Artist Christopher Finlayson was caught drink driving in Takaka after he swerved into the path of an oncoming car being driven by a police officer. Photo / Tracy Neal
Artist Christopher Finlayson was caught drink driving in Takaka after he swerved into the path of an oncoming car being driven by a police officer. Photo / Tracy Neal
The freedoms of a well-known artist have been curtailed by his seventh drink-drive offence, this time after he swerved into the path of an oncoming police officer’s patrol car.
Christopher John Finlayson, who is known around the country for his large-scale public artwork and for his work with community art,cut a sombre figure as he shuffled into the Nelson District Court today with the aid of a walking stick.
He was sentenced to three months’ community detention and 12 months’ supervision and made subject to an alcohol interlock order after he was caught driving drunk in June this year.
Finlayson had earlier admitted a charge of driving with excess breath alcohol for a third or subsequent time, except it was his seventh offence spanning the years since his first in 1979.
Judge Tony Zohrab acknowledged why Finlayson sought solace in alcohol, outlined in several reports.
He said while they served to explain his behaviour, they did not excuse his actions of putting innocent members of the public at risk on a repeat basis.
The 66-year-old Golden Bay-based artist, who was supported by his wife, heard the events of June 30 this year recounted in court.
The mural Aotearoa on a building on the Nelson waterfront, by artist Chris Finlayson. His freedom has been curtailed by a seventh drink-drive sentence imposed in the Nelson District Court today. Photo / Tracy Neal
It was during the day and Finlayson was driving on Abel Tasman Drive in Takaka when he crossed the centre line in front of an oncoming vehicle - a patrol car driven by a local police officer.
When stopped and spoken to Finlayson showed signs he had been drinking.
He then failed a passive breath screening test, and when he refused to accompany police he was arrested and taken to the Takaka police station, the summary of facts shows.
A subsequent breath screening test showed he was driving while almost four times the legal limit with a reading of 963 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath.
The legal limit for drivers over 20 is 250 mcg of alcohol per litre of breath, while a reading above 400 mcg will attract a criminal charge.
Finlayson’s lawyer Michael Vesty said the offending was aggravated by his history of drunk driving, the high reading and the “poor driving” which on this occasion resulted in him swerving into an oncoming lane, in which there happened to be a police officer.
Vesty said it was to Finlayson’s credit that he had later apologised to the police officer, which in Takaka was perhaps worth more than otherwise.
Judge Zohrab acknowledged the apology, but while Finlayson had said he was sorry for what he’d done, he also said he could not remember buying the alcohol but he could remember drinking it at nearby Pohara Beach.
The judge said Finlayson’s six previous drink drive offences had occurred in 1979, 1982, 1991 and 1997 in Auckland, Waitākere and Wellington, and then in Nelson during 2001 and 2011.
Vesty said Finlayson had now taken a forward-looking approach to seek ways to address the offending and prevent it from happening again.
He had also been diagnosed with conditions not previously known about which may have contributed to his cognitive and memory abilities.
Vesty also referred to past traumatic events in Finlayson’s life which he had masked with alcohol, but over which he was committed to addressing.
“He was using alcohol as a mechanism to manage the traumatic deaths of people close to him,” Vesty said.
He said Finlayson was deeply connected to the arts and local community, and remained so, and asked that an alcohol interlock order might be considered.
Judge Zohrab said a seventh drink-drive offence justified a prison sentence as a starting point, but considering all factors he decided a sentence of community detention and supervision was warranted.
The sentence of supervision carried conditions that included Finlayson was to attend and complete alcohol and drug programmes.
The alcohol interlock order carried a 28-day disqualification before the device was fitted for a year, and then three years on a zero-alcohol licence.
