View Full Version : Remember the 122mph biker
...did it deserve 6 months prison?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/7918212.stm
I don't think so.
kwak zzr
02-03-09, 01:21 PM
thats the UK justice system for ya!
Luckypants
02-03-09, 01:24 PM
Not worth a spell in prison. Nothing bad happened. Still, whoever advised him to plead guilty to the dangerous driving charge needs to be there with him! Speeding is NOT dangerous driving.
It is a sad indictment of how motorcyclists are viewed by the judiciary.
SoulKiss
02-03-09, 01:27 PM
And if you actually kill someone you only get 12 weeks
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/7909510.stm
If you kill 6 people then its only 2 months for each of them.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/02/17/grandfather-slams-death-crash-jail-sentence-for-lorry-driver-paulo-da-silva-115875-21129808/
Should be grounds for an appeal I think.............
timwilky
02-03-09, 01:34 PM
No it is disproportionate sentencing. Nobody suffered any injury or loss as a result of his riding. Yes he was a numpty doing it with his lad on the back.
He should to appeal his sentence, and tell us who his solicitor was so we know never to use them. Guilty of speeding, if he been doing it on a restricted road then possibly also of dangerous driving. but on an NSL no way unless his speed had led to an accident.
The news today harped on that the lad had no gloves/ or protective trousers. So what the law does not require them. Yes I would insist my pillions are adequately protected. but the lad had the only mandatory thing a helmet.
Warthog
02-03-09, 01:34 PM
And if you actually kill someone you only get 12 weeks
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/7909510.stm
If you kill 6 people then its only 2 months for each of them.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/02/17/grandfather-slams-death-crash-jail-sentence-for-lorry-driver-paulo-da-silva-115875-21129808/
Should be grounds for an appeal I think.............
Pff that really annoys me. Such inconsistency!
Plenty of non-custodial options available, too harsh I think. He caused no actual harm or loss to anyone. It's time the jury recommomended the sentence and not leave it all the out of touch judges.
missyburd
02-03-09, 01:46 PM
I was just trying to find my old thread, beat me to it though Ed :cool:
I think the prison sentence is a bit steep but the 18month riding ban I'd have to agree with. The sentence is excessive, I'm sure he's well aware he was in the wrong.
SoulKiss
02-03-09, 01:48 PM
I was just trying to find my old thread, beat me to it though Ed :cool:
I think the prison sentence is a bit steep but the 18month riding ban I'd have to agree with. The sentence is excessive, I'm sure he's well aware he was in the wrong.
Will only be a 12 month ban by the time he gets out...........
dizzyblonde
02-03-09, 01:57 PM
witch hunt scapegoat syndrome etc.
Don't agree with him speeding, but we alreaady covered that in the original thread. Defo not an appropriate punishment for speeding. Granted his lad should have been wearing gloves etc, but like Tim said its only mandatory to wear a lid.
yet another victim of the 'rides bike' must be seen as being made an example of
At worst a ban would've sufficed. I wouldn't take one of my kids over the speed limit, but more because of the missus than the law really. She would be much worse, she went mental when I took my 8 year old down the A2 to my dad's and I was SUPER cautious.
shifter
02-03-09, 02:12 PM
Looking at the video I'd never have said that was 122, the Fiesta that appears in shot in the last few frames looks like it's going just as fast.
Pathetic.
How do some of these judges get into power.
Another embarrasement for the UK court system.
Now wheres that girl I planned to rape. Thats ok, i'll get a community service or something.
(note im not actually going to rape anyone, figure of speach before the PC brigage come mouthing in).
Ceri JC
02-03-09, 02:43 PM
"Sentencing Bennett, the judge said that if he had lost control of the bike it would have become a "missile". "
...but he didn't did he and the bike didn't become a missile did it? What exactly does the judge think would have happened at 122mph that couldn't have happened at 70mph? Using what could happen if you lost control of the vehicle to justify the sentence seems most foolish.
