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!

Justice Project offers Clarification on unpaid traffic fines

On Tuesday 9 February 2015 the Road Traffic infringement Agency put out a media release with the grossly misleading headline: “UNPAID FINES BLOCK LICENSING BY AUTHORITIES”.

While the content of the release vaguely clarifies the matter and correctly states that an Enforcement Order will result in licensing transactions, it is important that this not be confused with a “traffic fine”.

In terms of Section 20(2) of the AARTO Act, the Registrar may authorise the issue of an Enforcement Order if he has satisfied himself that both, an infringement notice and a courtesy letter have been served on the alleged infringer by the prescribed means. In the case of an infringement notice this could be service that occurs in person at the time of the alleged infringement or by registered mail if it is served after the fact and in the case of a courtesy letter, this must be served by registered mail. An enforcement order must also be served by registered mail.

The more recent licence renewal notifications contain a misleading statement which reads as follows:

” Your application for a new Driving Licence Card or PrDP will not be processed unless all Enforcement Orders have been settled and all penalties and courtesy letter fees for outstanding Infringements are settled. Visit www.aarto.gov.za“

While the first part of the statement is true, the second part of it is untrue and is used by licensing authorities to mislead people into believing that they are compelled to settle ALL outstanding infringement notices including but not limited to the illegal infringement notices the JMPD issued from 1 June 2010 to 21 December 2012. The findings of the Public Protector on this issue was that the JMPD violated the provisions of the AARTO Act and as a result, the improperly served infringement notices were “irregular” and amounted to maladministration.

Motorists are advised to look closely at the part of this notification to see if an Enforcement Order has been issued against their particulars. If it says “Enforcement Order outstanding: No/Nee” and a licence disc is not automatically printed, motorists should ask for a R114 eNaTIS statement to determine whether they have outstanding licensing fees or penalties owing on other vehicles registered in their name, or a warrant of arrest issued against them by courts in the jurisdictions outside of the operational areas of the Johannesburg and Tshwane Metro Police Departments.

Licensing authorities have become fond of preying on the ignorance of the average motorist who does not know and/or understand the legislative provisions that allow blocking of licensing transactions. They also appear to be of the opinion that traffic fines are somehow excluded from the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven which is enshrined in Section 35 of the Constitution.

The media release by the RTIA should be viewed as a statement by the RTIA that they are going to resume following the legislated provisions of the AARTO Act and nothing more. Motorists who ignore infringement notices issued against their names are doing themselves no favours and would be better advised to deal with their traffic fines as quickly as possible when they receive them.

Admitting guilt and paying a traffic fine, whether it is issued under the AARTO Act or the Criminal Procedure Act is ONE of the options but it is not the only one. Any person has the unalienable right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty and is fully entitled to mount a defence against any accusation of violation of any law – including traffic infringements/offences.

The RTIA is also tasked with EDUCATING people about the AARTO Act, but as yet, almost 7 years into the so-called “pilot phase” of the implementation of the AARTO Act, it has done very little to educate motorists and this is very sad indeed.

Anyone who wishes to educate themselves on the provisions of both, the AARTO Act or the Criminal Procedure Act is welcome to visit JPSA’s dedicated AARTO website at www.aarto.co.za. This must not be confused with the RTIA’s AARTO website is located at www.aarto.gov.za which does not present any of the abuses that have been perpetrated by authorities operating under the AARTO Act.

Howard Dembovsky

National Chairman – Justice Project South Africa (NPC)

Justice Project offers Clarification on unpaid traffic fines

Justice Project notes with concern e-toll threats by Sanral despite it being “sub-judice”

Justice Project South Africa has noted that SANRAL has again deployed its Chief Financial Officer; Ms Helga Mulder to threaten motorists with prosecution for the non-payment of e-tolls, despite the fact that e-tolling is currently under review by the Gauteng Provincial Government.

An article which appeared on Moneyweb on Monday 27 October 2014 bears testimony to the mechanics SANRAL intends using in furthering these criminal prosecutions, which it has waited for more than 7 months after the first prosecutions should have begun in April 2014. SANRAL has thereby created an enormous amount of prejudice, both in the monies allegedly outstanding to it and the quantum of individuals that will have to be prosecuted for non-payment of e-tolls.

On 1 September 2014, JPSA presented its submission to the Gauteng e-tolls review panel, warning of the socioeconomic disaster for South Africa as a whole that will ensue out of successful criminal prosecutions for non-payment of e-tolls but it would appear that SANRAL doesn’t much care what happens to the economy of South Africa if they are successful in creating a high volume of artificial criminals. It is still somewhat debatable whether SANRAL will be successful in prosecuting cases of the non-payment of e-tolls, but only a court will prove whether they will or will not.

The 2 cases currently undergoing prosecution must not be confused with prosecutions for non-payment of e-tolls, despite the fact that SANRAL has chosen to conflate these 2 cases with fraud charges applicable to e-tolling. Falsifying and defacing number plates are criminal offences under the National Road Traffic Act. Falsified number plates would ordinarily be prosecuted under the criminal charge of fraud, with charges under the National Road Traffic Act forming alternative charges.

The case of the former Deputy Chief of the Tshwane Metropolitan Police Department, Ndumiso Jaca, who fitted the same false number plates to a BMW Z4 and a Harley Davidson motorcycle which was instituted in 2011 is still ongoing. This matter is being heard in the Pretoria Regional Magistrates Court; the same court that the matter against Dr Stoyan Hristov Stoychev is being heard.

