Singapore Expats Forum

lawyer who handles traffic offenses?

Discuss about the latest news & interesting topics, real life experience or other out of topic discussions with locals & expatriates in Singapore.

bloodhound123
Regular
Regular
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu, 16 May 2013

Postby bloodhound123 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 12:08 pm

Mad Scientist wrote:
bloodhound123 wrote:jack79789 - what was your breath alcohol content? There is no point fighting a DUI case if it is a simple DUI ( no accident/no escaping etc ) unlike US where you hire a DUI lawyer and get your sentence reduced to something like reckless driving, speed contest etc. In fact I was told by a cop that fighting it with a lawyer might even piss off the Judge and he might give a higher penalty.

Just go to the court and plead guilty. Hearing happens in traffic court 21 in subordinate courts complex wherein you will be queued up with hundreds of other traffic offenders.

Unless your content is very high ( over twice the limit ) you will be fined along with license disqualifications. I had a DUI early this year with a breath alcohol content of 37. I got a 1500 fine and 1 yr disqualification from all classes. Luckily this is not a criminal offense in SG unless there is a severe
accident/very high alcohol content which could result in a deterrence sentence.

OSOD - Even a DUI arrest ( with no conviction ) is enough to cause issues with visas to Canada/US from what I read. Any alcohol abuse related
arrest is seen very very strictly by US and Canada. It seems one would be better off getting a visa to these countries with a shoplifting offense than a serious driving conviction like DUI.


You wrote like a PRO, !! but if recalled you were pretty #$%^$ back then


I hardly knew any law pertinent info back then. But since then I have been reading a lot - statutes, news posts by people in legal profession etc. It may not be a bad idea for the gahmen to release a concise version of the statutes/penal codes in layman terms for the benefit of the public. I have been sharing what I learn with my friends and acquaintances and most of them seem to be in dark in this regard.

User avatar
x9200
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9165
Joined: Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Location: Singapore

Postby x9200 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 1:15 pm

Also may be not a bad idea to stop drunk driving. Probably much better than advocating for making the law more clear.

bloodhound123
Regular
Regular
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu, 16 May 2013

Postby bloodhound123 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 1:50 pm

x9200 wrote:Also may be not a bad idea to stop drunk driving. Probably much better than advocating for making the law more clear.


Yes of course. The problem is that as per statistics a good chunk of people caught drunk driving are not way over the limit. They seems to be under the impression that they are driving under the limit and are fit to drive. I know this from a first hand experience. I have been able to convince at least 20 peoplele from doing this. They were all driving after a few drinks. They may or may not have been driving over the limit. In fact many of them enjoyed driving after a few drinks. But all of them have stopped after I told them about the potential consequences in life if they are charged and convicted. A lot of the forumers tend to know about the consequences of a DUI as they see folks asking questions about effect of this on their work pass applications, work etc and they tend to realize its true impact. But this is not the case with the majority.

It may not be a bad idea to keep the legal limit at 0 instead of 35 too. And regarding the clarity on law - I was referring to law in general , not just drunk driving. It is good for people to know the basic legal aspects in the penal codes.

User avatar
x9200
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9165
Joined: Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Location: Singapore

Postby x9200 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 2:05 pm

The limit is just some arbitrary enforced level so being a bit above or below is more about legal risk management but frankly it changes not a iota if you kill or make someone crippled for life. A few drinks is a lot.

User avatar
Mad Scientist
Director
Director
Posts: 3447
Joined: Thu, 03 Dec 2009
Location: TIMBUKTU

Postby Mad Scientist » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 2:42 pm

You seemed to forget that you came to me for help in your hours of darkness. Memory lapse?
The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible.Yahoo !!!

bloodhound123
Regular
Regular
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu, 16 May 2013

Postby bloodhound123 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 3:36 pm

Mad Scientist wrote:You seemed to forget that you came to me for help in your hours of darkness. Memory lapse?


Yes MS :). My reading and investigation started from your advice/pointers.

User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 3:47 pm

bloodhound123 wrote:
x9200 wrote:Also may be not a bad idea to stop drunk driving. Probably much better than advocating for making the law more clear.


Yes of course. The problem is that as per statistics a good chunk of people caught drunk driving are not way over the limit. They seems to be under the impression that they are driving under the limit and are fit to drive.


Funny that consuming alcohol can also impair the judgement in just a way where they're more likely to be under such an impression!

I'm amazed that in a country where just having THC in your blood from pot you could have smoked weeks ago somewhere it's legal will get you deported, yet drunk drivers aren't simply rounded up and shot outside the court.

bloodhound123
Regular
Regular
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu, 16 May 2013

Postby bloodhound123 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 3:55 pm

x9200 wrote:The limit is just some arbitrary enforced level so being a bit above or below is more about legal risk management but frankly it changes not a iota if you kill or make someone crippled for life. A few drinks is a lot.