What a waste! I thought the prisons were supposed to be full since they're releasing dangerous criminals to clear space. Also, it was my understanding that you only went to prison in order to protect the public, if he's banned then he's no danger. I'd have thought a 6 month ban, a bit of community service and a bikesafe course would have been more appropriate.
The law is an ass.
Yer this is wrong, take away his license and a fine, sure but sent to jail for 6 months is way to harsh. People do hit and runs in there car and don't do that long if any.
Very messed up system we have.
Bluepete
02-03-09, 02:51 PM
The sentencing is a joke, but so is the decision to charge him with Dangerous Driving in the first palce.
SoulKiss
02-03-09, 02:53 PM
The sentencing is a joke, but so is the decision to charge him with Dangerous Driving in the first palce.
What would you have done/recommended in that situation? (genuine question - just seeing how opinions differ)
Should have been 3 points, £60 fixed penalty.
That's what I got
murder
rape
gbh
faurd
arson
robbery
wot u in for mate ?
speeding...........................??????????????? ????????
kill any one ?????????
no...
humm....
no one will belive him.
FXXK ME ............. i also speed sometimes .... better stop or go to JAIL..
WTF ... the law is as ASS, they say... :smt104
i know now why..
Bluepete
02-03-09, 02:56 PM
What would you have done/recommended in that situation? (genuine question - just seeing how opinions differ)
It's not my decision. The CPS do that now.
122 mph
kiddy on back
mindless.
sentence, 6mth mindless also.
we all speed, knowing when where and conditions are the key. one bump at that speed and that kid is airbourne.
i dont agree with the custodial at all. i would say he should never be allowed to take a pillion though. maybe this could be a discussion in its self?
with considering his son wasnt wearing anything protective and it was soaking wet it probably wasnt the best thing to do and did deserve something bad but didnt deserve 6 months.
chompyyyyyyyyy :cyclopsani:
Heard it on the radio....pretty rediculous really.
I often worry when having a play on the bike that I could quite possibly end up in jail.....this just proves the fact......Its not even that fast.
SoulKiss
02-03-09, 03:06 PM
It's not my decision. The CPS do that now.
Ahh I would have tought that the Officer observing the events would have some kind of say in it, being as they were the one that actually saw what happened.....
Ahh I would have tought that the Officer observing the events would have some kind of say in it, being as they were the one that actually saw what happened.....
me too
i have been pulled for speeding a handfull of times (in car) over my 17years of clean driving. i state clean because i have never had any points/fines. in each case these cops have 'let me off' (thankfully) i think due to the facts, i am no wide boy (never been) and positvely polite. car 100% safe and roadworthy. one thing one cop did say though was that he was going to check that i had handed my documents in, and if anything was out of line he would then pursue the speeding factor, 66 in a 50, east lancs rd.
this was this cop's discretion.
any cop, chef or courier witnessing a bike tearing past with a (aww luck at the size at that kid on the back) would be in total disgust, thats why 'that' cop did what he did. that deserved more than a ticking of at the side of the road.
please dont think i am condoning the sentence, i am not, no way.
(aww luck at the size at that kid on the back) would be in total disgust, .
I thought the kid was about 14 :confused: Hardly to ickle to hold on :???:
speedplay
02-03-09, 04:00 PM
Should have been 3 points, £60 fixed penalty.
That's what I got
I was caught on the M5 just outside Exeter waaaaay back when I had my fiesta rs turbo, the copper claimed that he had followed me from plymouth averaging 96mph.
This was obviously rubbish as I hadnt even been to plymouth.
Still got 9 points and a 1 grand fine though.
Thats Devons policy for road "crime".
BUt I guess the judge passed sentence, felt happy about his life and went back home to his sister....:rolleyes:
kwak zzr
02-03-09, 04:04 PM
2 or 3 seconds twist of the wrist and now you're a hardened criminal.
