A man in Surrey says his car was taken away and his license was suspended after he wasn’t able to take a breathalyzer due to the effects of a past stroke.
Sukhwinder Singh Gill says he was pulled over for speeding in late January. He says after he handed over his license and registration, the officer asked him to do the test to see whether or not he was impaired.
“I couldn’t do it. My mouth could not do it. I told him, ‘Look at my face, look at my face. My face, the right side is dead,'” Gill said.
That explanation, according to Gill, didn’t seem to satisfy the officer.
“He didn’t believe me.”
Because he couldn’t provide medical proof, Gill wound up with a ticket and his car was seized. After getting a blood and urine test to show he was not impaired, and retaining a lawyer — Gill says he was able to get his car and license back.
Related Articles:
The Surrey RCMP says it cannot comment on this specific case, but a spokesperson notes an officer can demand anyone who they believe to be under the influence of alcohol to take the test.
“Clear directions are provided to the driver on how to blow into the device and officers will even demonstrate how to blow into the device to ensure understanding,” an emailed response reads.
“If someone refuses to or fails to provide a breath sample, they can receive a 90 day driving prohibition and a 30 day vehicle impound, the same penalty as someone who provided a breath sample and blew a fail,” the statement adds.
Police are required to document any reason, including a medical or physical issue, given by a driver to explain why they could not complete the test.
“A copy of the paperwork is provided to the driver and it includes instructions for how to request a review,” the email continued, adding anyone who thinks they have been treated unfairly by police can make a complaint to the Surrey RCMP or the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission.
‘It’s very frequent’
Vancouver lawyer Kyla Lee says in her experience, what happened to Gill is not actually all that uncommon.
“It’s very frequent that we see cases of people who aren’t able to provide a sample, who are factually innocent — they’ve not consumed any alcohol, they’re not doing anything wrong — but they’re unable to blow properly due to a medical condition,” she told OMNI News.
Lee adds when something like this happens, the burden is on the driver to dispute the resulting action.
“The problem is that the Motor Vehicle Act doesn’t really provide much of a review process for those types of situations,” she explained. “You have a very short time to do it, you have to prove your innocence in the review hearing, and while all of this is taking place, even though you are actually innocent, you still have to serve all of the consequences associated with the prohibition until the adjudicator renders their decision.”
Ultimately, however, Lee says the police officer in Gill’s case was likely just following the law, though she notes she can’t say anything for sure without seeing the police report.
Meanwhile, Gill says he wants to share his story to help bring awareness to what’s happened.
“I don’t want it to happen to anybody else. I suffered for two weeks without a car, without a license,” he said.