VIDEO: 'Drivers are in control of a potentially lethal weapon' - police officer's warning as more drink drivers in court

Bournemouth Echo: Sgt Nikki Burt at Bournemouth Magistrates Court Sgt Nikki Burt at Bournemouth Magistrates Court

THE devastating consequences of drink driving have been outlined by one of the police officers behind the Dorset Police Christmas drink and drug driving campaign.

Death, injury and collision damage, as well as possible imprisonment, driving bans and huge fines are all consequences of the socially unacceptable offence, said Sergeant Nikki Burt.

She was speaking outside Bournemouth magistrates’ court as more people charged with drink and drug driving related offences were facing the music behind its doors.

The Daily Echo has joined forces with Dorset Police to name and shame all those convicted of such offences during the festive campaign.

See a gallery of those convicted of drink-driving offences during the Christmas campaign here

But Sgt Burt stressed that those who avoided detection during December are not off the hook.

“This campaign has identified that there are still people who continue to drive having had alcohol to drink” she said.

“Although we have enhanced campaigns at Christmas and in the summer, this offence remains a priority for Dorset Police throughout the year.”

She said anyone thinking of driving should avoid alcohol altogether adding: “One drink is one too many. Drivers are in control of a potentially lethal weapon and there are still fatal collisions happening where alcohol is a factor.”

She urged anyone planning to drink alcohol to arrange transport with a nominated driver or taxi, or to arrange accommodation.

And she also asked members of the public to report anyone they suspect is breaking the law.

“Call 999 if it is happening at the time or 101 with non-urgent information about drink drivers” she said.

A total of 65 people were charged with such offences in Dorset during the Christmas campaign and many have already appeared before magistrates in Bournemouth and Weymouth. Others will come before the courts during the rest of January and in February.

  • A third more drivers were breathalysed during Dorset Police’s Christmas drink and drive campaign last year, compared with 2012.

A total of 1,472 breath tests were carried out by officers between December 1 and New Year’s Day, compared with 1,107 during the 2012 campaign – an increase of 33 per cent.

The Force recorded 103 positive breath tests during the campaign, compared to 101 in 2012.

This saw the percentage of people supplying positive breath tests drop from nine per cent in 2012 to seven per cent in 2013.

Every driver involved in a collision or stopped while committing a moving road traffic offence during the campaign was breath tested, irrespective of whether they were suspected of drink driving or not.

In all 430 breath tests were carried out following collisions, of these 25 were positive or the individual refused or failed to provide.

A total of 108 people were arrested during the campaign. Of these 65 people aged between 18 and 75 were charged – 16 women and 49 men.

Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:56am Fri 17 Jan 14

jeebuscripes says...

This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth. jeebuscripes

8:04am Fri 17 Jan 14

High Treason says...

jeebuscripes wrote:
This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
If that is what is required to stop these selfish people from drink driving I am all for it. The bans and fines do not appear to prevent some from drink driving. Maybe some publicity will.
[quote][p][bold]jeebuscripes[/bold] wrote: This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth.[/p][/quote]If that is what is required to stop these selfish people from drink driving I am all for it. The bans and fines do not appear to prevent some from drink driving. Maybe some publicity will. High Treason

8:32am Fri 17 Jan 14

static kill says...

Legalise it.
Legalise it. static kill

8:46am Fri 17 Jan 14

samsmith says...

High Treason wrote:
jeebuscripes wrote:
This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
If that is what is required to stop these selfish people from drink driving I am all for it. The bans and fines do not appear to prevent some from drink driving. Maybe some publicity will.
Only a device fitted to all cars requiring a sample of breath before the car can start would help prevent drink driving and even this could be bypassed by a sober associate. Only the few who read the Echo may be helped by this article. It's possible some of those mentioned in the article aren't even aware they're being named and shamed. Papers have always had a courts section so people being named and shamed have been going on for a long time. (The Western Gazette has always had quite an elaborate section). To me it is more a reflection of what little news there is rather than anything else. It is great that the issue of drink driving is making a paper's front page story but it I can't see it going any great lengths to cure the problem.
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jeebuscripes[/bold] wrote: This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth.[/p][/quote]If that is what is required to stop these selfish people from drink driving I am all for it. The bans and fines do not appear to prevent some from drink driving. Maybe some publicity will.[/p][/quote]Only a device fitted to all cars requiring a sample of breath before the car can start would help prevent drink driving and even this could be bypassed by a sober associate. Only the few who read the Echo may be helped by this article. It's possible some of those mentioned in the article aren't even aware they're being named and shamed. Papers have always had a courts section so people being named and shamed have been going on for a long time. (The Western Gazette has always had quite an elaborate section). To me it is more a reflection of what little news there is rather than anything else. It is great that the issue of drink driving is making a paper's front page story but it I can't see it going any great lengths to cure the problem. samsmith

8:57am Fri 17 Jan 14

suzigirl says...