I thought the kid was about 14 :confused: Hardly to ickle to hold on :???:
my missus is nearly forty and she at times struggles to hold on, the point i was making if that bike would of bounced (issue being the kids weight) or the kid got distracted with kak in his eyes or turned quickly to look at anything!
120 no gloves wind and rain factor hitting his 'manly' fingers, mind bending!
i wince at any biker though without gloves!
Biker Biggles
02-03-09, 04:27 PM
2 or 3 seconds twist of the wrist and now you're a hardened criminal.
What you do in private is your affair:D:rolleyes:
jamesterror
02-03-09, 04:29 PM
I think prison isn't necessary, from the video I've just watched on TV I wouldn't see "dangerous driving", I could argue it is dangerous in the rain, however as you seen him cornering he looks in control, and I'm sure if he didn't have confidence in his bike and himself, he wouldn't ride at them speeds, also the fact hes "an experienced rider", however the only thing I would do him for if I was the judge is excessive speed.
A ban would have been plenty. (I'd say fine but its just a money making scheme for the government which I disagree with :) ).
kwak zzr
02-03-09, 04:31 PM
What you do in private is your affair:D:rolleyes:
yea should keep that to myself really :smt040
£30 & no points if your caught with your numberplate "fallen off" iirc ....
:D
2 or 3 seconds twist of the wrist and now you're a hardened criminal.
i've been breaking the law since i was about 13 then
i've been breaking the law since i was about 13 then
BH you're fast, man;)
BH you're fast, man;)
taken years of practice to be this quick y'know...
Alpinestarhero
02-03-09, 05:13 PM
6 months for him
12 weeks for the guy who was convicted of dangerous driving after police found he had been texting on his mobile phone whilst travelling down a motorway (the texting had nothing to do with the crash he was involved in btw)
hmmm
I gotta say, i get really really paranoid when im out riding. Any speed above 90 mph and i feel edgy and slow back down. I cant do it, i cant do triple figures on my own, and even in the company of others im relcutant.
hence why i cant justify buying an R1....when my SV has more engine performance than I'm scared to use
£30 & no points if your caught with your numberplate "fallen off" iirc ....
:D
If I ever had problems with cameras it is what I would resort to, but I've always been stopped by the rozzers so it would only have counted against me up to now.
What?!
Did anyone hear about Lord Nazir Ahmed who got 3 months for dangerous driving. (there was a fatality involved) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7795234.stm i cant find the actual story but theres a reference to it there.
SoulKiss
02-03-09, 05:24 PM
What?!
Did anyone hear about Lord Nazir Ahmed who got 3 months for dangerous driving. (there was a fatality involved) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7795234.stm i cant find the actual story but theres a reference to it there.
Erm post #4 of this thread (http://forums.sv650.org/showpost.php?p=1804402&postcount=4) perhaps :smt040
John 675
02-03-09, 05:35 PM
I'm going to disagree somewhat folks.. All it needed was a thick patch of diesal and the kid could be dead..
122 which let's face it was probably more, in the rain, with no leathers protecting a 6 year old... The guy is stupid and there are far too many retarded riders that make life **** for the rest of us.. So screw him and good ridance one less muppet on the road. You speed I speed FACT buy who speeds in the rain with there child or partner who is wearing no protection what if the " what if " actually happened.
maybe the judge imprisoned him for being so retarded and putting his childs life an unnesisary risk. May seem harsh but you wouldn't have the same opinion if he crashed... You would of called him every name going. . Remember people like him contribute to all bikers been branded a prats!!
Flamin_Squirrel
02-03-09, 07:09 PM
IThe guy is stupid and there are far too many retarded riders that make life **** for the rest of us..
Disagree. There will always be those that go too far - the retards are those that fail to realise this and punish everyone for it. The 'what ifs' are just assessments of risk, and throwing an otherwise law abiding person in prison when no harm was done because his and the judges assessment of risk differ is madness.
