Spiked Drink Defence Successful
- Thread starter Butchers Dog
- Start date
The system is broken
FAST
What I was thinking also, if it was a drug, just not more booze, then the "Judge" is truly an ass, or at least an paid ass.!!!If his drink got spiked why the judge did not ask for proof? Nowadays they can trace almost any type of drug. Either he is the judge's friend or the judge was paid off
FAST
Except that ignorance of one's own state of intoxication is NOT a defense against drunk driving.... I think that IF the guys drink was spiked, then it is probably a legit defence. When people are drunk, they often have impaired judgement (eg driving the wrong way like this guy). They may even not recognize their own intoxication. You all have seen people completely hammered deny they are drunk at all. ...
It doesn't matter if this guy knew his drink was spiked (if it was). The fact is that he was driving while intoxicated, which is against the law.
non, mon ami. In Canada, a serious offence, like DUI, cannot be an absolute liability offence.Except that ignorance of one's own state of intoxication is NOT a defense against drunk driving.
It doesn't matter if this guy knew his drink was spiked (if it was). The fact is that he was driving while intoxicated, which is against the law.
Most ticket-offences, like speeding, are absolute liability, so it's no good trying to prove that you didn't mean to speed, or that you had a good reason to speed. The fact of the speeding is enough for a speeding conviction.
But in serious offences, like DUI, the prosecution has to prove guilty intent, and now you are allowed to "put your side of the story". If the court believes you weren't at fault, for some reason, as appears to be the case here, you can be acquitted.
But don't count on being able to do that -- note that it makes the news when it happens.
