Jamie Scott Sheehan claims positive meth result was due to ADHD meds
A magistrate has slapped down an excuse from a Two Wells man who attempted to claim his ADHD medication was the reason he tested positive to driving on meth.
North & North East
Don't miss out on the headlines from North & North East. Followed categories will be added to My News.
A construction worker’s unique ADHD medication meth excuse lasted all of two seconds before a magistrate suggested he would be wasting his time and money pursuing the defence.
Jamie Scott Sheehan, 42, of Two Wells, on Thursday pleaded guilty to driving with methamphetamine in his system which was also in contravention of his provisional licence.
But before he reached that decision, Sheehan was seconds into claiming his ADHD medication had led to a false positive when Magistrate Ben Sale suggested the defence was one not worth pursuing.
“Plenty of people are prescribed that medication, but I’ve not heard that excuse before,” Mr Sale, a former defence lawyer, said to Sheehan.
“The drug that you’re consuming, legally, isn’t methylamphetamine.
“It does have similar properties – it’s in the same ballpark – but it’s not methylamphetamine.
“Pursuing a defence … would be a waste of time and potentially a lot of money defending (this) charge.”
Mr Sale explained to Sheehan any defence would have to, at least in part, rely on him swearing under oath he had not knowingly taken methylamphetamine.
But, when Mr Sale asked Sheehan if he could do that, the possible defence came to an abrupt end.
Sheehan: “I’ve had a drug before, but I hadn’t had it before I’d driven”.
Mr Sale: “Okay, how long?”
Sheehan: “Maybe a day-and-a-half”.
Mr Sale: “You’re gone. It can stay in your system for four days, easily”.
Mr Sale then asked Mr Sheehan if he did indeed want to pursue the defence.
“I don’t want to waste your time or the courts’ time,” Sheehan said.
Mr Sale convicted Sheehan on both charges, imposed a six month licence disqualification and fined him $900.