Mighty Boosh
02-03-09, 07:28 PM
I think prison is way way waaaaay too harsh.
Points, ban, fine, retest, attending a course justified, but prison.:confused:
I think the judge was as irresponsable in his sentencing as the biker was speeding.
Dave20046
02-03-09, 08:04 PM
I really want to kick the **** out of whoever's responsible for that sentence. (meh I'll only get a community service order)
John 675
02-03-09, 08:05 PM
Disagree. There will always be those that go too far - the retards are those that fail to realise this and punish everyone for it. The 'what ifs' are just assessments of risk, and throwing an otherwise law abiding person in prison when no harm was done because his and the judges assessment of risk differ is madness.
Oh come on dude... Taking a six year old child who has probably only just learnt to wipe it's backside on a post 1k motorbike with no protective gear at 100+ in the rain.. How many assesments of risk do you need to take before it's decided that this guy created a serious risk..
Traveling at 52 miles an hour over the speed limit.. Fair enough ban, fine, retest etc etc
But carrying a young boy who unless was seriously tall probably couldn't sit to a bike securely with no decent protection?? Are you serious??
And stop me if I'm getting this all screwed up... Just because no one got injured this time they should easy??
Bottom line is that guy put the safety of his child at risk.. Which is unforgiveable as I'm sure the child mother would agree with. As would you if it was any of your own.
If he was on his own I would +1 every post and he wouldn't be in prison.
Just because it didn't happen doesn't out weigh the fact that the guy didn't consider that it could of.
Flamin_Squirrel
02-03-09, 08:13 PM
Oh come on dude... Taking a six year old child who has probably only just learnt to wipe it's backside on a post 1k motorbike with no protective gear at 100+ in the rain.. How many assesments of risk do you need to take before it's decided that this guy created a serious risk..
Traveling at 52 miles an hour over the speed limit.. Fair enough ban, fine, retest etc etc
But carrying a young boy who unless was seriously tall probably couldn't sit to a bike securely with no decent protection?? Are you serious??
And stop me if I'm getting this all screwed up... Just because no one got injured this time they should easy??
Bottom line is that guy put the safety of his child at risk.. Which is unforgiveable as I'm sure the child mother would agree with. As would you if it was any of your own.
If he was on his own I would +1 every post and he wouldn't be in prison.
Just because it didn't happen doesn't out weigh the fact that the guy didn't consider that it could of.
The kid is/was 14.
fizzwheel
02-03-09, 08:16 PM
The kid is/was 14.
Which I would wager means that he was tall enough to get his feet on the pegs, He's wearing a helmet which is all the law requires....
I wouldnt have done it, but then its his child and his choice. If he deems that an acceptable risk, I'm not about to tell somebody else how to bring up their child.
Dave20046
02-03-09, 08:18 PM
yeah his risk assessment might have been lousy lyle but worse than a murderers risk assessment? I see where you're coming from and I wouldn't have done it but being locked up for it?? Only thing I can think of is that there's more history to this and the media ar trying to hide it to make for a juicier story. i.e he's got an appalling record, he had other charges waiting etc.etc.
speedplay
02-03-09, 08:38 PM
I agree its a bit harsh and that the prison space could be put to better use BUT...at the end of the day, the limit on that stretch of road is 60mph from memory we all know theres a risk of a penalty of some sort if and when we speed.
Regardless of if he had a child on the back or not, he still decided to break the law by speeding and now has to live with the penalty.
If he was doing 60mph in a 30mph limit in the wet, theres a chance the penalty would have been similar.
He admitted he had broken the law, He will now have to pay the price for it.
Its not like hes going to be hanged for it.
John 675
02-03-09, 08:39 PM
The kid is/was 14.
Which I would wager means that he was tall enough to get his feet on the pegs, He's wearing a helmet which is all the law requires....