"Drivers are in control of a lethal weapon" No s##t Sherlock!
"Drivers are in control of a lethal weapon" No s##t Sherlock! suzigirl

9:19am Fri 17 Jan 14

BoscVegas says...

suzigirl wrote:
"Drivers are in control of a lethal weapon" No s##t Sherlock!
one is also in control of a lethal weapon when they are pouring their wine out the bottle.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: "Drivers are in control of a lethal weapon" No s##t Sherlock![/p][/quote]one is also in control of a lethal weapon when they are pouring their wine out the bottle. BoscVegas

10:26am Fri 17 Jan 14

downmoor-ch63 says...

jeebuscripes wrote:
This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
YOU SEEM TO ME, AND I MIGHT BE WRONG, THAT YOU WERE ONE OF THOSE CAUGHT, OR ONE OF THOSE DRIVERS THAT DID DRINK, AND DRIVE, AND GOT AWAY WITH IT, REALIZE, THESE ARE POTENTIAL MURDER CASES. A CAR DRIVEN BY A DRUNKEN IDIOT NOT REALISING THAT HE IS DRIVING A POTENTIAL MURDER WEAPON!.
[quote][p][bold]jeebuscripes[/bold] wrote: This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth.[/p][/quote]YOU SEEM TO ME, AND I MIGHT BE WRONG, THAT YOU WERE ONE OF THOSE CAUGHT, OR ONE OF THOSE DRIVERS THAT DID DRINK, AND DRIVE, AND GOT AWAY WITH IT, REALIZE, THESE ARE POTENTIAL MURDER CASES. A CAR DRIVEN BY A DRUNKEN IDIOT NOT REALISING THAT HE IS DRIVING A POTENTIAL MURDER WEAPON!. downmoor-ch63

10:34am Fri 17 Jan 14

downmoor-ch63 says...

samsmith wrote:
High Treason wrote:
jeebuscripes wrote:
This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
If that is what is required to stop these selfish people from drink driving I am all for it. The bans and fines do not appear to prevent some from drink driving. Maybe some publicity will.
Only a device fitted to all cars requiring a sample of breath before the car can start would help prevent drink driving and even this could be bypassed by a sober associate. Only the few who read the Echo may be helped by this article. It's possible some of those mentioned in the article aren't even aware they're being named and shamed. Papers have always had a courts section so people being named and shamed have been going on for a long time. (The Western Gazette has always had quite an elaborate section). To me it is more a reflection of what little news there is rather than anything else. It is great that the issue of drink driving is making a paper's front page story but it I can't see it going any great lengths to cure the problem.
WELL SAID SAM SMITH, I HOPE THAT IT CATCHES ON, WITH NAMES, ADDRESSES, AND A ROGUE PHOTO ON THE FRONT PAGE, THEN THEY WOULD BE WELL AND TRULY SHAMED, ,PLUS JAIL OR A HEAVY FINE OR BOTH!.
[quote][p][bold]samsmith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jeebuscripes[/bold] wrote: This moral crusade of yours to name and shame people in the pursuit of profits leaves a bad taste in my mouth.[/p][/quote]If that is what is required to stop these selfish people from drink driving I am all for it. The bans and fines do not appear to prevent some from drink driving. Maybe some publicity will.[/p][/quote]Only a device fitted to all cars requiring a sample of breath before the car can start would help prevent drink driving and even this could be bypassed by a sober associate. Only the few who read the Echo may be helped by this article. It's possible some of those mentioned in the article aren't even aware they're being named and shamed. Papers have always had a courts section so people being named and shamed have been going on for a long time. (The Western Gazette has always had quite an elaborate section). To me it is more a reflection of what little news there is rather than anything else. It is great that the issue of drink driving is making a paper's front page story but it I can't see it going any great lengths to cure the problem.[/p][/quote]WELL SAID SAM SMITH, I HOPE THAT IT CATCHES ON, WITH NAMES, ADDRESSES, AND A ROGUE PHOTO ON THE FRONT PAGE, THEN THEY WOULD BE WELL AND TRULY SHAMED, ,PLUS JAIL OR A HEAVY FINE OR BOTH!. downmoor-ch63

1:24pm Fri 17 Jan 14

kalebmoledirt says...

