A woman driver who seriously injured two brothers after running them over was “taking a chance” and driving while impaired, a jury heard.As the Supreme Court trial of Tracey Pitt, 51, came to its closing summations yesterday, Crown counsel Takiyah Burgess maintained that Ms Pitt was a reckless motorist who held off on complying with a police officer’s demand for a breath sample as a “delay tactic”.She is accused of causing grievous bodily harm to twins Randolph and Rudolph Smith, in the January 29, 2012 accident on Woodlands Road, Pembroke.Ms Pitt has admitted in court to drinking two glasses of wine at a dance earlier that night, but denies driving while impaired.However, Ms Burgess told the jury: “She had been drinking and driving; she was impaired, and she wasn’t paying attention. She was being reckless, and took a chance getting behind her wheel after consuming alcohol.”The court has heard that the brothers, who were in Ms Pitt’s lane, were dragged about 40 feet after they were struck.The Devonshire woman subsequently refused “three or four” requests for a breath test from Sergeant Narase Samaroo at the Hamilton Police Station, while making an unsuccessful attempt to contact her lawyer by phone.Ms Burgess suggested that in the aftermath, the defendant “knew she was in big trouble — she told you herself, she thought those boys were dead”.“As time went on she agreed, then refused, because the knew that once she took the test there was a possibility that she would be over the legal limit,” Ms Burgess added.Regardless of legal advice, it is an offence to refuse a police demand for a breathalyser, the jury heard.“It’s not their policy to sit around and wait for a detainee to get their lawyer before taking the test,” Ms Burgess told jurors.She suggested that the defendant’s insistence on trying to contact her lawyer was a delay tactic, in an effort to sober up.Ms Pitt, represented by lawyers Elizabeth Christopher and Victoria Pearman, has denied all charges.The trial is expected to conclude today.