Flying Lawyer
I can't see how it could mislead anyone. No, the protocol is not part of the legislation, and both you and I have explained ad nausam what the legislation says.
What I said was:
'In the case of aircrew, then Police have a power to ask for a specimen of breath, or blood or urine.
However, they have agreed with the CAA that usualy a blood test will be required.'
Note para 1, the words Police have a power to ask for, and, the word usualy in para 2.
Explaining my further comment, no, it is not in the pilots interest. I have a feeling you are as aware as I am of why is is not, if the report which is quoted as comming from him did in fact do so.
Yes he was lawfully arrested, he failed a breath test when required to provide one by a Constable. Not a breath test requirement made by a chef.
The fact is yes, he then provided a blood test which was below the limit, again you know as well as I do that does not mean that at the time he was arrested he was below the limit.
Yes, I will leap to the defence of Police in most cases, partly because there should be a balance and partly because having done the job, I can see it from thier side, the officers concerned cannot answer some of the misguided comments made about them. In the same way, you leap to the defence of pilots, even though you are probably as aware of the score as I am.
As regards to airport security, it's obvious you are not as well aware of the rules they work under, and I doubt you complain too often in court when information has led to the arrest and conviction for any other offence?