My Stupidity...

[stolen 0]

Your only chance is that the police have made a procedural error and you get off on a technicality.

Good luck.

I dont think this will be the case for me. Thank you for your info Cain.

[*sic 1]

Your only chance is that the police have made a procedural error and you get off on a technicality.

Good luck.

I dont think this will be the case for me. Thank you for your info Cain.

OWNED!

sorry it just gives me a good warm feeling inside to know you got caught and now it f**ks you off..

mmm warm.

[bravo 34]

I should have said "remanded on bail" you won't be remanded in custody. Basically entering no plea will give you a couple of extra weeks to suss yourself out - any duty solicitor will recommend this to you.

The application fee for a limited license is low, but if you want to ensure you get it you really should pay a lawyer unless you know what you are doing (hence the $1 - 1.5k) as they know what to say to the court (and more importantly what NOT to say).

DIC convictions can restrict passage into Canada and some other countries - won't affect Australia and there is a time limit for how long it will affect you.

After 6 months you'll get your license back with no limitations and all of your demerits wiped entirely, but good luck getting insurance for awhile.

The police make proceedural errors all the time - you'd be surprised how many drunk drivers get off this way.

Edit: BTW its 3 months mandatory loss, but you may receive 6 months - pray for 3 months and hope you get a good duty solicitor. Take one of your parents with you - it looks good to the court if your family is there to support you - the solicitor should make a point of making the judge aware you have a family member with you.

Edited March 6, 2006 by bravomikewhiskey

[Widow 0]

This will not affect your ability to travel. It is a traffic conviction, not a criminal conviction.

I am in the industry (and I have been in your position!) - my advice - use a duty solicitor, plead guilty and take the six months, it will be much cheaper than employing a lawyer, and judges do not like lawyers who rabbit on with excuses of why their client drove over the limit!

[bravo 34]

1) you are wrong - some countries will not allow entry to anyone convicted of drink driving.

A drunk driving conviction can also make it difficult for you to travel long after your court case is over and done with. For example, if the authorities know of your conviction you will not be allowed entry into Canada without a special dispensation. This is because any drinking and driving offense is considered a crime in Canada. To seek entry prior to five years after your conviction you may apply for a so-called "Minister's Permit". This application can be obtained from any Canadian Customs or Immigration Office.

2) Only a dipshit 2-bit lawyer will "rabbit on with excuses ..." as any lawyer worth his/her salt know that there is no reason to drive over the limit - they will usually manipulate the law to get you off on a tchnicality or poke enough holes in the police's actions that either the police will drop it or their eveidence won't stand up. I know - I've seen it happen many a time to people I know and during a period where I had to go and watch district court cases for a study I was doing for university.

Edited March 6, 2006 by bravomikewhiskey

[*sic 1]

where I had to go and watch district court cases for a study I was doing for university.

sorry but how does this qualify you to despense legal advise in any form?..

just asking..

take the 6 months, why is anyone even trying to help him?

[bravo 34]

sorry but how does this qualify you to despense legal advise in any form?..

It doesn't - I wasn't trying to provide a qualification as to my abitlity to dispense legal advice, rather I was providing a qualification for my conjecture as to the most likely avenue a lawyer would in my opinion pursue when defending a drink driving case.

I believe that observation of previous drink driving cases (or EBA cases as they are known) that ended variously in conviction, discharge without conviction, and withdrawal of charges gives me sufficient qualification to speculate as to what sort of case a good lawyer might form as to a poor lawyer.

My "legal advice" however is simply that - advice - which if you read essentially says "get a lawyer or plead guilty" and then simply provides information on the court processes which you can easily confirm by talking to any lawyer or court bus-boy. At most I suggested a possible avenue for defense but in no way endorsed it with any qualification, and in no way provided any likelihood of success.

Just telling.

How do you like my Northland "bush Lawyer" style?

Pwns your dragon style n00b.

Why helping? because people make mistakes and stolen is evidently showing remorse at his actions and although he may deserve the punishment he gets, it sounds to me as though he has more or less been scared straight already.

[stolen 0]

1) you are wrong - some countries will not allow entry to anyone convicted of drink driving.

