The Age are today running with a story about some fuckwit going by the name of Nicola Di Milta, who has gotten the shits up after he was charged and convicted following a failure to stop for a breath test:

Licence lost despite reading of zero

IT BEGAN with a rushed trip home to take his daughter to hospital. It ended with Nicola Di Milta losing his licence – despite recording a blood-alcohol content of zero at the booze bus.

Mr Di Milta, of Reservoir, says a series of unfortunate events and rigid drink-driving laws have resulted in his being without his licence now for almost three years.

In February 2007, Mr Di Milta says he drove home from work to take his sick 11-year-old daughter Marisa to hospital. The girl was in excruciating pain after two lots of spinal surgery and Mr Di Milta admits to rushing home, driving at about 65 km/h in a 60 km/h zone.

Not far from his house, he was stopped at a booze bus, where he told a policewoman about his situation. She told him to get out of the car, but he drove off.

Half an hour later, while his daughter lay in hospital, Mr Di Milta returned to the booze bus, apologised to the same policewoman and took a breath test, which returned a blood-alcohol level of zero.

Mr Di Milta was charged with failing to stop at a booze bus and his lawyer later entered a guilty plea – allegedly without consulting him. A finding of guilt or conviction carries a mandatory licence suspension of two years.

Mr Di Milta has since complained to the Legal Services Commissioner against the lawyer, who he says told him an appeal would be a waste of money. ”No one asked me anything. The magistrate talked with the lawyer and my licence was suspended for two years,” Mr Di Milta said.

…

”I thought I’d paid my price,” Mr Di Milta, a chef, said. ”Why do I get punished for something I did not do? I’m not a drink-driver.”

…

Now, if you actually go and have a read of the entire article, it’s quite obvious that the whole piece is exceptionally one-sided. There’s no mention of actually talking to any of the other parties involved such as the lawyer or the police (who probably wouldn’t comment on the case anyway, unless it involved Mick Gatto) and the whole thing is just a bunch of dubious allegations made by this Di Milta cocksucker. I suspect The Age are just playing follow-the-leader with the Herald Sun, who make it their business to publish biased, one-sided articles with the intention to shitstir without actually providing all the facts, if any at all. But fuck that noise, back to the point.

Due to the route I usually take to get home, I find myself being stopped for a breath test on average about twice a month – at least in recent years. Over 13 years of being licensed and driving a car, I’ve not once been asked to get out of the vehicle when submitting to a preliminary breath test. Di Milta says he was asked to do so.

Now, I think it’s more than fair we ask why he was asked to leave his vehicle. If you ask me what happened, I’m betting he attempted to drive around the testing station without travelling through the queue as directed to. Being suspicious of something, the police officer probably THEN asked him to jump out. There’s a big fucking piece of the story missing here.

Then the fuckwit goes on to complain that he did nothing wrong. What fucking part of “failing to stop” does he not appreciate here? The article claims he was charged with failing to stop as directed, which just happens to carry similar penalties to being over the legal BAC limit. In short, it assumes that the person was over .05.

What makes the whole incident even more laughable is he then complains about his solicitor and how the proceedings were carried out. As I already doubt his version of events regarding the night of the actual incident, I seriously fucking doubt his story regarding the court appearance.

Again, I’m going to surmise what happened here:

He rocked up to court with the hope/expectation that a guilty plea along with an explanation of the circumstances surrounding his behaviour would allow the Magistrate to see some sense and record no conviction against him with minimal or no penalty.

When he actually turned up, he plead guilty with no fucking understanding of the ramifications behind his plea. I’ll grant him that he MAY have had dodgy representation, but given that his story smells like bullshit I’m doubting that. I’m no law expert here, but in the few times I’ve been to the Magistrates Court to see cases in action the Magistrate has asked the defendant if they understand the potential consequences of pleading guilty. I’m fucked if I know if that’s a requirement or just a courtesy. My legal training extends as far as what I’ve seen on Boston Legal. Denny Crane.

On top of that, I seriously fucking doubt that there was so much about the case discussed between the magistrate and the solicitor behind Di Milta’s back.

In short, Di Milta is a lying cockgobbler, and deserved what he got. Maybe not lying completely, but there’s definitely a fuckload of holes in his story. If he’s that fucking retarded to do what he did and then go on to not understand why all of the fucking fuss, then I’m glad he has been denied the opportunity to possess a license and can’t driving on the same fucking roads that I do.

Maybe the dickhead should consider this: Stopping as directed for the fucking breath test and actually undertaking it probably would have taken far less time than it did to argue with the police first place.