Yeah slumped over the steering wheel is the difference between .05 and .08 - gimme a break.

Drinking and driving is drinking and driving, at least they didn't let her sleep it off in the motorhome..
Hope they catch many more, actually I would rather they didn't have to but realilty says they will...

if they would only get tougher!!!!!!!!!!

“female seated in the drivers seat of the motorhome, which was parked in a PUBLIC AREA just off of Airport Rd adjacent to Hwy 97”

Wow!! This could make for a very interesting case.

From the description, she was likely parked at the Visitors’ centre on their public parking lot which is on the southwest corner of airport road and HWY97. If she had been parked on the side of the road, it would likely not have said PUBLIC AREA.

Two businesses to the north is a Pizza restaurant which serves not only Pizza, but also alcohol. She could have walked there, had a pizza and some beer or wine, walked back and fallen asleep. She could also have alcohol available in the motor home.

Just because she fell asleep, does not mean that happened because she had excessive alcohol. It could have been because she was simply too tired after driving for too many hours. It could have been because she took some prescription drugs once she was off the road which caused here to become drowsy. There can be so many “could have beens”, we really know very little …. Its is the same all the time, isn’t it? We do not even know at what time of day this occurred.

The motor home is both a vehicle plus a mobile “home”. If she would have been found in a campground, sitting in the drivers seat slumped over the wheel with horn blasting I doubt the motorhome would have been impounded. In that situation she could have checked in earlier, then
1. taken the home back out to go to a restaurant or pub, have excessive alcohol, drive back to the campground, parked, and fallen asleep at the wheel, or
2. been at the camp for several hours, had a meal, had some drinks, sit in the drivers seat (there are no restrictions of which seat one might want to sit in for comfort when the motorhome is not being driven) and fall asleep, etc.

The tourist parking area can be seen at the top of the linked page
[url] http://southcaribootourism.ca[url]

The most telling thing, of course, is that it states the woman was “known to police”. Locally? In other words, does she live in this motorhome and has been found in this state on several other occasions. What is she “known” for?

It is a weird story, with many teasers, but hey they are fun on blogs, aren’t they?

I just re-read the story and notice that the motorhome was not impounded.

"As a result of her failing to provide a suitable sample she was issued an Immediate Roadside Prohibition under the Motor vehicle act. Her vehicle was impounded for 30 days and her driver's license was suspended for 90 days as is mandatory under the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act."

Better re-read it again!

Thanks ... don't know why I read it correctly the first time and not the second time .... someone must be changing the text ... can't possibly be me ... LOL

Interesting that the above report does not include the key first sentence from the RCMP media release.

http://bc.rcmp.ca/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=50&languageId=1&contentId=16790

"A highway/parking area is not a campsite, driver of motorhome issued licence suspension and motorhome impounded".

I gather that the relevance of that statement comes from precedent cases.

There is still the matter of whether she was driving the vehicle while being over the limit.

Here is a bit more of the story ....

Here she is 62 years old ... This reporter sounds like he/she talked to the woman to get her side of the story.

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Woman+loses+parked+motorhome+misses+court+date+divorce/3615758/story.html?cid=megadrop_story

"Henriette Henault said she had permission to camp for a week in a designated spot in the parking lot beside the South Cariboo Visitor’s Centre at 100 Mile House."

I knew this would be an interesting case. Since she is not charged with anything, I do not know whether she will receive a ticket which she can defend.

If her story is true, and it is certainly very believable, I wonder how she can get at least her costs back.

"A worker at the visitor’s centre confirmed Friday that Henault had received permission to camp in the parking lot.

"But RCMP Cpl. Dan Moskaluk said that, even if Henault had permission, police treat that type of parking lot as part of the highway.

“This individual is found in care and control of a motor vehicle,” he said. “From there, there’s an investigation.”

If Henault had been in a private campsite, it would have been a different matter, Moskaluk said, adding that the onus was on her to “take responsibility” for her actions."

RCMP can be such jerks!!!!! This is a good example of that.

"But RCMP Cpl. Dan Moskaluk said that, even if Henault had permission, police treat that type of parking lot as part of the highway."

So, there is a caution for everyone who drives to a pub, decides they cannot drive home afterwards, get into their car, push down the backrest of the seat and go to sleep in the pub or restaurant parking lot.

The RCMP amend the rules as they go.

You know, the RCMP does all the media releases about this added enforcement of the DUI cases, but do they tell the public about all these other cautions of what you can or cannot do?

Seriously, who out there knew that you cannot be found by the RCMP in your car on the CN parking lot, a PUBLIC AREA, after walking across the road from the pub/restaurant and figuring you are too drunk to drive an you would sleep it off in your car, SUV, van, or motorhome?

"RCMP can be such jerks!!!!! This is a good example of that."