2) Only a dipshit 2-bit lawyer will "rabbit on with excuses ..." as any lawyer worth his/her salt know that there is no reason to drive over the limit - they will usually manipulate the law to get you off on a tchnicality or poke enough holes in the police's actions that either the police will drop it or their eveidence won't stand up. I know - I've seen it happen many a time to people I know and during a period where I had to go and watch district court cases for a study I was doing for university.

Thank you for the info.

If I wanted to go the fine+loss of license way, like you said do I just go there earlier than my court time on the day and ask for a duty solicitor? Or will 1 be appointed to me anyway? You said it will be 3 months compulsory? So will the duty solicitor be able to argue this for me?

And for the limited license, will i definetly need a letter from work? I wasnt too keen on letting them know about this to be honest. :-|

Sorry I am not familiar with the courts process at all. Thanks again.

[stolen 0]

Why helping? because people make mistakes and stolen is evidently showing remorse at his actions and although he may deserve the punishment he gets, it sounds to me as though he has more or less been scared straight already.

Thank you Bravo, your pretty much on the mark. Never even got a speeding ticket (and thats because i dont speed, not because i didnt get caught) and then i go and did something much much worse.

[*sic 1]

BLAH BLAH BLAH gives me sufficient qualification to speculate...BLAH BLAH

lies. comes under the same thought that people somehow gain a sort of qualification / expertise from experiencing loss or grief, then are consulted about projects a govt are undertaking, ie some roading project that some mothers son died on that particular route.. or some drug overdosed kids dad now gives drug legality and use advice to the papers / govt regarding legislation..

back on to the topic at hand,

People should only say "call a lawyer".. nothing more, but if anything less.

what particular style am i noob in also? i missed it.

[Widow 0]

Stolen, Do you need your car to get to and from work or is driving part of your job description?

You are obliged to tell your workplace if this is going to be something that could impact on your performance or ability to do the job (like having to ctach a bus and being constantly late to work).

I have been in your position so I feel your pain (though I only had two beers with a meal and was over the limit). But it was a very good lesson to learn, even such a small amount can put you over.

Telling your workplace will the hardest!!

[bravo 34]

Legal argumentaltionalisation.

Experience in a certain situation most certainly qualifies someone to make speculation on what they belive the most likely outcome is.

That is what statisticians do for a living. it is what the census is about, it however measures a population, not a sample.

I'm as qualified to make an argument about the most likely outcome as a election poll is about the outcome of an election - they're never right, but they're often close to the mark - and that is my point.

Everyday people on this forum dispense advice on what people should do to their cars and who that will likely affect preformance - their qualification to do that is same as mine here.

3 scholars travel to scotland for the first time and driving through the countryside they see a brown cow.

The first scholar says "We can thus determine that there are cows in scotland and they are brown"

The second scholar says "No all we can determine is that there are cows in scotland of which some are brown"

The third scholar says "No all that we can determine is that there is at least one cow inscotland and that that cow is brown"

I am the third scholar - It is possible in some cases to get off DIC if the lawyer uses a defense based on police proceedure as long as there are proceedural errors. No more, no less.

[bravo 34]

Read s68-79 of the Land Transport Act.

Edited March 6, 2006 by bravomikewhiskey

[westy 614]

Go to court early,stand in line for the duty solicitor,ask them to enter a guilty plea for you you,the police ask them not to represent drunk drivers,but the have no right to do this. The judge will prodably ask you to say something in your defence.

Your previous record will help(if its clean)make a point of this and your regret for your actions.

Dont be smug or smart in front of the judge.If your lucky you will get 3 months(if thats the min)and a fine.

Suck it in and accept it,theres little chance of getting out of it.

Its just a legal process,dont be scared of it.

We all make mistakes so dont sweat it too much.

[E30stz 0]

meh, sure it was a mistake but there is a reason they keep drink drivers off the road, you chose to make this decision and you should pay the consequences however tough they are.

No offense but take it like a man, think about the people you could have killed because of a stupid decision like that, although uncharacteristic, you still got behind the wheel and should have some more self-control.

I wonder if its possible to do 3months loss of licence and some community service ?

Edited March 6, 2006 by E30stz

[westy 614]

All true,but it still happens.

