A VAN driver prosecuted for drink driving near Wigton has failed to prove that the police breathalyser machines used to measure his alcohol intake were faulty.

Bradley Todd, 26, denied the offence, telling Carlisle’s Rickergate court he neither drinks alcohol nor takes drugs. But after a short trial, during which he failed to present credible evidence of his claims, he was found guilty.

He also claimed that he had “paid to have a blood test” conducted on the morning of his arrest but Todd also could not prove this.

After Todd failed to persuade magistrates that the case should be adjourned so he could secure the evidence he claimed existed to prove his innocence, his trial got underway.

Prosecutor Nick Turner said police decided to stop the Ford Transit van the defendant was driving as he was travelling along the B5305 towards Wigton at 4.25am on September 17 last year.

“The vehicle was stopped by the officers,” said Mr Turner.

Because they could smell intoxicants on the defendant, the officers breathalysed Todd and this produced a reading of 56mcg of alcohol in 100mls of breath.

The legal limit for driving is 35mcg, the court heard.

After he was arrested, Todd was taken to the police HQ at Durranhill in Carlisle, where a second breath test was conducted twice. This produced a lower reading of 44mcg of alcohol in 100mls of breath – still over the legal limit.

The police officer who arrested Todd gave evidence.

She said he was spoken to initially about an investigation concerning an alleged malicious communications offence. She said that at no point was aware that a blood sample was taken from the defendant.

It was also suggested that a roadside drugs swipe produced a positive result but there was no drug driving allegation pursued.

In his evidence, Todd said he had been driving to his Skinburness home after visiting family in Durham. He needed to pick up a trailer so he could collect a car from Scotland, he said.

Questioned about the alcohol reading produced by the police breathalysers tests, the told magistrates: “I don’t drink, and I don’t take drugs, so I don’t understand. If I failed a swipe for drugs, why would they just let me off?”

Todd said there had been no family celebration in Durham and he had not consumed alcohol. He said he had refused to sign a document confirming the result of his breathalyser test at the police station because “it was wrong.”

Mr Turner said Todd had experienced an “unfortunate evening” and asked him if he stood by his claim that the breathalysers results were wrong. The defendant replied: “It happened to me. I’m telling nothing but the truth.

“If I was wrong, I’d own up and get it out of the way.”

Questioned further, the defendant accepted having no documentary evidence to show he paid for a blood sample analysis, saying that it was his mother who dealt with such administration issues, not him.

Magistrates said the evidence given by the police officer was credible and there was no reason to doubt it. They noted also that the breathalyser machine at the police station was calibrated immediately before it was used.

“For that reason, we find the evidence overwhelming,” said the magistrate, confirming that they found Todd guilty of drink driving. He said the inevitable driving ban would prevent him from doing his work as a motor trader.

He was banned for a year and fined £750, with a £300 victim surcharge, and prosecution costs of £550. Magistrates offered him the drink driver rehabilitation course, which if completed by a deadline will reduce his ban by three months.