so i can still pretend my bow tie is really a camera
neat
|
so i can still pretend my bow tie is really a camera neat
lol bellboy. Yes, but only in America
|
|
|
|
|
I believe use of a mobile is defined as "interactive communication", transmitting or recieving information. I am sure a lawyer could wriggle for hours on that one.
|
|
So driving along whilst 'writing' a text should be ok then?
|
|
No more legal than reading a map, book, or paper, or anything else that is distracting you from driving. Cause a crash doing any of these, or many other things, or texting, and if it can be proved you are in the poo.
Edited by Old Navy on 17/10/2009 at 10:27
|
Come on then, so what was the gag?
|
|
No gag, sorry just being a bit pedantic. Using phone, or no care and attention, different but possible same result.
|
Don't know what the charge was or the legalities but sounds to me that there has maybe been a gaff with the offence
ie. charged with using a mobile phone whilst driving when the lawyer has said it was only a recording device.
However if he had been charged with careless driving or without due care and attention like the apple eater, kitkat eater, then he might not have wriggled out of it.
|
|
In the same way that "Mr. Loophole" doesn't look for loopholes in the law,he merely takes the police thro' their own procedures and,in most cases,they haven't followed them;in this case ,the wrong charge.
|
"a gaff with the offence
ie. charged with using a mobile phone whilst driving when the lawyer has said it was only a recording device."
The Iphone is NOT just a recording device. It is primarily a phone. It has a FUNCTION like many other makes of phone for recording speech.If he had been using a dictaphone then I could see the loophole. As everyone has said, I thought using anything at the wheel contravenes road law. I cannot believe he got out of this one. It is a phone, and it is illegal to use a phone at the wheel. Surely the police could have checked phone records to see if this was the case.
Okay "Mr Loophole" is good at exploiting glaringly obvious mistakes with these kind of charges. Why can't the CPS or firstly the police not get it right in the first place so people like our comic friend are treated the same as Joe Public.
|
|
|
I mean the gag that he was recording into the phone, I mean if it was good enough then of course he should get off ;-)
|
His lawyer said the joke was;
My girlfriend had a phantom pregnancy, now we've had a little ghost.
Yes, totally unfunny, like the man himself.
|
|
It would have been good for someone to trawl through his stand up routine to see if he had used the gag before. Thus proving or disproving his intent.
|
The whole mobile/handfree debacle is just that. There were/are already laws for driving dangerously, carelessly, without due care and attention, and without due regard for other road users.
Making using a hand held mobile a specific offence was just so that they could give out easy £60 penalties and with easy evidence via the mobile records.
It means a perfectly good and attentive driver holding a mobile in a traffic jam will be busted over the careless person who knocks a cyclist off their bike. The careless person will get all tea and sympathy and a caring arm across their shoulders.
Edited by Hamsafar on 17/10/2009 at 12:39
|
The Iphone is NOT just a recording device. It is primarily a phone.
What about my phone then? It is branded as a "Walkman", I have several albums saved on it and I use it to play them through my car's stereo. When I was young a "Walkman" was a personal music player first and foremost and it seems as if this one is designed thus, with the phone functionality tacked on afterwards.
(I don't adjust the settings whilst driving btw, far too fiddly for me.)
|
Clue in the title. IPHONE. Not I applications, or Irecorder. It's a phone.
I think the reason why Mr. Loophole is so successful, might be because the BIB feel that beccause they've hooked a "celeb", footballer or high profile person, they deliberately offer a way out for them to allow a loophole option into the equation. Something that isn't applied to you or me.
How many times has this legal expert got off other celebs and footballers on "technicalities". Too many to be a coincidence IMO.
|
I wonder why it was important enough to Carr to bring in this lawyer to get him off.
What's the penalty for driving while using a mobile?
I can't see that a financial penalty would be any problem to Carr, so is there a problem with accrued points? If not, why all the fuss?
|
Most laws are not that well written and lots of charges can be dismissed, either thru procedural errors by the police or CPS, or poor definitions and terminology. A modern phone is also a camera, a caculator, a picture and music library, and a dictaphone, which these functions is it illegal to use? Answer - it costs you £1k pounds an hour via Mr Loophole to find out!
|
|
At the end of the day, what he did wasnt illegal. Right and wrong are only distantly related to the rule of law - anyone see that burger eating story? Priceless.
|
|
So it's not OK to use an iPhone to check the fuel prices because it's a 'phone', but OK to use an iPod touch to check the fuel prices, or with Skype or Yahoo messenger? :)
|
Didn't think it worth a new thread but decided it was topical enough for this one. If mods disagree fair enough, bin it or whatever.....
;-)
Just been out in the car. Wife in back seat, son in front. Me driving, phone linked to Bluetooth in its new cradle. Ticketty boo legality-wise.
Wife asks to borrow phone to make a call from where she is sitting in the back seat. I pass her the phone. She makes her call. I probably should get at least community service for that I expect. Now if I'd passed her a similar sized tin of sweets...........