Amazing how little it takes.

[martyyn 2]

sorry but how does this qualify you to despense legal advise in any form?..

just asking..

take the 6 months, why is anyone even trying to help him?

Damian take your head out of your ar$e and stick to what you are good at....dissing blinging rides.

Whilst I have nothing but admiration for your 'take no prisoners' stance on drink driving your anger at Bravo is misplaced.

Everything he has said (and Widow, and DirtySix for that matter) is right on the money.

Get down there early to meet with a duty soilictor and put in a guilty plea.

For your plea in mitigation, a judge does not ask you to 'say something in your defence', take as much evidence as you can that you are a decent citizen (a letter from your boss, a parent, any evidence of charity work that sort of thing) and take the fine and loss of licence on the chin.

Dont bother trying to get off on a technicality the courts see it every day and you will just look like a twat. You will do well to save the lawyers fees for your forthcoming taxi journeys.

Now you may ask what qualifies me to give this advice ?

I would think the LLB Hons sitting in my wife's office and her 13 years experience as a solicitor (including 5 years doing her part as a duty solicitor) would do the job nicely.

Sometimes you just have to accept that there are others in life that know more than you do. The trick is to know when to shut up and listen because you might learn something.

Edited March 6, 2006 by martyyn

[*sic 1]

Haha anger?.. you must not be able to read and interpret a line of questioning correctly.

I just like to know people are giving good advice.. also it seems everyone is an expert on matters they are far from. My flatmate is a crimal lawyer, also 2 family members are criminal lawyers, I do ask for advice from them from time to time, as i know the credibility behind it. Someone who practices law will always advise never to despense any advice unless you are fully trained, not in your 3rd year of law school, nothing.

In my training i do ensure i listen to everyone who i interact with, as most people even down to a white belt, will show me something in a new light or help show me another version of things from their perspective. However in that particular situation i already know what they are discussing as i have been doing it for 9 years making me, trained and qualified.

Law is another kettle of fish. i already know they stuff you have mostly said (ie dirty and bravo) is correct. However i disagree that anything other than "speak with a lawyer" should have been advised.

and i also disagree that we are trying to help a drunk driver on a CAR FORUM..

the mind boggles.

[*sic 1]

Now you may ask what qualifies me to give this advice ?

I would think the LLB Hons sitting in my wife's office and her 13 years experience as a solicitor (including 5 years doing her part as a duty solicitor) would do the job nicely.

your wife should know better than to allow you to give legal advice. :jap:

[martyyn 2]

Damian,

first you say this....

apply for a work licence restricted hours etc.

then you say this....

sorry but how does this qualify you to despense legal advise in any form?..

which is what we could ask you.

and then this....

People should only say "call a lawyer".. nothing more, but if anything less.

I dont know about anyone else, but Im confused !

First you give advice, then question someone else right to give advice, and then fall back onto the old chestnut of consulting a professional before doing anything.

lies. comes under the same thought that people somehow gain a sort of qualification / expertise from experiencing loss or grief,

then are consulted about projects a govt are undertaking,

ie some roading project that some mothers son died on that particular route..

or some drug overdosed kids dad now gives drug legality and use advice to the papers / govt regarding legislation..

The optimal word in all of this (for me) is 'experiencing'.

What Id like to know is how you can even think about telling someone how it is without first having experienced it for yourself. Bravo says he has seen plenty of these cases in court, which should be good enough for him to have an opinion.

Following on this train of thought, you then said this....

In my training i do ensure i listen to everyone who i interact with, as most people even down to a white belt, will show me something in a new light or help show me another version of things from their perspective. However in that particular situation i already know what they are discussing as i have been doing it for 9 years making me, trained and qualified.

Dont you think the govt know this when they want to talk to the mother who's lost a son, or the father of the drug overdosed kid ?

Nice exmaples, by the way, but highly unlikely from ever actually happening.

I just like to know people are giving good advice

and they are....in the same message you said....

i already know they stuff you have mostly said (ie dirty and bravo) is correct.

Its not mostly correct, it is correct. The only mistake (if you want to call it that) was in terminology where Widow said the judge would ask you (Stolen) to 'say something in your defence' the right idea but the wrong terminology.

So if the information is correct, and you know it to be correct, why question it ?

and i also disagree that we are trying to help a drunk driver on a CAR FORUM

The simple fact is that everyone is entitled to help no matter what the offence.

Ive said it before and will say it again, I admire your stance on drink driving, I wish more people had your attitude towards it, too many young NZ's die because they have no respect for either alcohol, the road or others using the road.

However Im sure your criminal lawyer friends and family have seen enough cases where perfectly sensible people have been even slightly over the limit for reasons other than drinking too much. Unless of course you yourself have spent years as a duty soliciter experiencing it first hand and are not relying on what advice your criminal lawyers have told you. Where of course they shouldve known better ;-)

I also expect that I dont need to tell you how different criminal law is to family law or even commercial law and that simply getting a 'lawyer' is not usually enough. You need someone who has expertise in the field that you find yourself in.

Ultimately if we were to be part of the court proceedings, were to find out just how far Stolen was over the limit and if there where any mitigating circumstances our opinions might be different. But of course thats what the judge's job, not yours or mine.

your wife should know better than to allow you to give legal advice

Why do you assume I wrote the reply ?

[*sic 1]

oh martyn i love you so..

first off applying for a limited licence is not legal advice its general that requires no qualification.. its advice that is obtained by anyone and can be despensed freely. read: LTSA.

second you ramble alot dont you.

third, "seeing" things does not make you a legal advise despensorizationerer, nor having an opinion about a legal situation give you any reason to voice such, in this particular thread.

So if the information is correct, and you know it to be correct, why question it ?

why question it? because it should not be offered in this particular situation, [A], noone here (so far) has any real qualification as a lawyer that has been admitted to the bar. , the f**k head got caught drunk driving and should be shown no help regardless of "we like to help".

Forth, your 'wife' never said it was her writing... so im within reason to assume that you were the only one writing in this forum, due mainly to the third person reference if it was her..

I would think the LLB Hons sitting in my wife's office and her 13 years experience as a solicitor (including 5 years doing her part as a duty solicitor) would do the job nicely.

If she did write it she has identity issues and should see a psychologist.

fifth, i just wanted to say that i love you

[martyyn 2]

first off applying for a limited licence is not legal advice its general that requires no qualification.. its advice that is obtained by anyone and can be despensed freely. read: LTSA.

I dont believe anyone has dispensed any legal advice, just how the process works.

second you ramble alot dont you.

A simple one-liner is unlikely cover all the points in this discussion is it.

third, "seeing" things does not make you a legal advise despensorizationerer, nor having an opinion about a legal situation give you any reason to voice such, in this particular thread.

Thats not at all what I have said. Bravo has seen and studied the process and therefore is justified in having an opinion. He has voiced his opinion as he is welcome to do here. You cant silence people simply because you disagree with their opinion.

why question it? because it should not be offered in this particular situation,

Help was asked for and some people gave it. Just because you disagree with it doesnt give you the right to rubbish perfectly good advice from others.

[A], noone here (so far) has any real qualification as a lawyer that has been admitted to the bar.

Which is irrelevant since no-one is actually giving legal advice, just saying what the process is.

Perhaps I shouldve pointed out that my wife is a barristor. Is her advice ok now ?

, the f**k head got caught drunk driving and should be shown

Im sure he will be, he got caught after all and will have his day in court. But get all the facts and let someone who is qualified (as the judge is) to make that decision.

Forth, your 'wife' never said it was her writing... so im within reason to assume that you were the only one writing in this forum, due mainly to the third person reference if it was her..

If she did write it she has identity issues and should see a psychologist.

Fair point, I shouldve said that she wrote it and that I just added the bit on the end.

fifth, i just wanted to say that i love you

I love you too mate

[*sic 1]

so telling someone to plead which ever way is not considered legal advise?..

you should speak to your wife.

love you.

[Guest Andrew]

All true,but it still happens.

Amazing how little it takes.

also amazing how much it can take - as cain as I both know.

[*sic 1]

All true,but it still happens.

Amazing how little it takes.

also amazing how much it can take - as cain as I both know.

grr your an idiot andy.