Skip to main content

How to spot a drunk

Across the land (apart from the bars in the House of Commons and House of Lords) pubs and clubs are going to have undercover policeman looking for drunk people. The Home Office have issued guidelines (thanks to The Publican for giving me details) to help spot drunks.

How can police spot a drunk?

Police have been told that the aim of the guidelines is “to present such compelling physical evidence of the person’s level of intoxication that it would be impossible for a court to accept that the person who conducts the sale did not know of this fact”.

Evidence police have been told to look for includes:

A noticeable change in behaviour
Bad tempered, aggressive;
Offensive language;
Becoming loud, boisterous or disorderly;
Becoming physically violent;
Becoming incoherent;
Slurring, or making mistakes in speech; and
becoming argumentative.

A lack of judgment
Being careless with money;
Annoying other persons, employees etc;
Exhibiting inappropriate sexual behaviour;
Drinking quickly or competitively (‘down in one’)

Clumsiness & loss of co‑ordination
Swaying;
Staggering;
Difficulty with walking;
Falling down;
Bumping into furniture;
Spilling drinks;
Difficulty in picking up change; and
Fumbling for cigarettes, or other items.
Decreased alertness
Drowsiness, dozing or sleeping;
Rambling conversation;
Loss of train of thought;
Difficulty in paying attention;
Not understanding what is said;
Glassy eyes and
Lack of focus.

Appearance
Unkempt
Dishevelled

Source: Home Office guidelines

Comments

Joe Otten said…
Some people fit most of these points even when sober.

Anyway I notice you got some coverage in Private Eye on this one.

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.