How do you figger? She broke the law, don't blame the RCMP for that.

"The RCMP amend the rules as they go."

I believe that this rule - getting caught in your parked vehicle, behind the wheel, drunk and asleep or drunk and awake - has been around for ages.

Many years ago a friend of mine got a ticket for leaving the key in the ignition on the dashboard of his car which was parked in his driveway. He disputed the ticket in court because the transmission had been removed and it was being overhauled in a local transmission shop.

No amount of argument would persuade the judge that a car without a transmission is inoperable and that it was beside the point whether the key was in the ignition or not because if somebody wanted to steal it he would have stolen it with or without the key. He got so mad that he was almost tossed from the courtroom and into the slammer.

He had to pay the ticket as it was against the law to leave the key in the ignition of an unattended vehicle...

Gus:
Are you a wannabe lawyer or private eye?
Give it a rest, doubt you'd make it.
Lady was drunk, went to the drunk tank, slept it off and away she goes.
Ruez you got it right.
Prince George, that wouldn't have been the honorable Judge George Stewart would it? No,
he would have seen through the BS.
That had to be frustrating when the car ain't goi'n nowhere.

"How do you figger? She broke the law, don't blame the RCMP for that."

Laws are not finite. They cannot cover every single case. That is why the "common law" considers precedence and new situations can set new precedence.

This "car" was both a home and a vehicle. If you read the story from the province, you now know that she lived in the motorhome. From the picture it is likely that the driver part of the cabin is not separated from the remainder of the vehicle.

In essence, not only was her vehicle impounded, but also her home. She had to move into a motel and then an apartment for the 30 days. And then she has to pay for the impound fees and find someone to drive it to a place that is not considered to be part of a highway and better get that in writing by the RCMP. Then she holes up there for another 60 till she can drive it herself again.

All this for sitting at the kitchen table and drinking some wine and then moving to the wrong chair. I mean, are you allowed to drink if you are on a roadside rest stop and you keep sitting at the table or even pull out the bunk and sleep?

Where is the law that defines what it is that you are allowed to and what you are not allowed to do?

I mean even if you are in a trailer and you just have to step put of it and into the vehicle that pulls the trailer. Are you allowed to drink in your trailer if you are parked on the side of a road at a lake or even in a parking lot on the side of the road that overlooks the lake?

There are hundreds of for instances that are in the realm of reasonableness that some RCMP joker can nab you and say that it is part of the highway without using some reasonable judgement because they have a live one on the hook (no one is going to say "show me the section of the MVA", are they?) and the cash register starts clicking away by the $100 increments and your freedoms are removed because you thought you knew what the law was, and you might be very right about what you thought the law was, but one of you has all the power in such a situation and you are not that one.

Ah, I see the hard liner hanging judges are at it for tonight.

Sleep well.

"Gus:
Are you a wannabe lawyer or private eye?
Give it a rest, doubt you'd make it."

No wannabe lawyer. But won more claims than I lost at WCB administrative hearings. In case you did not know, administrative hearings are won not on procedure but on the merits, equity, and natural laws of the situation. In other words, you have to know the details of the cases and be able to argue them competently.

Gus you are absolutely correct. This is a prime example how our right to a correct interpretation of the law has been hijacked by the new powers that were given to the police in this province. We no longer live by the rule of law, but rather by the decisions of a police officer in the middle of the night who may or may not have had a bad day and may or may not hold a prejudice against the person on the receiving end.

Its why we have lawyers and judges, and its why in common law the merits of the circumstances are what matters, and not what the prejudice of a heat of the moment officer of the law thinks.

This woman's rights have clearly been violated because under the new powers she is deemed guilty not until proven innocent, but rather with no opportunity to prove innocence.

If the legal profession had any gonads in this province they would make this lady the poster child in striking down the unconstitutionality of the out of control bureaucracy at ICBC who think their regulations are above the Charter of Rights and our historical common law.

I'm glad to see you picked that one up Gus.

Impounding a vehicle is theft IMO. RCMP (ICBC) can take their license back as well as their insurance but a vehicle is privatly owned.

I bet half of you would change your tune if this was drunk 18 year old male slumped over the steering wheel.

northman - not if he was camping I wouldnt. This is exactly why these new laws give too much power to the RCMP. This person deserves thier day in court. If she was driving while impaired than certainly, throw the book at her - AFTER she's been proven guilty.

What gets my Goat is , this Vehicle was not moving it was parked and calling a Rest Area part of the Highway is stretching it and that she my have been driving drunk before, again is only speculation , has any one seen her doing that? By no means I condone driving drunk but this is nothing but making Money . So what is the RCMP saying, in a Reststop back in my Camper(Pickup) I can't have a Beer and go to sleep to carry on fresh and sober the next day! I hope someone take this BS to a higher Court.