The Virtual Pub

Come Inside... => Petrol/Diesel/Red Diesel/Aviation Fuel Head Zone => Topic started by: The Moan Ranger on September 24, 2007, 01:42:25 PM

Title: Jail for speeding motorist
Post by: The Moan Ranger on September 24, 2007, 01:42:25 PM
I cant say I'm surprised - 172 in a 40 is taking the piss somewhat, however, is it a worse offence than burgling someone?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm

Title: Re: Jail for speeding motorist
Post by: Snoopy on September 24, 2007, 02:19:06 PM
Apparently so.
Title: Re: Jail for speeding motorist
Post by: Marley's Ghost (Imbiber of Spirits) on September 24, 2007, 04:29:16 PM
Quote from: The Moan Ranger on September 24, 2007, 01:42:25 PM
I cant say I'm surprised - 172 in a 40 is taking the piss somewhat, however, is it a worse offence than burgling someone?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm



I think you'll find it was 172 in a 70 BTW
Title: Re: Jail for speeding motorist
Post by: Misunderstood on September 24, 2007, 05:12:39 PM
Quote from: Marley's Ghost on September 24, 2007, 04:29:16 PM
Quote from: The Moan Ranger on September 24, 2007, 01:42:25 PM
I cant say I'm surprised - 172 in a 40 is taking the piss somewhat, however, is it a worse offence than burgling someone?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm



I think you'll find it was 172 in a 70 BTW

Doesn't seem to make much difference really does it?   However he could have done with a better solicitor.

I recall a policeman doing something like that but got away with it because he was "Just testing"

I would have demanded jail if he been involved in an incident of any kind, but he wasn't, and seeing as he didn't endanger anyone or injure anyone I would have denied the dangerous driving charge based on lack of any relevant evidence.

Driving without due care and attention?  No. I'd say he was giving it his full attention.   Speeding?  Yes, Guilty m'lud fair cop.
Title: Re: Jail for speeding motorist
Post by: Barman on September 24, 2007, 05:57:18 PM
Quote from: Bouncer on September 24, 2007, 05:12:39 PM
Quote from: Marley's Ghost on September 24, 2007, 04:29:16 PM
Quote from: The Moan Ranger on September 24, 2007, 01:42:25 PM
I cant say I'm surprised - 172 in a 40 is taking the piss somewhat, however, is it a worse offence than burgling someone?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7009923.stm



I think you'll find it was 172 in a 70 BTW

Doesn't seem to make much difference really does it?   However he could have done with a better solicitor.

I recall a policeman doing something like that but got away with it because he was "Just testing"

I would have demanded jail if he been involved in an incident of any kind, but he wasn't, and seeing as he didn't endanger anyone or injure anyone I would have denied the dangerous driving charge based on lack of any relevant evidence.

Driving without due care and attention?  No. I'd say he was giving it his full attention.   Speeding?  Yes, Guilty m'lud fair cop.
He does look like a tosser tho...  whistle:
Title: Re: Jail for speeding motorist
Post by: Snoopy on September 24, 2007, 06:09:31 PM
What about the aggravated vehicle taking?


Didn't we used to call that "Taking and driving away without the owners consent" which all the evidence suggests he was guilty of ~ what ever they call it.
Title: Re: Jail for speeding motorist
Post by: Misunderstood on September 25, 2007, 05:22:43 PM
Quote from: Snoopy on September 24, 2007, 06:09:31 PM
What about the aggravated vehicle taking?


Didn't we used to call that "Taking and driving away without the owners consent" which all the evidence suggests he was guilty of ~ what ever they call it.


Well, we used to call it stealing. then TDA. But I'm not sure that it's actually an offence any more...