Drink-driver’s appeal fails

A man who crashed a car while nearly five times the drink-drive limit has failed to get his conviction overturned, despite the fact he may have been unlawfully detained by police.

In a recent judgment, High Court judge Justice Simon France said the issue may require looking at by higher courts to properly figure out how black and white the law around unlawful detention is.

The judgment was in relation to Marcus Konrad Welby Tamaira, who was found by police to have a blood alcohol reading of 243 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood. The legal limit is 50mg.

He was caught after crashing his car, then going to a petrol station to call a taxi.

There was no dispute he was over the limit, or had been driving. Rather, he appealed his conviction on the basis the procedure for getting the blood-alcohol test was not correct, and he had been unlawfully detained.

Security camera footage showed a police officer with a screening device going into the police station, then heading back out towards his car with Tamaira.

The pair were in the car for a time, where Tamaira did a breath screening test, before the car’s lights came on, indicating the car had been started.

Tamaira argued the breath test, which found he had a reading of over 400 micrograms per litre of breath, happened in the car, meaning the trip to the car was an unlawful detention. It was not clear if Tamaira went to the car voluntarily or under police direction, the judge said.

Depending on how one read the law, it could be argued there were no ‘‘lawful shades of grey’’ between being detained or not.

However, that approach could make things difficult for police.

‘‘It would . . . be surprising if Parliament has conferred a power (to require the person to take the test) but afforded no control mechanism at all,’’ the judge said.