You get the impression most of the childish caustic remarks about the appearance of a what is probably a mother wife and successful woman that cannot defend herself on this forum.are being written by the unemployable Sat in sweaty bedroom watching The bloody Kyle rubbish.adding comments to those already placed is to show you up for the coward that you are..Nikki you look absolutely fine to the reader that have NOT commented and that is a lot more than have
You get the impression most of the childish caustic remarks about the appearance of a what is probably a mother wife and successful woman that cannot defend herself on this forum.are being written by the unemployable Sat in sweaty bedroom watching The bloody Kyle rubbish.adding comments to those already placed is to show you up for the coward that you are..Nikki you look absolutely fine to the reader that have NOT commented and that is a lot more than have kalebmoledirt

2:01pm Fri 17 Jan 14

nevernever says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
You get the impression most of the childish caustic remarks about the appearance of a what is probably a mother wife and successful woman that cannot defend herself on this forum.are being written by the unemployable Sat in sweaty bedroom watching The bloody Kyle rubbish.adding comments to those already placed is to show you up for the coward that you are..Nikki you look absolutely fine to the reader that have NOT commented and that is a lot more than have
Hear hear,I know Sgt Burt and she is an excellent Police Officer.
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: You get the impression most of the childish caustic remarks about the appearance of a what is probably a mother wife and successful woman that cannot defend herself on this forum.are being written by the unemployable Sat in sweaty bedroom watching The bloody Kyle rubbish.adding comments to those already placed is to show you up for the coward that you are..Nikki you look absolutely fine to the reader that have NOT commented and that is a lot more than have[/p][/quote]Hear hear,I know Sgt Burt and she is an excellent Police Officer. nevernever

2:36pm Fri 17 Jan 14

justanoldie says...

I think she just "popped it on" for the photo. Great to see more women in these demanding jobs...
I think she just "popped it on" for the photo. Great to see more women in these demanding jobs... justanoldie

6:03pm Fri 17 Jan 14

cycle commuter says...

nevernever wrote:
kalebmoledirt wrote:
You get the impression most of the childish caustic remarks about the appearance of a what is probably a mother wife and successful woman that cannot defend herself on this forum.are being written by the unemployable Sat in sweaty bedroom watching The bloody Kyle rubbish.adding comments to those already placed is to show you up for the coward that you are..Nikki you look absolutely fine to the reader that have NOT commented and that is a lot more than have
Hear hear,I know Sgt Burt and she is an excellent Police Officer.
I'm going to take a wild punt and guess that Sgt Burt is too busy serving the public, nicking villains and protecting us all to have time to read this, let alone give a sweet tuppenny **** about what very small-minded, backwards-thinking internet armchair warriors think of her.

Some people need to go back to the '70's and stay there.
[quote][p][bold]nevernever[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: You get the impression most of the childish caustic remarks about the appearance of a what is probably a mother wife and successful woman that cannot defend herself on this forum.are being written by the unemployable Sat in sweaty bedroom watching The bloody Kyle rubbish.adding comments to those already placed is to show you up for the coward that you are..Nikki you look absolutely fine to the reader that have NOT commented and that is a lot more than have[/p][/quote]Hear hear,I know Sgt Burt and she is an excellent Police Officer.[/p][/quote]I'm going to take a wild punt and guess that Sgt Burt is too busy serving the public, nicking villains and protecting us all to have time to read this, let alone give a sweet tuppenny **** about what very small-minded, backwards-thinking internet armchair warriors think of her. Some people need to go back to the '70's and stay there. cycle commuter

6:28pm Fri 17 Jan 14

nickynoodah says...

cycle commuter wrote:
nevernever wrote:
kalebmoledirt wrote:
You get the impression most of the childish caustic remarks about the appearance of a what is probably a mother wife and successful woman that cannot defend herself on this forum.are being written by the unemployable Sat in sweaty bedroom watching The bloody Kyle rubbish.adding comments to those already placed is to show you up for the coward that you are..Nikki you look absolutely fine to the reader that have NOT commented and that is a lot more than have
Hear hear,I know Sgt Burt and she is an excellent Police Officer.
I'm going to take a wild punt and guess that Sgt Burt is too busy serving the public, nicking villains and protecting us all to have time to read this, let alone give a sweet tuppenny **** about what very small-minded, backwards-thinking internet armchair warriors think of her.

