A member of the family has a 'partner' who is currently 'serving ' a 5 yr driving ban in the UK.
I have received at least THREE different reasons* WHY he has such a harsh penalty over his head, and all of them sound like the excrement of an ox. (if you get the meaning...)
Unfortunately, the family member, who has a luke-warm IQ, thinks the sun shines out of etc etc etc, and gets rather houty-toity when we start stroking beards and giving it the 'oh yeah?'...
So, maybe somebody in the backroom can explain what a naughty fellow one has to be to get a 5-yearer ...
--------------------------
List of implausible excuses...
*#1 - He used to go out with a policewoman, who was "a woman scorned", and used her influence to nail him when he was caught for a speeding offence, which then became "reckless and negligent". (Yeah, right ...)
#2 - He was caught driving at over 140 mph on his motorcycle.
#3 - Was set up by the "pigs" (his words), when somebody he didn't know asked him to move his motorcycle in a pub carpark, and as he got onto it, the police swooped....
|
|
<guess>Possibly and offence that would normally carry a custodial sentence (e.g. causing death by dangerous driving) but was reduced to the 5 year ban becuase of mitigating circumstances?</guess>
|
It would appear that he has been convicted of offence/s which carry obligatory disqualification and by nature more towards the serious end of the Traffic Law.
Under Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 Court can order for Obligatory disqualification offences a period not less than 12 months or as the Court thinks fit.
Upped to at least 3 years if offence of drink/drink and within preceeding 1O years convicted of similar offence.
Death by dangerous/death by careless driving while under influence - not less than 2 years.
All in all a naughty boy.
DVD
|
He hasn't HIT someone at 140mph has he?
:-)
--
"Give Way"? Wait....I know this one...give me a minute
|
Most likely is a multiple repeat offence of driving while disqualified.
Which begs the question - what got him disqualified in the first place?
|
Most likely is a multiple repeat offence of driving while disqualified. Which begs the question - what got him disqualified in the first place?
Or to be more precise, what makes them think that he won't do it again anyway. If you deserve a 5 year ban, then you probably deserve a stretch inside.
|
I tend to agree with you Jonathan.
Almost by definition, the time inside will be shorter than the ban. After all, all prisoners are banned from driving unless they can somehow get a car past prison security, so there's every possibility he also did a shortish stretch.
|
Drink-driving repeat offending frequently carries this length of ban, as does death by dangerous driving under the influence, or just persistent offending (xN) due to idiocy/taking the P of the law.
|
|
|
|
|
If you know whereabouts in the UK he lives/lived then it is bound to feature in the local paper you would think? If the local paper is online you should be able to find out....or else write to them asking for a reprint of any articles featuring the person in question.
|
If you know the area he was done in Ian, then links to local newspapers:=
www.wrx.zen.co.uk/britnews.htm
www.newspapersoc.org.uk/links/links-main.html
|
|
Suggest it might be due to the 140mph. Anyone who rides at this speed obviously has no regard for the law and the judge must have felt that this deserved real punishment. Recent attendance at a court (several times in building/covenant dispute) shows that the judges are not as impartial as they should be, and I have lost faith in British justice as a consequence. Hope that I never have to go to court in any capacity ever again.
|
|
|
If you know the area he was done in Ian, then links to local newspapers:= www.wrx.zen.co.uk/britnews.htm www.newspapersoc.org.uk/links/links-main.html
Even better, find out where the court is and the date that he was banned. I believe their records are open to the public. If not, that will help with the searches that Martin suggested.
Hugo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Being detected enjoying motoring!
|
|
|
Many thnx for the replies - I'll try some specific online enquiries later in the week. (Google is to broad for this type of search!) and hopefully get to the murky bottom of the matter.
THEN it is just a question of breaking the news ... though given the blind-faith aspect, it will probably be ignored as anti-him propaganda.
|
|
|
