The defendant was charged with operating a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol contrary to s. 253(1)(a) of the Criminal Code and with consuming alcohol in such a quantity that the concentration thereof in her blood exceeded 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood contrary to s. 253(1)(b) of the Criminal Code.
The offences were alleged to have occurred on September 18, 2014.
The Crown relied on breath samples taken outside the two-hour window for the presumption of identity, requiring expert toxicological evidence.
The defendant testified that she consumed alcohol in response to phone calls from her abusive ex-husband and that she poured alcohol on her car floor when she saw police pulling her over.
The court found the defendant's credibility seriously undermined by her false statements regarding requesting a Punjabi interpreter and her implausible account of pouring alcohol on the car floor.
The court acquitted on the over 80 charge because the Crown failed to prove the "no bolus drinking" assumption underlying the toxicologist's opinion, given evidence that the defendant was consuming large quantities of alcohol while driving.
However, the court convicted on the impaired driving charge based on poor driving, slurred speech, swaying, and stumbling observed by police officers.