Some people need to go back to the '70's and stay there.
Very true some commenters sank lower than a knobdirt ferret
I was glad to see the clean up.
[quote][p][bold]cycle commuter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nevernever[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: You get the impression most of the childish caustic remarks about the appearance of a what is probably a mother wife and successful woman that cannot defend herself on this forum.are being written by the unemployable Sat in sweaty bedroom watching The bloody Kyle rubbish.adding comments to those already placed is to show you up for the coward that you are..Nikki you look absolutely fine to the reader that have NOT commented and that is a lot more than have[/p][/quote]Hear hear,I know Sgt Burt and she is an excellent Police Officer.[/p][/quote]I'm going to take a wild punt and guess that Sgt Burt is too busy serving the public, nicking villains and protecting us all to have time to read this, let alone give a sweet tuppenny **** about what very small-minded, backwards-thinking internet armchair warriors think of her. Some people need to go back to the '70's and stay there.[/p][/quote]Very true some commenters sank lower than a knobdirt ferret I was glad to see the clean up. nickynoodah

7:34pm Fri 17 Jan 14

kalebmoledirt says...

So in summary great to have foxy police seargents.that can wear a bad hat .xx
So in summary great to have foxy police seargents.that can wear a bad hat .xx kalebmoledirt

8:00pm Fri 17 Jan 14

nickynoodah says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
So in summary great to have foxy police seargents.that can wear a bad hat .xx
what the **** is a seargents
did you just make it up
very poor effort. you know
leave the lass alone
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: So in summary great to have foxy police seargents.that can wear a bad hat .xx[/p][/quote]what the **** is a seargents did you just make it up very poor effort. you know leave the lass alone nickynoodah

9:08pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Mrs C. A Townend says...

The only way to stop drink drivers is to ban alcohol altogether. However, like with drugs this would prove very difficult because people who have these problems, always find a way to get what they want illegally.
The only way to stop drink drivers is to ban alcohol altogether. However, like with drugs this would prove very difficult because people who have these problems, always find a way to get what they want illegally. Mrs C. A Townend

10:02pm Fri 17 Jan 14

rotcoddam says...

The real point being missed,as always in these reports, is this. In this country the police are not permitted to conduct random breathtests, therefor all those tested must have been involved in an accident,committed a moving traffic offence or have been driving so badly as to give reasonable cause to assume they where drunk. According to police figures drink played a part in only a tiny minority of these accidents and or offences. Less than 7% of those tested failed the test. Should we therefor not be investigating the reasons behind the majority of these accidents and offences. Which where apparently involving entirely sober individuals.
The real point being missed,as always in these reports, is this. In this country the police are not permitted to conduct random breathtests, therefor all those tested must have been involved in an accident,committed a moving traffic offence or have been driving so badly as to give reasonable cause to assume they where drunk. According to police figures drink played a part in only a tiny minority of these accidents and or offences. Less than 7% of those tested failed the test. Should we therefor not be investigating the reasons behind the majority of these accidents and offences. Which where apparently involving entirely sober individuals. rotcoddam

7:09am Sat 18 Jan 14

alasdair1967 says...

The echo have started a thing here ,may I remind them that drink driving is a year round issue ,people are caught 365 days of the year not just over Christmas so I assume the high profile name and shame will continue and they will not just leave it to the in the courts feature
The echo have started a thing here ,may I remind them that drink driving is a year round issue ,people are caught 365 days of the year not just over Christmas so I assume the high profile name and shame will continue and they will not just leave it to the in the courts feature alasdair1967

10:39am Sat 18 Jan 14

Wackerone says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
So in summary great to have foxy police seargents.that can wear a bad hat .xx
The point with the hat is that female police officers are issued with bowler hat type head gear. If male police officers turned up wearing female head gear we would all die laughing. What is it with some females that they want to dispose of their feminine side and dress like men. This photo has done the rounds of a neighbouring forces RPU to the extreme amusement of both male and female officers!
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: So in summary great to have foxy police seargents.that can wear a bad hat .xx[/p][/quote]The point with the hat is that female police officers are issued with bowler hat type head gear. If male police officers turned up wearing female head gear we would all die laughing. What is it with some females that they want to dispose of their feminine side and dress like men. This photo has done the rounds of a neighbouring forces RPU to the extreme amusement of both male and female officers! Wackerone

12:10pm Sat 18 Jan 14

scrumpyjack says...

