Detained for being over the legal limit of alcohol? A few things Justice Project says you to be aware of!

Question:

Hi, I have a quick query. If you are detained for being over the legal limit of alcohol AND you are taken to be held in a holding cell, how long are you required to be there, is there a compulsory time period or are you able to be released one you have called a friend and they have come with the bail money, is there a need to be detained any further?

Also, if the police station has run out of “stationery” is it right for them to keep you detained for hours after even if you have the bail money? Surely that is prejudicial treatment to the one who is being detained because it is the stations’; mismanagement of their resources which has left the detained subject to suffer longer hours of detainment than is necessary.

And when giving blood, if you mention that you only allow YOUR medical practitioner to withdraw blood (before blood is drawn) and the ones drawing blood choose to not give you the option to call your medical practitioner, is that legal? I should think not.

;

Answer:

Your question/s may have been “quick” to ask, but they are certainly not quick to answer. I shall however do my best to keep my answers short.

;

1. When a person is arrested for alleged driving under the influence of alcohol, SAPS Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) dictate that such a person must be detained for a minimum period of 4 hours so they may sober up before being released. In reality however, this period is often in excess of twelve hours.


2. A person who is detained for any criminal offence cannot simply be released until such time as the necessary documentation required to be contained in the docket has been completed and it is usually a detective that needs to complete such documentation.


3. Whilst there are always detectives on duty, at night or over weekends, there are usually not as many detectives on duty as would be the case during “normal working hours”.


4. I am not sure what you mean by the police station “running out of stationary” and therefore cannot comment on that beyond saying that if this were the case, one would think that your friend would have been detained until such time as he appeared before a court, or stationary was acquired.


5. Persons who are detained after allegedly committing a crime must be brought before a court within 48 hours of their arrest, except where such a time would occur over weekends and public holidays. Where it does, they must be brought before a court on the next court day.


6. The purpose of the above provision is for the arrested person to make an application for release on bail, however the Criminal Procedure Act further allows a policeman to grant bail to a detained person at any time before that. It does not however say how speedily they should do so, nor does it compel them to grant bail.


7. Insofar as the drawing of a blood sample for evidentiary purposes goes, your friend, and everyone else for that matter, has no right to demand that their medical professional of choice draw their blood sample. Section 65(9) of the National Road Traffic Act also defines refusal to provide a breath and/or blood sample as a criminal offence and whilst I realise that your friend may not necessarily have entirely refused to provide a blood sample, that would not be helpful to his case.


8. There is also a requirement in Section 65(3) of the National Road Traffic Act further requires that a blood sample be drawn within 2 hours of the alleged offence.

;

It is my view that lengthy detentions of any person accused of any non-violent crime are both, unnecessary and counter-productive and this practice should really be reviewed by SAPS management as a matter of urgency. Furthermore, whilst SAPS SOPs hold that intoxicated persons should be checked on regularly (once per hour), or more regularly (once every half an hour) if that person is severely intoxicated. In reality, this rarely happens as prescribed and even if it did, a person can drown in their own vomit in a matter of minutes if they are intoxicated to the extent that they are comatose.

;

Every case is different however and unfortunately, in this particular matter, it sounds to me like your friend’s behaviour towards police may have aggravated his position. Police men and women are human beings too and when people become uncooperative, and sometimes, combatant with them, it is very hard for them to resist the temptation to take longer to do something – thereby further inconveniencing the source of their frustrations, without breaking the law. The behaviour described in this story appears to indicate that your friend was obstructive towards police and this could most certainly have aggravated the situation and extended his detention, as opposed to helping the situation.

;

Best Regards,

;

Howard Dembovsky

National Chairman – Justice Project South Africa (NPC)

;

Detained for being over the legal limit of alcohol? A few things Justice Project says you to be aware of!

Is legal costs cover worth the expense?

Who would foot the bill if another driver crashed into you, injuring you and making it impossible for you to work?

Or if you had to pursue the other driver’s insurer through the courts to recoup money spent on taxis or hiring a vehicle while your car was being repaired?

Your car insurance might – but only if you’d taken out legal expenses cover as an add-on to your policy.

