SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE - A man fighting charges of refusing to give a breath sample was found guilty in territorial court on Nov. 12.

The man was found guilty, given a $2,000 fine, and a two-year driving prohibition.

The trial concerned his conduct in the RCMP detachment after being arrested on March 10, on suspicion of drunk driving.

He was asked to provide a breath sample by blowing into the breathalyzer machine. RCMP testified at trial that his cheeks inflated and his face turned red, but no air went through the machine.

When air is blown in, a whirring sound is heard and a reading is obtained even if there is no alcohol in the breath.

RCMP officers said they checked the mouthpiece, put a new one in, and one of the Mounties tested it himself - obtaining a reading of zero - while explaining to Ryan exactly what to do. He was told to "blow as long and hard as he could."

During their second attempt to obtain a sample - after the man was warned he could be charged for refusing to provide a sample - the man blew very briefly, but not long enough to provide a sample.

No breath went through the machine on the third attempt and the man was charged.

The man's lawyer Nikolaus Homberg argued his client should have been told in a clear and concise manner the third breath test was his last chance and charges would be laid as a result of it.

Homberg also thought the breath test process should have been more thoroughly explained to the man.

Crown prosecutor Angie Paquin said the warning, given during the second test, that (the accused) could be charged if he didn't co-operate should have been enough to get the message through to him and she did not see how the

instructions could have been given any more clearly.

"It was clear he just didn't want to provide a breath sample," said Paquin.

Homberg also said he wished the mouthpiece used in the first test could be looked at by the court, to which Judge Bernadette Schmaltz replied that it was looked at by the police officers, and that multiple mouthpieces were used throughout the tests.

"There is no evidence that there was anything wrong with the mouthpiece; there is evidence before me that there was nothing wrong with the mouthpiece," said Schmaltz.

We welcome your opinions. Click here to e-mail a letter to the editor.