Police 'assumed too much' in drink-driving case

BY BRITTON BROUN

An "unhinged" Wellington woman charged with a drink-drive offence after going to police for help swears that she would never drive drunk.

Her husband has told a court that police accused him of "making up stories" when he tried to explain her actions.

A judge will decide if property manager Cassandra Palmer, 46, will be convicted of refusing to give blood after she walked into Wellington police station in April and handed over her car keys so she would not be tempted to drive home drunk.

Without money or cellphone and in tears, she wanted to use a toilet and hoped they would call her husband. Officers processed her for drink driving.

In Wellington District Court yesterday, Palmer said she was "unhinged" after a family tragedy.

Grabbing a bottle of wine, she drove from her Johnsonville home into Wellington and parked outside the Central Library in Victoria St after 7pm on April 27.

She admitted to drinking a small glass of wine at home, but only "guzzled" the bottle once the car was parked.

"I don't [drink and drive]. I'm really strong about it and really careful. Generally if I have a second glass of wine I don't do it," she told the court.

Her husband, Simon Palmer, told the court he talked to his wife while she drank the glass of wine at home and did not see her have another.

After picking her up from the station that night he phoned back to try to explain what had happened.

An officer "accused me of making up stories", he told the court.

The police case rests on comments Palmer made to officers, including her admitting to driving in from Johnsonville and drinking a bottle of wine in her car.

Police also say Palmer made the comment she was "wrestling with the legal side of it" – something she denied.

At the first part of the defended hearing in October, Sergeant Corey Watts said that, based on Palmer's comments, he had reasonable grounds to believe that she may have driven drunk. Under the charge of refusing to give blood, police do not have to prove that someone drove drunk – only that there is just cause to suspect that they had.

In cross examination yesterday, police prosecutor Sergeant Barney Souter questioned why Palmer had not told police that she had not driven drunk until she was in the room used to process drink drivers. Palmer said the police officers had never asked.

Defence lawyer Sandy Baigent said this one question would have been enough to meet the standard of "just cause" but there was no record of police ever raising it.

Police had assumed too much from the comments that Palmer made and never questioned the order in which things happened, Ms Baigent said.

This made the entire breath-test process unlawful.

Judge Susan Thomas reserved her decision until January.

THE DEFENCE CASE

* Police did not have just cause but simply assumed Palmer had been over the legal drink-drive limit while driving.

There was no evidence she had driven drunk, she was not involved in an accident, and police did not know when she last drove.

*Before the breath-test process began there was only a short conversation with Palmer and police never directly asked if she had driven while under the influence.

THE POLICE CASE

* Police argue they had just cause to suspect Palmer had been drink-driving.

* She handed over her car keys and told police: "I shouldn't be driving."

* She admitted she had been drinking wine and to driving into town and commented that she "was wrestling with the legal side of it".

- © Fairfax NZ News