So should you pay extra to add this type of insurance to your annual motor policy.

Let’s take a closer look at the reasons for and against…

What is legal expenses cover?

The legal expenses cover you can buy alongside car insurance is designed to cover legal bills that could arise from the use or ownership of your vehicle.

Circumstances that could result in legal costs include

• having to take action against another road user for negligence, or


• needing to defend yourself against accusations made by another driver.

Legal expenses cover can also be taken out as an add-on to a home insurance policy, in which case it typically covers legal proceedings relating to your home, your employment, your death or personal injury and the supply of goods or services.

Insurer LV estimates that 40% of its customers choose to add this type of cover to their home insurance policies.

Whether it’s an add-on to car or motor cover, the maximum you can claim is usually limited to say £50,000 or £100,000.

How much does it cost?

The cost of adding legal expenses cover to your car insurance policy is generally around £20 to £25 a year.

Some deluxe policies offer it as standard for no extra charge.

When you’re shopping for car insurance, make sure your final quote does not include legal expenses (or any other add-on) unless you actually want it.

You might have to untick a box if you decide you don’t need the cover.

What are the advantages?

The cost of legal proceedings can be huge. So taking out legal expenses cover would prove a very worthwhile move if you needed to take legal action for any reason, for example following a car accident.

Legal expenses cover can also be used to recover any excess you have to pay as a result of a crash in which you were not at fault.

Plus, it usually entitles you to access to a free legal helpline, which could be a valuable source of advice on legal matters.

Are there any downsides?

One of the main issues with legal expenses cover is that there are no guarantees your claim will be accepted.

You will, for example, only be allowed to make a claim if it is completely clear who was to blame for the accident and the insurer expects the legal action to go in your favour.

Claims may also be rejected if too much time has passed since the incident, or the insurer does not feel the amount being contested is high enough to warrant court action.

This would be the case if the amount involved was £500, but the insurer expected the case to cost say £1,000.

Do I need it?

Some 25 million households already have legal expenses insurance, according to figures from the Office for National Statistics – although there’s a question as to how many actually know they have the cover, having inadvertently gained insurance as an add-on or as a benefit of employment.

The main benefit is the peace of mind that comes with knowing they won’t have to cover the cost of pursuing legal action should that become necessary.

If you’re thinking cover might be worthwhile, remember to check whether you already get free legal advice through your trade union or being a named driver on someone else’s car insurance. There’s no point in doubling up.

Is legal costs cover worth the expense?

It is legal for a person/s in unmarked car taking videos at intersections for which traffic fines are sent?

Question:

I would like to know if it is legal for a person/s in unmarked car to be taking videos at intersections for which traffic fines are been sent.

I have been watching 2 cars at an intersection in Port Elizabeth, white BMW and a red golf,who’;s occupants are not in uniform taking videos of cars and I know of a fine that has been received at that intersection.

There are no warning signs of cameras in the vicinity.

Answer:

I have heard of this happening in Cape Town and now you say that it is happening in Port Elizabeth too.

There are no TCSP guidelines for this type of exercise and since no measurement as such is taking place, they would probably not be deemed necessary.  My understanding of these exercises is that the persons involved in them simply park off and film people disregarding stop signs etc.  Insofar as warning signs go, if you think about it, a sign warning people to abide by traffic signs sounds a little bizarre and it is undeniable that if a command sign (such as a stop sign) exists, motorists have a duty to obey it.

;

In my view, there is little legally wrong with this so long as the traffic fines that get issued are issued by a qualified traffic officer.  It does however make me wonder why it is that prosecutors would be willing to prosecute these matters and not willing to do anything about footage captured on dash cams.  The other problem I have with this type of enforcement is the fact that the offender is not stopped at the time.  Disregarding a stop sign is as dangerous as disregarding a red traffic signal and sending people fines in the post has limited value with respect to road safety, particularly since doing so could lead to a collision and the injury/death of others.  There is absolutely no replacement whatsoever for visible, physical policing and what concerns me most about the proliferation of this kind of exercise is that it leads to lazy policing.  After all, if they can catch multiple offenders on video and send them fines in the post, why would they be interested in rather forcing compliance by stopping offenders at the time and letting others see that physical enforcement is happening?

