Author Topic: Jail for speeding motorist  (Read 2229 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline The Moan Ranger

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 13952
  • Reputation: 1
  • No surrender
Jail for speeding motorist
« 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


Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: Jail for speeding motorist
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2007, 02:19:06 PM »
Apparently so.
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Offline Marley's Ghost (Imbiber of Spirits)

  • Fool Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4917
  • Reputation: 0
  • What a dead end job . .
Re: Jail for speeding motorist
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2007, 04:29:16 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
"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." 

Well, someone had to say it!

Misunderstood

  • Guest
Re: Jail for speeding motorist
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2007, 05:12:39 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.

Online Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 152174
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Jail for speeding motorist
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2007, 05:57:18 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:
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: Jail for speeding motorist
« Reply #5 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.
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Misunderstood

  • Guest
Re: Jail for speeding motorist
« Reply #6 on: September 25, 2007, 05:22:43 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...