Its all getting very silly.
|
|
Alas the law, with all its frailties, was brought in because too many people were too stupid to understand that 'using' mobiles whilst driving was too distracting and causing too many accidents. Some still find that too difficult to understand.
|
was cycling along a busy straight road in N. London a few days ago. Doing about 12 mph, the median cycling speed. Up to 2 years ago, it would have been a driving journey, but on a Friday afternoon cycling is simply faster and more fun....
As I went past a turning on my left , a transit tipper was about to turn right, he braked late on when seeing me , but I saw he was yacking on the phone with his right hand , while working the gears with his left. I held out one hand to my ear and pointed at him holding up three fingers to show ' 3 points ', which I also mouthed....
the Chav at the wheel exploded into fury , his face contorting and presumably expletives emerging - probably amused his interlocutor. I had a hill coming and half expected him to come tearing after me. 5 mins later , now going downhill, saw the biggest loaded earth moving lorry turning sharply left uphill , whilst holding his phone , and of course too many selfish car drivers to even recall all doing the same
Where are the coppers ?? I have only seen one example of a mobile phone ' trap ' - I know it was because I'm nosy and so I asked them.
|
I think the reason why Mr. Loophole is so successful might be because the BIB feel that beccause they've hooked a "celeb" footballer or high profile person they >>deliberately offer a way out for them to allow a loophole option into the equation. >>Something that isn't applied to you or me.
Spood, don't be so daft.....if you were going to let a 'celebrity' off....you'd give them a verbal warning and not put pen to paper in the first place....why bother issuing a ticket, going back to the nick and writing up the evidence and putting it in the Crininal Justice System if your intent was to give them a way out?
if we could all afford Mr Loophole, we'd all be able to wriggle off many things...although as stated by someone else I can't see the point of paying someone a £1,000 per hour to get off a £60 fine.
The standard of evidence attained for an FPN is going to be considerably less than a serious criminal offence....that's the way it is, there's no conspiracy involved....minor offences have minor attention to detail, if it were any other way you'd be spending forever preparing the minor case for court and wouldn't be available at all to patrol for other offences
|
WP
Why can't yourselves (BIB) or the CPS not see the obvious points that could let people off. Why charge in the first place if you know people like him will use the loopholes against you.
I too can't see how his fees outway any fine, but this load of points could have cost him his license, hence the fight.
Why couldn't the CPS not contend the fact he was not in control fully of his vehicle whether it was a phone, a recorder or a banana.
As for bananas, Mr. Loophole makes chumps out of the legal fraternity, yourselves included. I suppose we pay peanuts (CPS) we get monkeys!
|
|
Last para strikes me as a bit naive and insulting Spood. The loopholes are in the way the legislation is drafted, not they way it is enforced or prosecuted. I can imagine a much longer thread from if they had decided not to prosecute just in case it fell through a loophole. Or maybe I'm missing your point.
Edited by smokie on 19/10/2009 at 00:34
|
Making using a hand held mobile a specific offence was just so that they could give out easy £60 penalties and with easy evidence via the mobile records.
If the £60 per pop tickets were that lucrative you might think they'd have Coppers, or even suitably empowered CEO's, on bikes in London traffic queues.
|
...makes chumps out of the legal fraternity, yourselves included. I suppose we pay peanuts (CPS) we get monkeys!...
The CPS lawyers I see prosecuting cases in crown courts are routinely outwitted by barristers - it really is an unequal contest much of the time.
As regards paying peanuts, I think CPS lawyers can be on up to a grand a week - and they're still hopeless.
|
Just wondering has anyone ever been done for changing stations on the car radio ?? so with my hard wired in bluetooth all I have to do is press a knob and I can hear and talk with both hands free to light a cigarette and/or open a pack of sweets.
Also why if all this is too dangerous, do the powers that be allow drive thru food outlets, for anyone driving solo ?? surely thats aiding and abetting
|
>>why ... do the powers that be allow drive thru food outlets, for anyone driving solo ??
You're supposed to stop to order the food, pay and collect it.
Though it does rather beg the question of why people have been done for phoning, drinking from water bottles etc. while stationary.
|
|
The drive thrus are on private land, I doubt there's anything the gov could do!
|
.. doubt there's anything the gov could do!...
Rely on the common sense of the citizen?
|
He is rich enough to pay for a hands free - why didn't he?
Just like the pratt in the Cayenne turbo that pulled out of the Belfrey last week and followed me to Bassets Pole with his phone held to his ear . . . . can't have been that a hands free kit was too expensive for him.
They just don't care about anyone else.
One commedian who will go the same way as Ross - the don't watch list.
|
Just like the pratt in the Cayenne turbo that pulled out of the Belfrey last week and followed me to Bassets Pole with his phone held to his ear . . . . can't have been that a hands free kit was too expensive for him. >>
Oh dear, you've misunderstood.
What you saw in your rear view mirror was a talented and wealthy comedian dictating the jokes for his next gig.
|
Though it does rather beg the question of why people have been done for phoning, drinking from water bottles etc. while stationary. >>
in reply to Manatee:
Could it be that these drivers have been seen to be careless to an extent that it was necessary for plod to charge them?
Edited by jbif on 21/10/2009 at 12:33
|
|
|
Come on then so what was the gag?
"what has a comedian who got caught using his phone whilst driving, and a firework got in common?"
"they were both let off"
Far funnier than one of his jokes, IMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