I wouldnt have done it, but then its his child and his choice. If he deems that an acceptable risk, I'm not about to tell somebody else how to bring up their child.
well in which case I stand corrected and humbled.. Maybe I should put more effort in my Reading before becoming so opinionated in future.. Still think the guys silly though LOL...
It's quite funny actually because I wondered why no one seemed bothered... Because the kid wasn't a child!!
Il get my coat...
Dave20046
02-03-09, 08:39 PM
I agree its a bit harsh and that the prison space could be put to better use BUT...at the end of the day, the limit on that stretch of road is 60mph from memory we all know theres a risk of a penalty of some sort if and when we speed.
Regardless of if he had a child on the back or not, he still decided to break the law by speeding and now has to live with the penalty.
If he was doing 60mph in a 30mph limit in the wet, theres a chance the penalty would have been similar.
He admitted he had broken the law, He will now have to pay the price for it.
Its not like hes going to be hanged for it.
probably raped though.
speedplay
02-03-09, 08:47 PM
probably raped though.
He may think twice about his actions in the future then...
"Will i be F***ed if this goes wrong? = probably"
Dave20046
02-03-09, 08:52 PM
He may think twice about his actions in the future then...
"Will i be F***ed if this goes wrong? = probably"
No one would expect a custodial sentence though would they so the risk seems worth it. This is the exact reason he got it I suppose...still BS though. If it was a car I'd understand it a bit more.
maviczap
02-03-09, 08:53 PM
It's not my decision. The CPS do that now.
Theirin lies the problem, read this story about a cyclist who was killed by a driver. The driver was never charged after the CPS decided not to prosecute.
So you can get away with killing someone but you can't get away with not killing someone
http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2040153_anthony_maynards_father_questions_cps_deci sion
I don't condone this riders actions but jail for not kiling someone?
Dave20046
02-03-09, 09:02 PM
The CPS are morons. As has already been referenced lord ahmed (I think) 'performed a sex act on himself before losing control of his car on the motorway killing someone' Basically he was cracking one off at 70+mph, stupid effing country. Or that terrorist scum that got the comp for being investigated. Where as my uncle smacked a mugger (that turned out to be 17) and just escaped prison. grrr gettin riled.
Which I would wager means that he was tall enough to get his feet on the pegs, He's wearing a helmet which is all the law requires....
I wouldnt have done it, but then its his child and his choice. If he deems that an acceptable risk, I'm not about to tell somebody else how to bring up their child.
+1. I bet the kid enjoyed it hugely. It's way over the top.
He may think twice about his actions in the future then...
Doubt it, he could get in a car, DUI with no insurance/tax/mot or license and kill a few people (forget the specific story) and get nothing more than a fine.
The problem was he was partially obeying the law.
Next time he will simply ride with false plates.
Based on this ruling, someone that actually kills another person using a motorbike/car with excessive speed should get epically long sentence ya?
Will they?
no.
maviczap
02-03-09, 09:44 PM
Doubt it, he could get in a car, DUI with no insurance/tax/mot or license and kill a few people (forget the specific story) and get nothing more than a fine.
The problem was he was partially obeying the law.
Next time he will simply ride with false plates.
Based on this ruling, someone that actually kills another person using a motorbike/car with excessive speed should get epically long sentence ya?
Will they?
no.
+1
Flamin_Squirrel
02-03-09, 10:08 PM
He may think twice about his actions in the future then...
"Will i be F***ed if this goes wrong? = probably"
Justice should be based on many factors, but one of those is that it attempts to prevent more harm than it causes. In this case it's trying to prevent lives being ruined by accidents, but look at the repercussions of the sentence. The man's ruined, he'll lose his job and all his family are going to suffer for it. All for a 'what if'?
If we locked up everyone for a 'what if' you'd end up destroying more lives than those affected on the roads, it's madness.