rotcoddam wrote:
The real point being missed,as always in these reports, is this. In this country the police are not permitted to conduct random breathtests, therefor all those tested must have been involved in an accident,committed a moving traffic offence or have been driving so badly as to give reasonable cause to assume they where drunk. According to police figures drink played a part in only a tiny minority of these accidents and or offences. Less than 7% of those tested failed the test. Should we therefor not be investigating the reasons behind the majority of these accidents and offences. Which where apparently involving entirely sober individuals.
They can have road stop checks and require cars to pull over for a spot check, if they claim to see a car being driven in a unusual or suspicious manner, they can pull over cars with a defect, cars being driven without lights or drivers committing an offense like failing to indicate on a roundabout or when changing lanes, they can pull over speeders/driving too slow, cars being flagged as not having insurance or for any other reason that makes their ANPR beep and then if they say they smell alcohol require a breath test.

I'm sure there are lots of other reasons and none of the above have anything to do with accidents
[quote][p][bold]rotcoddam[/bold] wrote: The real point being missed,as always in these reports, is this. In this country the police are not permitted to conduct random breathtests, therefor all those tested must have been involved in an accident,committed a moving traffic offence or have been driving so badly as to give reasonable cause to assume they where drunk. According to police figures drink played a part in only a tiny minority of these accidents and or offences. Less than 7% of those tested failed the test. Should we therefor not be investigating the reasons behind the majority of these accidents and offences. Which where apparently involving entirely sober individuals.[/p][/quote]They can have road stop checks and require cars to pull over for a spot check, if they claim to see a car being driven in a unusual or suspicious manner, they can pull over cars with a defect, cars being driven without lights or drivers committing an offense like failing to indicate on a roundabout or when changing lanes, they can pull over speeders/driving too slow, cars being flagged as not having insurance or for any other reason that makes their ANPR beep and then if they say they smell alcohol require a breath test. I'm sure there are lots of other reasons and none of the above have anything to do with accidents scrumpyjack

12:54pm Sat 18 Jan 14

billy bumble says...

scrumpyjack wrote:
rotcoddam wrote:
The real point being missed,as always in these reports, is this. In this country the police are not permitted to conduct random breathtests, therefor all those tested must have been involved in an accident,committed a moving traffic offence or have been driving so badly as to give reasonable cause to assume they where drunk. According to police figures drink played a part in only a tiny minority of these accidents and or offences. Less than 7% of those tested failed the test. Should we therefor not be investigating the reasons behind the majority of these accidents and offences. Which where apparently involving entirely sober individuals.
They can have road stop checks and require cars to pull over for a spot check, if they claim to see a car being driven in a unusual or suspicious manner, they can pull over cars with a defect, cars being driven without lights or drivers committing an offense like failing to indicate on a roundabout or when changing lanes, they can pull over speeders/driving too slow, cars being flagged as not having insurance or for any other reason that makes their ANPR beep and then if they say they smell alcohol require a breath test.

I'm sure there are lots of other reasons and none of the above have anything to do with accidents
This is correct

What they CAN'T do is take a DNA sample without a charge

If any of the bullying ones try it on you can and should refuse
[quote][p][bold]scrumpyjack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rotcoddam[/bold] wrote: The real point being missed,as always in these reports, is this. In this country the police are not permitted to conduct random breathtests, therefor all those tested must have been involved in an accident,committed a moving traffic offence or have been driving so badly as to give reasonable cause to assume they where drunk. According to police figures drink played a part in only a tiny minority of these accidents and or offences. Less than 7% of those tested failed the test. Should we therefor not be investigating the reasons behind the majority of these accidents and offences. Which where apparently involving entirely sober individuals.[/p][/quote]They can have road stop checks and require cars to pull over for a spot check, if they claim to see a car being driven in a unusual or suspicious manner, they can pull over cars with a defect, cars being driven without lights or drivers committing an offense like failing to indicate on a roundabout or when changing lanes, they can pull over speeders/driving too slow, cars being flagged as not having insurance or for any other reason that makes their ANPR beep and then if they say they smell alcohol require a breath test. I'm sure there are lots of other reasons and none of the above have anything to do with accidents[/p][/quote]This is correct What they CAN'T do is take a DNA sample without a charge If any of the bullying ones try it on you can and should refuse billy bumble

8:20am Sun 19 Jan 14

nickynoodah says...

Police should be issued with even bigger hats
especially with all this rain
they could save lives
use the hats for dingies
Police should be issued with even bigger hats especially with all this rain they could save lives use the hats for dingies nickynoodah

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree