[Archived] Steve Kean

[Miker]

A person does not need to be driving recklessly in order for the Police to stop them. I am aware of a police operation in my area and the 1st January one year. Police were stopping people in the morning - between 6am to 8am. Many still over the limit from the night before. With the roads quiet the Police were pulling everybody in and testing. This was quite a few years ago - testing procedures may have changed since then.

One defence I have heard of was that a person pulled over, took medication on the way to the police station which effected his alcohol limit. I Don't know if there are medications that can give false readings - just a defence I heard about. Did kean visit an injured player, where alcohol was used to treat a wound, that got on his clothes. just speculating as I cannot think of any other defence Kean could use.

The police are free to stop you and question you, but they are not legally allowed to conduct a breath test on you without having reasonable suspicion you're committing an offence. That's why they will make you get out of your car and make you do a bunch of tests of your motor skills that you'd probably fail even if you were sober. The Police simply have no right to test you for anything without probable cause, it's a massive infringement on your rights.

I'd be surprised if taking the medication would have worked, especially as it would have to be specific medication that could make a change in your BAC. I suspect that the medicine that can affect your BAC would have that little "do not take these if you've been drinking alcohol" disclaimer on them, which would put the person in the wrong in itself.

As I've mentioned earlier, Kean can use the validity of the effects research as an argument for his case. On its own, it won't work, since the court is responsible for setting precedents, so if it just let anyone come in and question the research simply on the grounds that it is questionable, then it would set a dangerous precedent for others to get out of drink driving offences. Kean CAN however try and prove that his drink was spiked or his BAC was somehow raised without his knowledge. By doing so, he can argue that his driving capability was not affected regardless and he got into the car with the knowledge he was fine to drive and not with the intent to harm others.

Did they actually specify the results of his blood test, or was it only the breath test? If the blood test showed 0.15 then he would have very little room for argument, that's just way too much. He'd have to be Superman to not be affected at all by that point.

[Stuart]

Kean CAN however try and prove that his drink was spiked or his BAC was somehow raised without his knowledge. By doing so, he can argue that his driving capability was not affected regardless and he got into the car with the knowledge he was fine to drive and not with the intent to harm others.

If alcohol was consumed without someone's knowledge - that still doesn't prove that their driving capability was not affected. Only that they didn't know it was affected.

However. I would have thought that someone who was double the drink-drive limit would feel less than sober. Unless they were a heavy drinker. Not that I am suggesting Kean could be.

[Miker]

If alcohol was consumed without someone's knowledge - that still doesn't prove that their driving capability was not affected. Only that they didn't know it was affected.

He doesn't need to prove that his driving capability was not affected, the police have to prove that it was (innocent until proven guilty). All Kean (and his lawyer) needs to do is show that there is 'reasonable doubt' that his driving capability was affected.

Remember that the drink driving laws are designed to pre-empt crime and you are charged with the assumption that you are going to recklessly drive and cause harm as a result of consuming alcohol. However, making this sort of an assumption is a bit of a stretch compared to something like intercepting a phone call of someone stating his plans for committing a terrorist attack, where you have direct evidence of the intention to do harm. So there is obvious room to maneuver from a legal perspective.

However. I would have thought that someone who was double the drink-drive limit would feel less than sober. Unless they were a heavy drinker. Not that I am suggesting Kean could be.

You would assume so yes, and I would be very skeptical if he was ok to drive by that stage, but I've just read that he was double the limit according to the breath test, not the blood test. I haven't looked into the exact science and formulations behind either test, but I remember reading something about the potential inaccuracy of the breath test based on a number of factors, so there's the possibility that he could argue that his BAC wasn't that high.

If his job and future is on the line, then I imagine he'd go all out to prove his innocence.

[Stuart]

I'm not sure that's true, Miker. If I understand you first paragraph, he could be 4 times the limit but driving impeccably and 'get off'.

The law is surely objective rather than subjective on this one. You are either over the limit or not - based on both blood test AND breath test. I expect people escape conviction by proving reasonable doubt about the accuracy of these readings and not their actual driving. Unless it was obviously flawed and there were witnesses or an accident.

[RevidgeBlue]

I glanced at the headlines on the front of today's LT earlier. Going from memory the salient points about Kean's court case are these.

1) He has pleaded not guilty to driving with excess alcohol and is being represented by "Mr Loophole" Nick Freeman.

2) From what was said in Court there will be a two pronged basis to his defence:

a) His drink was possibly spiked.

b ) There was too long a gap between either his two breathalyser readings or breathalyser and blood sample. (I can't remember which)

3) The breathalyser reading was 65. (Legal limit 35).

I don't think it's really fair for anyone to comment on the case without hearing the full facts as presented in Court. However if you're found guilty after trial you lose any available credit for a timely guilty plea so in that sense Kean is paying his money and taking his chances and running the risk of an increased ban and higher fine.

Just to put some perspective on the offence itself, assuming no previous history for similar offences someone being convicted of the offence with a reading of 65 and no other aggravating circumstances would normally expect an 18 month to 2 year ban rather than the minimum 12 months. (Plus of course a hefty fine)

He doesn't need to prove that his driving capability was not affected, the police have to prove that it was (innocent until proven guilty). All Kean (and his lawyer) needs to do is show that there is 'reasonable doubt' that his driving capability was affected.

None of the above is correct or relevant in the slightest.

[Bobby G]

Spiked drink? Who is he, James Bond?

[Inta Beaver]

What a prick, if I got done for drink driving and claimed my drink had been spiked the court would laugh at me, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime Keano. Except your punishment like a man!

[PAFELL]

I glanced at the headlines on the front of today's LT earlier. Going from memory the salient points about Kean's court case are these.

1) He has pleaded not guilty to driving with excess alcohol and is being represented by "Mr Loophole" Nick Freeman.

2) From what was said in Court there will be a two pronged basis to his defence:

a) His drink was possibly spiked.

b ) There was too long a gap between either his two breathalyser readings or breathalyser and blood sample. (I can't remember which)

3) The breathalyser reading was 65. (Legal limit 35).

I don't think it's really fair for anyone to comment on the case without hearing the full facts as presented in Court. However if you're found guilty after trial you lose any available credit for a timely guilty plea so in that sense Kean is paying his money and taking his chances and running the risk of an increased ban and higher fine.

Just to put some perspective on the offence itself, assuming no previous history for similar offences someone being convicted of the offence with a reading of 65 and no other aggravating circumstances would normally expect an 18 month to 2 year ban rather than the minimum 12 months. (Plus of course a hefty fine)

None of the above is correct or relevant in the slightest.

Drink spiked??????????? who by, Fergy, players. Unbelieveable.

Time gap is a moot point - if the readings were still reading he was over the limit, there is no defence.

[RibbleValleyRover]

Well if the rumours are true about us having a decent budget to work with in the summer do you trust this man to spend it wisely?

[Mattyblue]

No, his inexperience plus Anderson interference cold see us squander a golden chance.

But, I suppose we have to just let him (or they) get on with it.

[Gav]

Well if the rumours are true about us having a decent budget to work with in the summer do you trust this man to spend it wisely?

Well I think you can only go off his record so far, which despite what many people on here seem to think, its pretty good. The January window is notoriously hard to do business but Kean was successful in my opinion.

Jermaine Jones was a revelation, a major impact player that helped secure out premiership status, did any other team loan a player during January that made such an impact?

Rochina by all accounts is going to be very good player, not bought to make a major impact last season, but next season could be his time.

Formica, no idea, but Kean rates him, bought with an eye for the future.

RSC, was worth a gamble for me, didn’t work out, injury prone.

So going of those buys we have cause for optimism I believe.

[jim mk2]

Well I think you can only go off his record so far, which despite what many people on here seem to think, its pretty good. The January window is notoriously hard to do business but Kean was successful in my opinion.

Jermaine Jones was a revelation, a major impact player that helped secure out premiership status, did any other team loan a player during January that made such an impact?

Rochina by all accounts is going to be very good player, not bought to make a major impact last season, but next season could be his time.

Formica, no idea, but Kean rates him, bought with an eye for the future.

RSC, was worth a gamble for me, didn't work out, injury prone.

So going of those buys we have cause for optimism I believe.

One did well, two might do well some time in the future but might disappear without trace and the third was a waste of money in terms of wages. Only one had an impact in terms of the predicament we were in. I don't see how that constitutes a "success".

Keep spinning GAV !

[thenodrog]

He had a packet of Wine Gums?

The limit is the limit. If you drink and drive then you should face the penalties and not be able to pay expensive lawyers to get your way out of trouble.

Grey area. It's not illegal to drink and drive, it's illegal to drive whilst over the legal limit. Cars have meters to indicate vehicle speed, humans do not have meters to indicate blood alcohol levels. Hence why so many random breathalyser tactics are targetted at early morning drivers heading to work. Hence why the police frequently get a bad name.

[den]

Well I think you can only go off his record so far, which despite what many people on here seem to think, its pretty good. The January window is notoriously hard to do business but Kean was successful in my opinion.

Jermaine Jones was a revelation, a major impact player that helped secure out premiership status, did any other team loan a player during January that made such an impact?

Rochina by all accounts is going to be very good player, not bought to make a major impact last season, but next season could be his time.

Formica, no idea, but Kean rates him, bought with an eye for the future.

RSC, was worth a gamble for me, didn’t work out, injury prone.

So going of those buys we have cause for optimism I believe.

Bunkum.

1 of them played, 3 of them didn't.

Not good enough Gav.

[Gav]

One did well, two might do well some time in the future but might disappear without trace and the third was a waste of money in terms of wages. Only one had an impact in terms of the predicament we were in. I don't see how that constitutes a "success".

Keep spinning GAV !

Do you think we'd have stayed up without Jones in midfield?

Can you think of another January signing that had such an impact?

The question was do we trust him with the cash? I can only go off his record so far, what are you gooing off?

[dave birch]

Do you think we'd have stayed up without Jones in midfield?

Invalid question IMO.

Would we have stayed up without Steve Kean as coach?

same answer.

[Gav]

Bunkum.

1 of them played, 3 of them didn't.

Not good enough Gav.

So you don't trust him with the cash, but on what basis Den?

[den]

So you don't trust him with the cash, but on what basis Den?

I made a post a short while ago Gav, saying why not. In short, I don't believe he knew anything about JJ, Formica or Rochina. IMO, JA was probably the man behind those deals. Just my belief Gav, I can't prove any of that, but would he have enogh knowledge of Schalke's players, Barcelona's reserve team players or Newell's old boys?

So for his judgement on players that he definately knows about. I believe he certainly did know about RSC and his injuries, yet still brought him in and unbelievably, he also wants to bring him back permanently. Another player that he knew about was Myles Anderson, who is viewed by Kean as the next Chris Smalling. Doesn't he want to see Benjani back here as well?

[Parsonblue]

So you don't trust him with the cash, but on what basis Den?

Looking at what happened in January, Jones and Roque were both loan deals. Rochina came for very little with a view to the future. The one decent fee he paid was for Formica who has looked decidedly poor in the Reserve team. Reserve football is a pretty poor standard and whereas Rochina quickly improved after a slow start, Formica has struggled to make an impact. Nor is Formica an inexperienced youngster and with 63 starts and 16 sub outings behind him, for Newell's Old Boys, one might have hoped that he would have made some impact at first team level. At 23 one might have expected him to perform better than Rochina who is three years younger. Thus, having paid £3.5 million in January, we are still no nearer knowing if this guy will be able to cut it at Premier League level.

Of course, every manager makes mistakes in the transfer market, but Kean has had no experience in buying and selling players. Admittedly, we don't know if Kean will be left to spend the money or if the "advisors" will hand him a list of players to chose from. However, of the signings made in January, only Jermaine Jones made any significant contribution to the first team and this does lead one to have reservations about him being given a large budget to spend in the summer.

[Gav]

I made a post a short while ago Gav, saying why not. In short, I don't believe he knew anything about JJ, Formica or Rochina. IMO, JA was probably the man behind those deals. Just my belief Gav, I can't prove any of that, but would he have enogh knowledge of Schalke's players, Barcelona's reserve team players or Newell's old boys?

So for his judgement on players that he definately knows about. I believe he certainly did know about RSC and his injuries, yet still brought him in and unbelievably, he also wants to bring him back permanently. Another player that he knew about was Myles Anderson, who is viewed by Kean as the next Chris Smalling. Doesn't he want to see Benjani back here as well?

Well Den you could be right, but lets not forget most managers take advice from agents and scouts, nothing out of the normal there.

I believe he did know about Rochina and Jones, but possibly Formica was agent driven which happens all the time, but the final say was down to Kean.

As for RSC, it was worth the gamble as far as I’m concerned, much like Robbie Kean was worth taking on loan, but he suffered with injuries also.

As for buying RSC permanently, that seems like madness, but Benjani as a squad player isn’t so daft for me.

[Ferrit]

Grey area. It's not illegal to drink and drive, it's illegal to drive whilst over the legal limit. Cars have meters to indicate vehicle speed, humans do not have meters to indicate blood alcohol levels. Hence why so many random breathalyser tactics are targetted at early morning drivers heading to work. Hence why the police frequently get a bad name.

Not a grey area in my eyes. You drink, you have the potential to be over the limit regardless of how much you've taken. That's a risk that he, or anyone else who does it for that matter takes. "I didn't know if I was over the limit or not" is hardly a legitimate excuse.

He drunk too much, drove, and got pulled, black and white to me.

[jim mk2]

The question was do we trust him with the cash? I can only go off his record so far, what are you gooing off?

I'm "gooing off" his record so far too - and his transfer dealings are average at best.

Do In trust him with the cash ? No I do not, and I don't trust a word he says either.

It's been reported on another thread that we might have £20m plus cash from players sales to spend this summer - the great shame in all this is that we don't have a proper manager such as Mark Hughes or Sam Allardyce to spend it.

Please use that last sentence to have another pop at Sam.

[Gav]

Looking at what happened in January, Jones and Roque were both loan deals. Rochina came for very little with a view to the future. The one decent fee he paid was for Formica who has looked decidedly poor in the Reserve team. Reserve football is a pretty poor standard and whereas Rochina quickly improved after a slow start, Formica has struggled to make an impact. Nor is Formica an inexperienced youngster and with 63 starts and 16 sub outings behind him, for Newell's Old Boys, one might have hoped that he would have made some impact at first team level.

Yes I take those points on board, but surely it makes no difference if Jones was a loan or not, its about being able to spot a player, and Kean spotted a right player there for me. RSC was a risk, but one worth taking for me.

Players coming in from South America often take time to ‘bed in’ but you could argue at 3.5m he should have been able to get a couple of games in, and look half decent in the reserves, but that’s opinion, Kean seems to rate him, then he would wouldn’t he, he bought him!

By the same token people who have seen Rochina in the reserves are raving about him, I was told he’ll probably make a move to a top 4 club in a couple of years if he progresses like he’s doing currently, no release clauses hopefully!

Oh well I think Kean did well, others think we had a poor January window, opinions eh.

[Gav]

I'm "gooing off" his record so far too - and his transfer dealings are average at best.

Do In trust him with the cash ? No I do not, and I don't trust a word he says either.

It's been reported on another thread that we might have £20m plus cash from players sales to spend this summer - the great shame in all this is that we don't have a proper manager such as Mark Hughes or Sam Allardyce to spend it.

Please use that last sentence to have another pop at Sam.

Do "In" trust him with the cash? yes I do, but time will tell Jim.

[den]

One point about RSC, Gav.

He had played hardly any football since he was last at Ewood. He'd been injured for most of his time at City, and when he did make one of his rare appearances for them, he looked very poor. This was a loan signing made in January at a considerable cost to the club, so surely, the least you would expect is that we sign someone who is at least fit enough to contribute until the end of the season? Again, Kean is paid to make the right judgements on behalf of the club, so rather than put it down to being worth a gamble, it really must be seen as bad judgement?