Yes. If there is an accident there is no change even if one is below the limit. But if caught at the road block a guy driving with 30 is let go whereas a guy driving at 35 is charged. IMHO the potential damage that someone driving at 30 could wreak is probably the same as someone overspeeding by 20-30 kmph. It all comes down to braking within a required distance and the response time when it is required. Also the influence of alcohol at 30 differs from one person to another. I have seen guys losing hold after 2 beers and guys staying steady after 4 beers as well.
A colleague of mine continues to drive after a few drinks even after I told him not to do so. It just falls on deaf ears. He always gives me the same lame excuse - 2-3 drinks is nothing.

bloodhound123
Regular
Regular
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu, 16 May 2013

Postby bloodhound123 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 6:27 pm

I got this annual traffic report from SPF

http://www.spf.gov.sg/prints/tp_annual/ ... auses9.pdf

The number of accidents/fatal accidents owing to DUI is around 1-2%. Most of the fatal accidents are due to negligent driving.
The share might be much higher in the US which sees around 2 million DUI arrests every year.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 6:38 pm

bloodhound123 wrote:The share might be much higher in the US which sees around 2 million DUI arrests every year.


Wow, so that's roughly like 1% of the population committing (and being criminalised for) a single crime in a year

bloodhound123
Regular
Regular
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu, 16 May 2013

Postby bloodhound123 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 6:45 pm

JR8 wrote:
bloodhound123 wrote:The share might be much higher in the US which sees around 2 million DUI arrests every year.


Wow, so that's roughly like 1% of the population committing (and being criminalised for) a single crime in a year


Explains why US is very hesitant in admitting people with prior DUIs. US has stringent driving rules. Even over speeding beyond a certain limit earns you a criminal speeding ticket and a criminal record as well accordingly.
Criminal driving offenses must be pretty common. Motorists do not have an intent to harm anybody/cause damage but doing something very stupid can make you a criminal - DUI/reckless driving/overspeeding by a lot.

SG seems to be having DUIs under check - around 2500 every year.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 7:05 pm

bloodhound123 wrote:Explains why US is very hesitant in admitting people with prior DUIs. US has stringent driving rules. Even over speeding beyond a certain limit earns you a criminal speeding ticket and a criminal record as well accordingly.
Criminal driving offenses must be pretty common. Motorists do not have an intent to harm anybody/cause damage but doing something very stupid can make you a criminal - DUI/reckless driving/overspeeding by a lot.

SG seems to be having DUIs under check - around 2500 every year.


Yah if 1% are caught and charged a year, How many aren't caught. Are they all at it?

US, 'stringent driving rules', well I'd disagree with that having spent some time being a daily commuter up and down the NJ Parkway ('GSP') and Turnpike.

Perhaps SG has 'DUIs under check', as almost no one can afford a car, or a beer come to that?

bloodhound123
Regular
Regular
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu, 16 May 2013

Postby bloodhound123 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 7:21 pm

JR8 wrote:
bloodhound123 wrote:Explains why US is very hesitant in admitting people with prior DUIs. US has stringent driving rules. Even over speeding beyond a certain limit earns you a criminal speeding ticket and a criminal record as well accordingly.
Criminal driving offenses must be pretty common. Motorists do not have an intent to harm anybody/cause damage but doing something very stupid can make you a criminal - DUI/reckless driving/overspeeding by a lot.

SG seems to be having DUIs under check - around 2500 every year.


Yah if 1% are caught and charged a year, How many aren't caught. Are they all at it?

US, 'stringent driving rules', well I'd disagree with that having spent some time being a daily commuter up and down the NJ Parkway ('GSP') and Turnpike.

Perhaps SG has 'DUIs under check', as almost no one can afford a car, or a beer come to that?


Stringent driving rules in the sense that the written laws are strict. I never lived there so I dont know about the level of enforcement. But from what I hear from my friends out there, the enforcement seems to be quite good as well. Lots of cops on patrol especially to catch erring drivers.

"DUI under check" yeah is probably wrong. Also the number of roadblocks are far and few.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 7:24 pm

Difference is here, almost no one needs a car, it's more a vanity thing.

In the US, if you haven't a car, you're pretty much completely stuffed.

bloodhound123
Regular
Regular
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu, 16 May 2013

Postby bloodhound123 » Sat, 16 Nov 2013 7:32 pm

JR8 wrote:Difference is here, almost no one needs a car, it's more a vanity thing.

In the US, if you haven't a car, you're pretty much completely stuffed.


Cities in US should try to build better public transportation and incentivise the usage of cabs by making then cheaper. With pubs around every nook and corner driving offenses are here to rise. My friend in Atlanta says that he has seen cops standing outside pubs to arrest people who walk straight out of the pub to reach their car doors.


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests