Bollocks, you are only arrested on suspicion for failing a test, thats the law, now prove otherwise or shut the fuk up.
It does say that he took a roadside breath test, but it doesn't say that it was at the scene of the accident or that he failed it. I assume that Ensil does have some kind of information from somewhere else that indicates otherwise though, as even he's not normally this pedantic!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...g-70mph-motorway-crash.html?ito=feeds-newsxml The father-of-five suffered injuries to his face in the 70mph crash and was arrested after being given a breath test on the hard shoulder. He was taken to Warwick Hospital for treatment to a cut to his head and was allowed home six hours after being admitted. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...iving-70mph-motorway-crash.html#ixzz1ahkjRvjO
PNP, if you read my link on the law, you can only be arrested on suspicion for failing a roadside test, its as simple as that, if its green or yellow you pass, if its red you're arrested on suspicion, it doesn't have to to literally say that in an article, but according to the procedure, thats how events should have happened...unless of course you're someone who knows procedure has not been followed!
I believe that you can still be arrested anyway, Notso. If you were slurring your words and having trouble standing up, for example, which pretty much ****s Merson straight away! You can also be taken in if you refuse to take the test or fail to complete it properly, I think. Merson could also be arrested for plowing his car straight into a truck too, of course...
If you were slurring your words and having trouble standing up, for example, ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'd say you're right there too, you can be arrested on suspicion for that too until a relevant test proves otherwise. You are also required by law to provide, in the event of 'any' accident, that is standard procedure whether you smell of it or not. If he was medically excused from the Intoximeter at the station, then its a blood test. You are still on suspicion until that result is known, which takes time, thats why he hasn't been charged yet.
Would I be right in thinking that the police wouldn't actually have to follow the normal procedure for a DUI, though? He'd actually crashed, so they could've just taken him in for another suspected offence. I'm not saying that Ensil's right, but he does seem rather convinced of it.
I answered that in the edit of my previous post, any accident, automatic breath test. or blood/urine test if incapable. Ensil will say the scene was the road, the test was on the hard shoulder, or something similarly irrelevant.
I think he's Paul Merson. No one believes you Paul. Unless you post something substantial, you're going to be accused of making it up. Nearly two-hundred news agencies are saying he was breathalysed, which is common following a road traffic accident where persons are injured.
Dude, why don't you just say why you know with such certainty that Merson wasn't breath tested at the scene of the accident ??? Are you 43 years old by any chance LOL !!
Ensil - fancy sharing the source with us? I'm just interested how you are so confident about this... Thanks
Well, you admitted to being an obnoxious ****. So I was just asking one of your members if they were calling you a knobber
