver of a vehicle suspected to be drunkenly driven? Do they have a right to breathalyse the passenger as well? If they have, what is the logical explanation for this right?

Surely they cannot or should not breathalyse the passenger unless they have reason to suspect that they changed seats as suggested by a previous poster. Seems pointless and beyond whats necessary and appropriate.

RDMH

I see a constitutional challange coming if this happens.

Our man in Havana

I wonder if the Gardai were trying to pull a fast one? I know of a case where the took the driver out of a car and then proceeded to do the passenger for drunk in charge. :eek:

piraka

Avns1s wrote:

Surely they cannot or should not breathalyse the passenger unless they have reason to suspect that they changed seats as suggested by a previous poster. Seems pointless and beyond whats necessary and appropriate.

If the driver and passenger changed seats the Gardai would have to prove that the passenger dad been in control of the vehicle before the sawp.

Andrew 83

In some (admittedly not that many cases) it could be a learner driver who needs a fully licensed driver in the car to drive. In this case it should surely be an offence for the fully licensed supervisor to be drunk.


By the way, has anyone been random breath tested yet? I haven't seen a checkpoint yet though there were 12,000 done last weekend.

seamus

Andrew 83 wrote:

In some (admittedly not that many cases) it could be a learner driver who needs a fully licensed driver in the car to drive. In this case it should surely be an offence for the fully licensed supervisor to be drunk.

Correct. In the case where the driver is fully licenced however, I don't see the pertinence of a passenger being over the limit.

Kimbot

If thats the case imagine all the taxi's getting done for it!! I would only say its the provisional drivers' passenger that gets checked TBH!!

maidhc

seamus wrote:

Correct. In the case where the driver is fully licenced however, I don't see the pertinence of a passenger being over the limit.

I don't believe that it is an offence for an inebriated person to be transported by a provisional driver (I have never seen the offence, but maybe I can be corrected). At worst it is a case of a learner driving unaccompanied, since the supervisors drunkness is unlikely to slow the reactions and blunt the senses of the driver. I also think it is fair to say a person after say 2/3 pints, while unfit to drive themselves would be more than capable of supervising another.

The reference to a person being "in charge" of a vehicle is used to catch those circumstances where a person does not actually drive, but has a clear intention of doing so... e.g. car started/keys in ignition

ircoha

gaf1983 wrote:

Has anybody ever come across a situation where the guards breathalyse both the passenger and the driver of a vehicle suspected to be drunkenly driven? Do they have a right to breathalyse the passenger as well? If they have, what is the logical explanation for this right?

Couple of reasons why:
It gets the numbers of people tested up so the stats look good.
Bag one, get one free, so to speak.

If both are over both get done as it is their word against yours that you were not driving the car, there is no photo evidence like for the camera shots on u using the mobile fone or for not wearing the seat belt.
How can you prove you were not the driver if u fail the bag test?

As a judge told me many years ago when i was being done for a crime I did not commit, the system wont work if we dont believe the Guards.

maidhc

ircoha wrote:

If both are over both get done as it is their word against yours that you were not driving the car, there is no photo evidence like for the camera shots on u using the mobile fone or for not wearing the seat belt.
How can you prove you were not the driver if u fail the bag test?

Two people can't drive a car at once. (unless it is a dual control maybe!). So if Mr. A gets prosecuted for driving 00C123 a4 12am, then Mr B can hardly get done for driving 00C123 at 12am.

gilroyb

Andrew 83 wrote:

In some (admittedly not that many cases) it could be a learner driver who needs a fully licensed driver in the car to drive. In this case it should surely be an offence for the fully licensed supervisor to be drunk.


By the way, has anyone been random breath tested yet? I haven't seen a checkpoint yet though there were 12,000 done last weekend.

I remember reading a statement from a government official saying that the current law means that the licensed driver could be drunk/having sex on the back seat/in the boot, and still be considered to be accompanying the provisional driver.

antodeco

so basically whats being said here is:

group of 5 people go out. 1 is designated driver.
the 4 others get completely drunk, while the driver is totally sober.
on the way home, the passengers get breathalysed and the driver gets done for it?

if thats the case, taxi men, bus drivers can be done. Included in this, if a gardai took a drunken passenger to the station, then they are in turn breaking the law?

Apologies if I took this up wrong..

cormie

Just another question on this. Is it ok for your passengers to be actively drinking while you are driving? I don't drink, but I have driven places with friends and they would be drinking on the way there etc. Is this ok?

seamus

cormie wrote:

Just another question on this. Is it ok for your passengers to be actively drinking while you are driving? I don't drink, but I have driven places with friends and they would be drinking on the way there etc. Is this ok?

For some reason I think it's illegal to have an open alcohol container in a car, but this could be American law, or a bastardisation of another law, I've nothing solid on it.

cormie

Really, that's a bit dodgy alright then. Where would I find this out for definite?

focusing

It's not an offence to be over the limit as a passenger.

They can't breathalise a non-driver.

The obligation to provide a preliminary breath specimen only extends to someone who is actually in charge of a vehicle at that moment.

(Yes, there does seem to be a loop-hole there.)

End of story.

cormie

but is it an offence to have an open alcoholic substance in the car? And what about the mouthwash situation?

Lenny

interest myself about others drinking in the car while being driven around, my self and mates do it all the time when we're passingers in the car

digweed

cormie wrote:

but is it an offence to have an open alcoholic substance in the car? And what about the mouthwash situation?

American law. mouthwash doesn't work. think about it, the company that makes these spent a fortune on development, the government knows there are going to be legal challenges (particularly because its drink driving, most case law of any offence), they are going to make sure that the device is up to scratch.

i think with the passenger being breathalysed ia that when they were first introduced they were a novelty to people and if there was a drunk person in the car they could show how the machine works.
(just my opinion).

D.

Zirconia

Of course it's not a problem to be over the limit as a passenger -- isn't this the whole point of designated drivers? The driver remains sober, and it can be assumed that the passengers will be over the limit, but that's the point.

I'd be very suspicious of a garda asking a passenger for a breath sample. If you are driving, without drinking beforehand, there is no sound reason for this, and if it was me I would outrightly refuse. Even if the garda began to warn of dire consequences, I would refuse - the threats would be groundless.