;

Unfortunately, it all comes back to the fact that traffic policing has come to mean revenue generation and that is the long and short of it.

;

Best Regards,

;

Howard Dembovsky

National Chairman – Justice Project South Africa (NPC)

Also view:

Safe Driving at Intersections

It is legal for a person/s in unmarked car taking videos at intersections for which traffic fines are sent?

What is the legal speed limit on an on-ramp as you enter the freeway?

Question:

I have a question regarding the speed limit when a driver enters a on-ramp to enter a freeway and what the speed should be when he merges with the freeway? Also when a driver leaves the freeway onto a off ramp what should the speed be as there is a speed sign of 60km/h only 50 meters before the stop. Any information will be helpful.
Answer:

The general speed limit on a Freeway is 120 km/h but the authorities have the right to change that depending on the circumstances on a specific road. The speed limit only applies after the freeway sign and sometimes the sign is only placed close to the junction.

Unfortunately all on-ramps do not allow for a 120 km speed due to the type of ramp or the distance to other traffic control signs.

As one is merging with the left lane traffic which is generally slower the average speed when entering a freeway is between 60 and 80 km ph. Remember trucks are not allowed to exceed 80 km ph and they travel in the left lane.

Hope this helps.

Alta Swanepoel

;

What is the legal speed limit on an on-ramp as you enter the freeway?

Rules of the Road: Your view when driving to vehicles behind you should be unobstucted to be legal!

Driving view to be unobstructed

Reg 204.               (1)          No person shall operate on a public road a motor

vehicle—

(a)          which is not so constructed and maintained as to afford the driver thereof a full and clear view of the roadway ahead and to his or her right and left when the vehicle is in use;

(b)          which is not fitted with a rear-view mirror or mirrors enabling the driver of such vehicle, when he or she is in the driving position, to see in clear weather a clear reflection of traffic to the rear: Provided that the provisions of this paragraph shall not apply in respect of a tractor;

(c)           which is a motor car, minibus, bus or goods vehicle, the gross

vehicle mass of which does not exceed 3 500 kilograms and which, according to the registration certificate thereof, was registered for the first time on or after 1 January 1987, unless it is fitted with an exterior rear-view mirror on the driving side and an interior rear-view mirror: Provided that where the interior rear-view mirror does not enable the driver, when he or she is in the driving position, to see in clear weather, a clear reflection of traffic to the rear, an additional exterior rear-view mirror shall be fitted on the side opposite to the driving seat and in such a case it shall not be necessary to fit an interior rear-view mirror;

(d)          which is a mini bus, bus or goods vehicle, the gross vehicle mass of which exceeds 3 500 kilograms and which, according to the registration certificate thereof, was registered for the first time on or after 1 January 1987, unless it is fitted with an exterior rear-view mirror on the driving side and an exterior rear-view mirror on the side opposite to the driving seat; or

(e)          which is a motor cycle, a motor tricycle or motor quadrucycle unless it is fitted with a rear-view mirror on the right side of the handlebars thereof, and such cycle shall also be fitted with a rear-view mirror on the left side of its handlebars.

(2)          Every rear-view mirror of a motor vehicle—

(a)          which—

(i)            is a motor car, minibus, bus or goods vehicle, the gross vehicle mass of which does not exceed 3 500 kilograms and which, according to the registration certificate thereof, was registered for the first time on or after 1 January 1976; or

(ii)           is a minibus, bus or a goods vehicle, the gross vehicle mass of which exceeds 3 500 kilograms and which, according to the registration certificate thereof, was registered for the first time during the period 1 January 1976 to 31 December 1986, shall be either flat or spherically convex and have an average radius of curvature of not less than one comma 2 metres; or

(b)          contemplated in subregulation (1)(d) shall be either flat or spherically convex and have an average radius or curvature of not less than one comma 8 metres.

;

Alta

Alta Swanepoel & Associates

Rules of the Road: Your view when driving to vehicles behind you should be unobstucted to be legal!