Overview:
When a young driver was accused of being in charge of a vehicle with THC (the main psychoactive cannabinoid found in cannabis) in his blood, and the analysis showed a level above the legal limit, the case might have looked simple on paper. It was not. The evidence showed a far more nuanced picture: a parked car, a client who said he had no intention of driving, and a prosecution case dogged by missing material, late disclosure and important evidential questions. By examining the detail closely and pressing those issues throughout, Ashworth Motoring Law kept the focus on what mattered most: whether the prosecution could actually prove the allegation.
The allegation:
The allegation was that our client was in charge of a vehicle on a road while the proportion of a specified controlled drug in his blood exceeded the legal limit. The prosecution case relied on a blood result recording THC at 2.1 mg/L, with the statutory limit being 2.0 mg/L.
Our client’s position was different from the outset. He was parked up, sitting in the car watching something on his phone, and had no intention of driving. His account was that the engine was off, the keys were not in the ignition, and he only put the keys into the ignition in order to open the window when police approached the car. That distinction mattered, because the case was not simply about a laboratory figure: it was also about whether he was truly in charge of the vehicle, and whether there was any likelihood of him driving at all.
What followed was a roadside encounter that became more complicated. Police said they could smell cannabis, and a roadside drug test was carried out on our client. He was then arrested and taken into custody, where a blood sample was obtained several hours later. The matter proceeded to a not guilty plea, directions were given for disclosure and expert issues, and the case was actively managed by the District Judge ahead of the trial, which was scheduled to take place at Southend Magistrates’ Court.
Problems in the prosecution case:
From the defence perspective, the real difficulty for the prosecution was that this was never just a numbers case. Ashworth Motoring Law identified a series of live issues that went to the heart of whether the evidence was cogent, reliable and admissible. These included whether our client was in charge of the vehicle at all, whether he had any intention to drive, the police procedure and the reliability of the blood sample analysis itself.
How Ashworth Motoring Law approached the defence:
Ashworth Motoring Law’s approach was methodical and persistent. From an early stage, we requested and analysed the Prosecution papers and associated police evidence. As the case progressed, requests for further, more detailed evidence ensued. These were not routine requests for the sake of it. They were directed to identifiable issues in the case and to material that was necessary to test the prosecution evidence properly.
The defence position was carefully formalised in writing and the case was meticulously prepared for trial.
The outcome:
Before the trial took place, the Crown Prosecution Service discontinued the case. The notice of discontinuance stated that the charge was being dropped because there was not enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction. For our client, that meant the allegation did not proceed to trial and he no longer needed to attend court in respect of it.
The result followed sustained work on disclosure, evidential reliability and procedure. This case study is not about dramatic courtroom theatre. It is about careful preparation, attention to detail, and the willingness to keep pressing issues that can make the difference in a drug driving or in-charge prosecution.
What the result meant for our client:
The Crown’s decision to discontinue matters prior to trial saved our client a great deal of additional stress and anxiety, and the result meant that he could continue with his career, unblighted by a criminal conviction and driving disqualification.
What our client had to say in his testimonial feedback review:
“Ashworth Motoring Law put such a compelling, powerful case forward for me that the Crown dropped all charges the week of the trial, meaning I was acquitted, and no court hearing was required.
They found numerous errors in the Police procedures, the roadside swab test, the arrest, the taking of my blood sample, the testing of the blood, the Police officers’ statements and a further 10 additional errors that all compounded to show that professional legal representation is an absolute must. All things that I would not have been able to identify if I did not have their help and guidance.
If I had not found Ashworth and commissioned them to fight my case, I would be facing a driving ban and a 10-year criminal record for an accusation that was based on no evidence and incorrect procedure. I can’t thank them enough!
If you are considering fighting you case, I highly recommend this outstanding team.“
When asked what he liked most about our business, he said:
“I was guided by experts at every stage of the process. The whole team were professional, caring and on time with everything and left no stone unturned.“
Contact Ashworth Motoring Law:
If you are facing a drug driving or in-charge allegation, details that may seem small at first can become critical: the circumstances at the roadside, the quality of the sample, the completeness of the paperwork, and whether the prosecution can produce the evidence it says it relies upon. Ashworth Motoring Law approaches these cases with care, persistence and close attention to detail. Take a look at some of our recent case results and see for yourself. If you want to be represented by the most highly specialised and prolific achievers of not guilty verdicts, contact Ashworth Motoring Law on 0330 33 22 770.
