a note on misdemeanor drunk in defence

a note on misdemeanor drunk in defence

Defense of accused

Judge Sir intolerance vilified erring reason and blinding insight is well known to you that usually attack policemen are usually inappropriate for their injustice to a lot of honorable policemen and performing their duty faithfully fearing God.

This provided-which had to be — we ask why not write Mr. alzabet in his presence what actually happens only if cryptic Chia? Otherwise we launched for ourselves unleashed behind the physical doctrines owners who they confirm that if God exists, anything goes, even murder.

Do drink schnapps and selection of reality:

Article 7 of Act No. 63 of 1976 prohibition drink wine at that.

(Whoever sets in a public place or in a place in drunk between the imprisonment of at least two weeks and not more than six months or by a fine of not less than twenty pounds and not exceeding one hundred pounds)

It is clear from the text of article 7 above – that the offence extends to areas of article VII is the presence of the accused was drunk in a public place or place of the year – and did not mention that the accused editor was lurching or can't stand the kadamih of drunk or was in an agitated state as a result of Biskra Albin but each note Mr. Editor-record statement record-that the accused mouth almost smell smelt alcohol.

It makes us ask why astkavh his question but this last subject distances us from our defense.

Vast difference between drinker and drunk.

There is no doubt that there is a vast difference between even drunk, drinker, not every drinker drunk but that the opposite is true and that we assume controversy-and the truth is not imposition Yarka. from here we will not deny the fact of eating schnapps but deny reality sugar itself. The tourist facilities authorized to sell liquor licensed establishments are so so this activity is prohibited or restricted, the text of Act No. 63 of 1976 in article 2:

(Prohibited or alcohol or alcoholic or fermented in public places or public stores, and are excluded from this provision.

(A) the specific hotels and tourist establishments in accordance with the provisions of law No. 1 of 1979 on hotel and tourism establishments

(B) tourist nature clubs specified by decision of the Minister of tourism in accordance with the provisions of law No. 77 of 1975 concerning community foundations for youth and sports.

The above-mentioned law in the fifth article of the offense and the penalty is imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, by a fine not exceeding two hundred pounds or to both.

(Appeal No. 3695 year 58 BC meeting 12/1/1988)

 ..... Consequently, we insist that our payment is the absence of sugar or no-incident incident accused drunk to the defendant if the – presumably – dealt with the bottle of beer licensed trade by the Government – a tourist establishments licensed in liquor, it is not necessary to be drunk and extends areas Act 63 of 1975 on the prohibition of drinking alcohol that punishment of the accused must be drunk between either simply accused of drink Beer without being drunk, not punishment.

 When the defendant's punishment is located an intoxicated?

 for punishment of the accused from the fact of its existence drunk between one of the two images:

 first image: the accused was drunk in the road and not in deed.

 the second picture: that with a bottle of liquor bottles and accused any kind on which the highway here is subject to the law extends to not punish Ali addressed within tourist establishments licensed either alcohol to main road openly is what not allowed and punishable.

 inadequate medical report but invalidated:

The medical report came free from the seal of the Republic logo, and the doctor did not sign a medical examination of the accused, but in his words echoed EIRP is transferred from the leaf record. said Dr. 's report accused

(Mentioned in drunk and out of his mouth the smell of alcohol) and had to take a blood sample for analysis as accused prosecutors in its report, but he did nothing in his said, is what makes us question the doctor's errand.

This doctor is not affiliated with llzabet in his presence either enough humiliation suffered by people of some policemen do satisfy the justice that this humiliation also doctor who God has given key to part of the secret of the creation of learn the secrets of the human body and comfort.

And a descent of all the above on their case as seen by the defence witness, who was accompanied by the defendant in returning to the House where the free alzabet for this witness also a mischievous yet another student with a personal card, squashes and threw away the witness testified that alzabet so diversified in the edited records edited minutes of sugar to a friend of the accused and another transcript has also confirmed that his friend wasn't drunk but the intransigence of the officer and the desire to edit records even if contrary to the truth behind Edit this record.

We are a sit-in in defense before the justice court what we lack sugar incident and the invalidity of the medical report.

We are nlgaa to you after God Almighty for rebut the falsehood and show right and explore the between the lines and reach the truth of things.

Let us recall telling the Secretary with his sincere Roy from Aisha said: the Muslimsfend off limits, what you can. It was his way out, let him. The Imam of the errs in pardon is better for him than to err in punishment, the Messenger of Allah peace be upon him.

For that

The accused sought Court Justice accepting payment in the absence of reality and elimination of sugar has pleaded not guilty, which is attributed to him.

Accused agent

Attorney