Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Avani Terraces - Greenway
Life is looking up

Blotto and unlicensed in Red Hill

By johnboy - 13 December 2013 32

A 45-year-old Red Hill man, holding a disqualified licence, has been caught drink-driving for the sixth time.

Around 11.30am yesterday (Thursday, 12 December), police were conducting mobile patrols in Red Hill when they were flagged down by a motorist who notified them of a white utility swerving and driving recklessly near the Red Hill shops.

Police located the vehicle and approached the driver, who underwent a roadside breath test.

The driver returned a positive screening test for alcohol and was taken to Woden Police Station where he undertook a breath analysis returning an Alcohol Concentration reading of 0.267.

The man had a disqualified licence and was a Special Driver, making him subject to a Blood Alcohol Concentration limit of 0.00.

He has been convicted five times for previous drink-driving offences, the most recent being in September this year.

Due to his level of intoxication and disqualified licence, the man was arrested and transported to the ACT Watch House.

He will appear in the ACT Magistrates Court this morning.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
32 Responses to
Blotto and unlicensed in Red Hill
shauno 5:03 pm 14 Dec 13

They can fit those ignition lock out devices where the person has to be below 0.05 or whatever the limit is before the car starts. Repeat offenders should have to fit those at there own expense.

GardeningGirl 1:56 pm 14 Dec 13

milkman said :

Primal said :

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. SELL the cars.

And use the proceeds to help victims of crime. Destroying valuable property is stupid.

+1
+1

breda 1:54 pm 14 Dec 13

Bimbogeek, you uncaring sod, this person is the real victim here. Society is to blame. Just think of the guilt he may (or may not) feel if he killed someone while driving drunk for the nth time. It might even make him depressed.

Deref 1:51 pm 14 Dec 13

CraigT said :

You are advocating he be punished on account of something he hasn’t actually done, right? Something he *might* do?

I think if you read it again you’ll find that OYM’s advocating punishing him for something that he did do.

milkman 1:43 pm 14 Dec 13

Primal said :

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. SELL the cars.

And use the proceeds to help victims of crime. Destroying valuable property is stupid.

IrishPete 1:11 pm 14 Dec 13

Primal said :

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. SELL the cars.

Worth a ttry (confiscating, crushing or selling) though he’ll probably only buy another, but he should be prohibited from registering it, and perhaps there could be some way of preventing the transfer of registration, so that sellers know they can’t sell to him?

0.267 is getting close to a fatal level of alcohol, for him as well as anyone unlucky enough to be in the way of his motorised vehicle.

IP

Primal 11:15 am 14 Dec 13

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. SELL the cars.

farnarkler 11:01 am 14 Dec 13

CraigT this bloke has broken the law for a sixth time. What would you do, give him a stern talking to, do a Michael Clarke finger point at him, take some money of him and just let him go about his business?

BimboGeek 9:17 am 14 Dec 13

CraigT said :

OpenYourMind said :

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. Crushing the repeat drink driving offender’s car is the best solution. How is it acceptable to crush a car owned by a bogan doing a burnout and not for idiots like Mr .267. At least Bogan Burnout hopefully has some control over his vehicle, at .267 I doubt that guy had any. It’s not fair on everyone else that we get to occurrence number 6.

And before anyone says what about his family’s need for a car; why punish them? Well if he’s driving round that drunk, he is likely to write-off the family’s car anyway.
What about if the car is borrowed? Well, I’m guessing repeat offenders are likely to be well known to anyone lending a car – the car could easily have been written off anyway.

Fix this problem now. We don’t need that kind of person f**king over someone else’s Christmas.

Sorry, I must have missed the bit where he did any damage to persons or property.

You are advocating he be punished on account of something he hasn’t actually done, right? Something he *might* do?

Nice world you want to live in.

I always said they pulled down the Berlin Wall way to quickly – people like this close-minded “openyourmind” idiot *really* need to experience a world run along the lines they suggest.

Shutup drunky!

CraigT 8:18 am 14 Dec 13

OpenYourMind said :

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. Crushing the repeat drink driving offender’s car is the best solution. How is it acceptable to crush a car owned by a bogan doing a burnout and not for idiots like Mr .267. At least Bogan Burnout hopefully has some control over his vehicle, at .267 I doubt that guy had any. It’s not fair on everyone else that we get to occurrence number 6.

And before anyone says what about his family’s need for a car; why punish them? Well if he’s driving round that drunk, he is likely to write-off the family’s car anyway.
What about if the car is borrowed? Well, I’m guessing repeat offenders are likely to be well known to anyone lending a car – the car could easily have been written off anyway.

Fix this problem now. We don’t need that kind of person f**king over someone else’s Christmas.

Sorry, I must have missed the bit where he did any damage to persons or property.

You are advocating he be punished on account of something he hasn’t actually done, right? Something he *might* do?

Nice world you want to live in.

I always said they pulled down the Berlin Wall way to quickly – people like this close-minded “openyourmind” idiot *really* need to experience a world run along the lines they suggest.

OpenYourMind 11:53 pm 13 Dec 13

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. Crushing the repeat drink driving offender’s car is the best solution. How is it acceptable to crush a car owned by a bogan doing a burnout and not for idiots like Mr .267. At least Bogan Burnout hopefully has some control over his vehicle, at .267 I doubt that guy had any. It’s not fair on everyone else that we get to occurrence number 6.

And before anyone says what about his family’s need for a car; why punish them? Well if he’s driving round that drunk, he is likely to write-off the family’s car anyway.
What about if the car is borrowed? Well, I’m guessing repeat offenders are likely to be well known to anyone lending a car – the car could easily have been written off anyway.

Fix this problem now. We don’t need that kind of person f**king over someone else’s Christmas.

shauno 9:43 pm 13 Dec 13

Only way really to stop this is to confiscate the cars some people just cant help themselves so with no car they cant do it

Deref 5:45 pm 13 Dec 13

Tch. No doubt he’ll receive a severe finger-wagging and be sent to bed without his supper.

Pork Hunt 4:19 pm 13 Dec 13

Talk about living the life of Riley. Blew .267 when the sun was barely over the yard arm:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=The%20Sun%20is%20over%20the%20yardarm

IrishPete 12:49 pm 13 Dec 13

Nice to see that he wasn’t released from the Watchhouse to stagger home with that blood alcohol level.

IP

1 2 3

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site