Quote:
Originally Posted by ken0042
Isn't the fact that the accused admitted to have been drinking enough? (I ask because thought it would be.)
I'm just thinking back to one day in traffic court; a lady in front of me was pleading not guilty to her 125 in a 100 zone ticket; saying that she wasn't doing 125 but really 140. The officer was cutting her a bit of a break by only marking 25 over. Based on her testimony, the judge then found her guilty of 140 in a 100 zone.
By taking this to court; wouldn't he run the same risk- that he could be found guilty of a higher offense?
|
Thats what I thought as well but if you read closely subsection (2) gives the authority for the officer to demand a Breath sample. Subesctions (3) and (4) tell what will happen if a breath sample is or isn't provided.
I don't see anywhere after (2) that allows for the suspension on suspicion alone. I didn't read it close enough yesterday and I believe I interpreted it wrong. Thanks to hockeycop it is now interpreted correctly.
OP: Appeal it and tell us what happens.