THE controversial boss of a collapsed York firm who stood trial accused of drink-driving walked free from court after the case was thrown out because of a technical error.
Christopher Douglas, who is still under investigation by police in connection with Challenor Property Developments, which folded in 2008, was charged with being over the drink-drive limit while driving a gold-coloured BMW car in Main Street, Heslington, on April 5 last year.
Gill Sandall, for the prosecution, told the court how PC Martin Scott became suspicious of the BMW after he saw it turn suddenly into a side street.
She said he had followed the car in his police van and came across it parked half on the pavement and half on the street, with nobody inside. On searching the area, she alleged PC Scott found Mr Douglas, 46, and his wife, Karen, hiding behind a bush in the driveway of a property having thrown the keys over a nearby wall. Giving evidence, PC Scott told the court Mr Douglas, of Naburn Lane, Fulford, appeared to be drunk, as his speech was slurred, he smelt of alcohol and he was unsteady on his feet.
He said after radioing the control room to request a roadside breath test, Mr Douglas’s health took a turn for the worse and he was struggling to breathe.
An ambulance was called and Mr Douglas was taken to York Hospital, where a sample of his blood was taken and sent off to a forensic laboratory for testing.
The results showed he had 96mg of alcohol in 100ml of blood. The drink-drive limit is 80mg.
York magistrates decided to drop the case because of a procedural error. The prosecution failed to present the court with evidence PC Scott issued Mr Douglas with a warning he could be prosecuted if he refused to give a sample of blood.
His barrister, Phillip Lucas, from Goldsmith Chambers in London, told magistrates that under the Road Traffic Act 1988, the defence had no case to answer in the absence of this evidence.
Mr Douglas, who had denied the charge, let out a cry of relief as the magistrates announced their decision to drop the case.
It was the second attempt by Mr Lucas to persuade magistrates to dismiss the case. Earlier, he argued there was no clear evidence to prove the blood sample that was analysed in the laboratory was the one given by Mr Douglas.
He also questioned why it had taken police three-and-a-half months to send the sample to the laboratory and questioned where the sample had been during this time. Magistrates rejected his application.
Earlier in the trial, the court was told how in an interview with police Mr Douglas claimed his wife had given him a drink from a bottle in her handbag to calm his nerves after getting out of the car.
Mr Douglas was one of five people arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering following the collapse of Poppleton-based Challenor in 2008, when hundreds of investors were left out of pocket.
In 2008, The Press reported how Mr Douglas, having declared himself bankrupt, auctioned off luxurious items to help pay off debts.
The five remain on police bail while police inquiries continue.
Lawyer specialises in defences
PHILLIP Lucas, the barrister hired by Christopher Douglas, states on his firm’s website he is a specialist in motoring law, including the so called “technical defences” to breath and blood-alcohol charges.
Earlier this week he was at Nottingham magistrates’ court for the high-profile drink-drive case of England cricketer Graeme Swann.
The court heard that Swann, 31, who denies the charge, was caught marginally over the drink-drive limit while on a mercy mission to buy screwdrivers to help rescue his pet cat, Max, which had got stuck under floorboards.
Using a similar argument to the one used during Mr Douglas’s trial, Mr Lucas said the case should be dropped because police had not followed the correct procedures during the arrest.
The case was adjourned until October 7, to tie in with Swann’s cricketing commitments.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article