The procedure involved in drunken driving cases often serves as an aquittal loophole for the drunken driver. Conviction depends on where the driver was apprehended, what he was doing at the time or what kind of accident there was. To prove that the driver was under the influence of alcohol, first a breathalyser test must be given; who gives it, with what equipment and at what time are crucial procedural questions. The driver must then be given either a blood test or a urine test, variation timing in each will show different blood alcohol levels. Other procedural problems with the tests involve size of the sample, analysis, what equipment the test was done with, and what part of the body blood was taken from. If the tests are done in a hospital, often hospital procedure interferes with police procedure. Who owns the car can be a procedural factor. The author advocates that if the proper procedures have been followed in good faith the court should be required to convict on the basis of proof of excess alcohol. He also advocates random tests for drunken driving. The public should meet its social responsibilities.

  • Corporate Authors:

    Butterworth and Company Publishers Limited

    88 Kingsway
    London,   England 
  • Authors:
    • Samuels, A
  • Publication Date: 1973-3

Media Info

  • Pagination: p. 192-195
  • Serial:
    • New Law Journal
    • Volume: 123
    • Issue Number: 5586
    • Publisher: Butterworth and Company Publishers Limited

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00095472
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Files: TRIS
  • Created Date: May 29 1975 12:00AM