Breathalyzers and hot air

Re: “Public needs better info on breathalyzers,” by Peter Goldring, Ideas, July 27. Like Edmonton-East MP Peter Goldring, I too was once arrested as a suspected drunk driver and was asked by police to provide a breath sample.

This is where the similarity of our stories ends.

The arresting officers told me that refusing to provide a breath sample was contrary to the Criminal Code and would be seen as an admission of guilt by both the court and my auto insurance provider.

I called a lawyer, who assured me the officers were telling the truth and said that I might as well blow into the breathalyzer. If I was innocent, I had nothing to worry about.

It was a simple legal concept that even an eight-yearold could understand, but apparently it was lost on Goldring.

Goldring’s opinion piece is an attempt to excuse his behaviour wrapped in disingenuous concern for public safety and law and order.

Worse, he tries to blame the Edmonton Police Service for not being clear about the law at the time of his arrest. My experience was the complete opposite.

I expect anyone who is stopped on suspicion of drunk driving now will cite Goldring’s case as precedent and refuse to provide a breath sample. I recently lost a beloved aunt to a drunk driver and this does not sit well with me.

The Crown should appeal Goldring’s acquittal.

As for my legal run-in, I blew .028. I was asked to provide another sample and blew .027. My innocence will never be in doubt.

Can Goldring say the same?

Adrian Lackey, Edmonton