When it comes to the prosecution of motorists for the non-payment of e-tolls, the matter is not nearly as clear-cut as someone falsifying or defacing number plates and prosecuting the 2 clearly criminal matters cited by SANRAL is a far cry from prosecuting hundreds of thousands, if not over a million individuals for non-payment of e-tolls.

If SANRAL is planning to violate the Constitution by selecting a few “choice matters” to prosecute in the hope that they can scare others into submission, they need to be aware of the fact that this will not simply be overlooked. If they are successful in prosecuting large volumes of e-tolls “offenders”, they will create an environment of unemployable artificial criminals and will, as a result, cripple the economy of South Africa.

JPSA takes a very dim view of the repeated threats of prosecution by SANRAL, despite the fact that a supposedly democratic process is currently underway. In our view, this acutely demonstrates the fact that neither SANRAL nor the Department of Transport are in any way interested in listening to what citizens, political parties and other organisations think and have absolutely no intention of deviating from their plans to persist with e-tolls, regardless of whether they are efficient in getting the job done or not.

Best Regards,

;

Howard Dembovsky

National Chairman – Justice Project South Africa (NPC)

Justice Project notes with concern e-toll threats by Sanral despite it being “sub-judice”

Jaguar, You are Projecting: F-variety Project 7 U.S.-Spec Pricing Released at Pebble Beach

We’re nevertheless reeling over Jaguar’s announcement that, yes, it will truly construct the superlative-transcending F-variety Project 7 sports car, but we steady ourselves for a moment to bring you breaking news! From its perch at the Pebble Beach Concours d’Elegance, Jaguar has released final pricing and power figures for the U.S.-spec version of the Project 7 due to arrive next spring.

Whipped collectively by Jaguar’s Specific Automobile Operations division, the Project 7 gets a lowered windshield, a cool D-kind-inspired fairing behind the driver’s head, a towering rear wing, and a slew of aerodynamic upgrades more than the F-sort V-8 S roadster on which it is based. It also receives a massive energy upgrade over that vehicle, in the form of an added 80 horsepower and 42 lb-ft of torque, for totals of 575 and 502. That’s even more energy than the F-kind R coupe gets, stuffed into an F-variety that has been stripped of almost 200 pounds of extraneous w7 (Roof? Who wants a stinkin’ roof?!) Customers will be able to select from 5 colors right here in the States: Glacier White, Ultra Blue, Ultimate Black, Caldera Red, and the only color worth specifying—in our opinion—British Racing Green.

---

---

So how much will your personal tiny slice of overpowered modern day D-kind cost? Jaguar’s base cost for the Project 7 is $ 165,925. Suddenly your 401(k) is not searching so well-funded. Still, we’d wager that the cost is almost irrelevant if you have got the money, just acquire a single of these prior to they’re gone (no more than 250 will be built). Bear in mind, the U.S.-spec 7 is debuting at Pebble Beach, an event filled with rich, eager-to-be-amused people who like vehicles.

Other Stories You Might Like

---

Jaguar, You are Projecting: F-variety Project 7 U.S.-Spec Pricing Released at Pebble Beach

All of the Hell Yes: Jaguar’s Wicked F-kind Project 7 Confirmed [Video]

This will be Jag’;s fastest street automobile ever.

View Photo Gallery

Pictures (30)

Other Stories You May well Like

Automobile AND DRIVER VIDEO   Honda Mean Mower: A 109-hp, 130-mph Lawn Tractor »

All of the Hell Yes: Jaguar’s Wicked F-kind Project 7 Confirmed [Video]

Is it As well Fast For Really like? Harley-Davidson Announces Project LiveWire Electric Motorcycle

“The Motor Firm.” It’s motorcycle slang for Harley-Davidson, and the Milwaukee-primarily based concern is lucky that “The Engine Company” didn’t wind up in the parlance, because it’d throw an identity wrench into their newest venture — an electric motorcycle.

Wisconsin, land of thowmping pushrod V-Twins, is about the last place you’d expect a mainline production e-bike to emerge from. And one particular hasn’t emerged but, but H-D is seriously taking a look in that direction and they’re utilizing Project LiveWire to do it.

They also look to have cribbed the name from Mötley Crüe’s ideal song.

Project LiveWire isn’t a for-sale sort of factor. Rather, it’s a analysis-gathering roadshow wherein Harley brings the bike to different cities and lets folks take it for a spin, all in an effort gather impressions with an eye toward future production electric cycles.

We have to say, we like the look of the LiveWire. It’s a melding of Yankee face-punch and Italian-streetfighter sophistication. In truth, it recalls the perform the company’s Buell division was undertaking prior to Harley shuttered it.

---

---

The tour begins on June 24th in New York and moves to the Harley-Davidson Museum in Milwaukee from the 26th to the 29th. There’s an event in Boston from the 27th to the 29th, and then one particular in Philly July 17–19. Future dates will undoubtedly be added, but for correct now, it looks like Left Coast e-bike enthusiasts will have to wait for future dates to be announced.

Oh, and on the LiveWire FAQ, HD does refer to the bike’s powerplant as “an electric engine,” which suggests there’s plenty of traditional pondering left in Milwaukee. So like, worry not, backpatch aficionados: your loud pipes will undoubtedly continue to preserve your lives for quite some time.

[embedded content material]

[embedded content material]

Other Stories You May well Like

---

Is it As well Fast For Really like? Harley-Davidson Announces Project LiveWire Electric Motorcycle