DCSIMG

Drink-driving 
police officer 
loses his licence

A police officer who kept his driving licence despite speeding at 100mph has been convicted again after being caught drink-driving near Stowmarket.

Pc Matthew Stott, 45, admitted driving while over the legal limit on the A14 in September last year when he appeared at Norwich Magistrates’ Court.

Prosecutor Oliver Haswell told the court that Stott - who admitted speeding in a 70mph zone in 2009 but kept his licence and job - had failed to stop for two police cars thinking it was ‘former colleagues playing a prank’.

But Mr Haswell said Stott’s passenger had repeatedly told him ‘just stop’ as cars with flashing lights chased him after spotting a defective rear light.

Two police cars attempted a ‘boxing in’ manoeuvre to force him to stop but had to abort this when it became clear he would not stop and the public may be at risk.

Mr Haswell added Stott, who claimed to have drunk two large glasses of wine, panicked and told his female passenger: “My job, my job, I’m going to lose everything and I’ve only got six years left.”

He eventually reached his home in Kingfisher Road, Stowmarket, where he agreed to a breath test.

Stott had previously denied the charge but changed his plea on the morning of his scheduled trial.

He had intended to fight the allegation on the basis that the breathalyser was faulty and officers had not followed correct procedures.

On Monday, District Judge Peter Veits banned Stott from driving for 12 months and ordered him to pay a fine of £800, court costs of £300 and a victim surcharge of £15.

After the hearing, Superintendent Louisa Pepper, from Suffolk Police, said: “Matthew Stott was suspended from his role as a serving police officer after his arrest and charge for drink-driving.

“Following his guilty plea at Norwich Magistrates’ Court this morning, Suffolk Constabulary’s Professional Standards Department will look at what additional action may now be taken against him.

“The public rightly expects the highest standards from our officers, who should act with integrity and professionalism at all times. Unfortunately, in this instance, this was not the case.”

 
 
 

Back to the top of the page