Roadside Stop: Refusal, Retest, and the Paper Trail
At 23:10 a patrol stops a car that drifted across the centre line twice. The driver, 28, smells of alcohol, has slurred speech and bloodshot eyes. A preliminary breath test reads 0.38 mg/l. The driver demands a second test on the same device, then refuses the evidentiary blood test at the station, saying 'I'll do it in the morning.' The officer's body camera battery died 4 minutes into the stop; the in-car camera recorded the drift but not the conversation. The driver's passenger, sober, offers to drive the car home. The driver has no prior record and is polite but insistent.
1. How should the officers handle the refusal of the evidentiary test, and what must be documented given the camera failure?
Read the worked answer
Refusal is itself a serious matter. A refusal to submit to the required evidentiary test, without a lawful justification, is treated as an offence/aggravating circumstance under road-traffic rules. The officers should:
- Formally record the refusal in the protocol: exact words, time, who was present, and that the driver was informed of the consequences.
- Note the camera failure and the reason (battery), plus the in-car footage that does exist.
- Corroborate with the passenger's and second officer's statements, the preliminary result, and observed symptoms (slurred speech, smell, drift).
- Do not accept 'in the morning' - the evidentiary sample must be taken within the statutory window; delay defeats the purpose.
The absence of body-cam footage does not invalidate the stop, but the paper trail must be airtight because the defence will attack the gap.
2. The passenger offers to drive the car home. May the officers allow this, and what are the risks?
Read the worked answer
Generally no, not as a substitute for the lawful procedure. Allowing a sober passenger to drive the car home is a courtesy, not a legal step, and it can create problems:
- The vehicle may need to be secured as evidence or removed under a specific power.
- Handing over the keys to a third party without checking their licence/sobriety exposes the officers if something happens.
- It may be read as the officers 'letting the driver off', undermining the refusal record.
Safer course: secure the vehicle lawfully (e.g. have it removed or parked legally), document the passenger's offer and the decision, and let the passenger collect the car later through the proper channel. If policy permits release to a sober licensed driver, verify the licence first and record it.
3. The driver is polite and has no record. Does that change the legal analysis?
Read the worked answer
No. Demeanour and clean record are mitigation, not elements of the offence. The legal analysis rests on: observed driving, symptoms, the preliminary result, and the refusal. Politeness does not excuse refusal, and a first offence is still an offence. The officers should apply the procedure uniformly, note the mitigating facts in the report, and let the decision-maker weigh them.