So, to sum up:
Nobody gives a damn about the "spirit of the law" (except Telescopi) because all we're interested in is being good law abiding citizens, regardless of how ridiculous our laws have become.
So let's all cheer the amount of the power the Police currently have, to make you a criminal when your intent is anything but.
Hurrah!
Where are you drawing these conclusions from?
He is a criminal because he chose to refuse to cooperate with the police, by not providing a second breath sample. If he hadn't made that mistake, then it is unlikely (or at least less likely) that he would have been found guilty of anything.
He was not charged with being drunk, or drink driving, or being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle, or anything similar.
The police cannot knowingly let someone, who they suspect is steaming drunk, sit or sleep behind the wheel of a car. That would be ridiculous.
They simply took him in for questioning and followed the required procedures (in case any evidence was required at a later date) and he failed to cooperate.
What would have happened if it turned out that there was evidence to show that he drove into the car park (straight from the pub)? If they don't have any breath test results, then they couldn't prosecute.
And yes you can get charged with drink driving without being caught driving at the time. I know someone who drove home from the pub, got home ok, but had the police turn up and breathalyse him and then charge him based on evidence that he was seen leaving the pub in his car.
edit:
Police act on the letter of the law not the spirit. That's for judges and magistrates to interpret. This is to ensure consistency.
And this.