A CO Donegal man has made legal history after being cleared of drink-driving – despite being TWICE the legal drink drive limit.
Lee Gibson (24) from Fr Arnold Terrace in Manorcunningham had fought the case against him at Buncrana District Court on the grounds that his rights had been infringed when handcuffed by Gardaí.
Mr Gibson was stopped in the car park of Lidl in Buncrana on September 13 last year.
Garda Tom Duggan said he had gone to the car park after reports that a damaged vehicle was in the area. Mr Gibson was arrested, handcuffed and taken to Buncrana Garda Station where a reading of 80mg/ml was recorded – the limit is 35.
Solicitor Frank Dorrian however challenged the legality of the Garda behaviour on the day, saying his client should never have been handcuffed in the first place.
Under cross-examination from Mr Dorrian, Garda Duggan claimed he had arrested Mr Gibson because he had tried to run away.
But Mr Dorrian said that both the sworn statement of the garda and his notebook had never referred to Mr Gibson “running” from the scene.
In fact, said the solicitor, both statements had said Mr Gibson was walking away from the car. Mr Dorrian put it to Garda Duggan that he had said his client was “staggering.”
He wanted to know how it was possible for Mr Gibson to be running, walking and staggering all at the same time.
Under re-examination by Inspector David Murphy, the garda said he had handcuffed Mr Gibson on health and safety grounds.
But Mr Dorrian – using case law from another case (DPP v Cullen) – objected to the legality of the arrest in the first place.
He said it was clear that Mr Gibson had in fact been compliant at all times with gardai. He had never tried to flee the scene.
Mr Gibson hadn’t tried to “run away” as had been claimed – and this wasn’t in any Garda statement.
Under the law a Garda can only handcuff someone when there was “a real and reasonably held belief” that someone was fleeing the scene.
Mr Gibson, he said, was not.
Mr Gibson had not run away, nor attempted to run away.
Judge Paul Kelly agreed with the defence solicitor’s argument saying he found it “unusual” that gardai would claim in court that someone had tried to flee a scene but had not stated the same thing in either the notebook or in a subsequent statement.
Judge Kelly dismissed the case.