The CPS are morons. As has already been referenced lord ahmed (I think) 'performed a sex act on himself before losing control of his car on the motorway killing someone' Basically he was cracking one off at 70+mph, stupid effing country. Or that terrorist scum that got the comp for being investigated. Where as my uncle smacked a mugger (that turned out to be 17) and just escaped prison. grrr gettin riled.
:smt040 He was only texting :lol:
Someone completly different was having a:toss:
Dave20046
02-03-09, 10:16 PM
:smt040 He was only texting :lol:
Someone completly different was having a:toss:
Ah was that someone else. I read one somewhere about a road killer 'performing a sex act on himself'
i wonder.......
has anyone been convicted of driving a car at daft speeds....
got to be someone here who knows.
then the guy who went to prison for modifying his land rover, being charged with the unithinkable.
what ifsssssssss
then the guy who went to prison for modifying his land rover, being charged with the unithinkable.
what ifsssssssss
What's that got to do with what ifs? He killed a lot of his family :???:
Reminder - our 122mph friend hadn't been drinking, was on a NSL road and didn't crash.
Compare with this, also on today's BBC news website, where the bloke had drunk 12 pints, was in a 30 limit, and did crash:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/7919626.stm
the ifsss are the consequences the guy considered before hurtling down a 60 in the wet, thankfully it was not the 'unthinkable' that has occured, the 'unimaginable' has in this case happened and we are all gobsmacked. probably the majority of us agree it doesn't warrant a prison sentence. but come on, let us not get side tracked with this guy's punishment, lets look at the 'real' reason why this guy has had a damn good wakeup call. for any father to show, encourage, thrill or scare there own child into such a 'rush' is just so very very wrong.
my opinion.
it would be interesting to know if 'father' was wearing protective gear.
gettin2dizzy
02-03-09, 11:47 PM
There must be more to this. As it stands, that's just plain ridiculous.
Luckypants
03-03-09, 12:04 AM
Reminder - our 122mph friend hadn't been drinking, was on a NSL road and didn't crash.
Compare with this, also on today's BBC news website, where the bloke had drunk 12 pints, was in a 30 limit, and did crash:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/7919626.stm
The parallels are striking. Both plead guilty to Dangerous Driving. The one where nothing happened except being nicked for speeding got jail, the one that crashed after doing 80 in a 30 ****ed, get a fine.
And the judiciary wonder why we have no respect for them or the 'justice' they dispense. :rolleyes:
Luckypants
03-03-09, 12:06 AM
There must be more to this. As it stands, that's just plain ridiculous.
I'm inclined to agree (pinches self) but cannot find anything to back that up.
Nicky S
03-03-09, 12:50 AM
+1
i second this
JohnMcL7
03-03-09, 01:03 AM
There's no doubt the guy was stupid to do as he did and he clearly doesn't dispute it however there are a few questionable aspects. His speed is obviously recorded at 122mph but looking at the video it's just a very brief ping in poor weather conditions (which affect the laser) at quite an angle, looking at the way he corners and the speed of the other cars it doesn't look like he's doing twice the speed. The lean is very gentle and both the car behind him and the oncoming car appear to be going at similar speeds.
Also I don't understand how he can be punished for the son not having protective clothing on as he met the legal requirements for carrying a pillion passenger. I think it's daft that there's no requirement to wear anything aside from a helmet and as a responsible parent he should have ensured the child was wearing suitable protective gear but really the problem is the law itself as I think it should specify more than a helmet.
The sentencing seems disproportionate as well as it's twice as much as the guy who was convicted from his Youtube videos received and I think the latter was much worse.
John
Balky001
03-03-09, 01:25 AM
I don't think the speed reading is being questioned and the rider accepted he was doing 122. In context with other punishment a custodian sentence is extreme. The way the judge implies he could be a missle if he had lost control whereas the bloke in the car, drunk doing 83 in a 30 was only a 'danger to himself' How??? Anyone could have been hit. It's unfair but prejudice is still alive an kicking on our law courts
so the tax payers have to yet again pay for his 6 month visit. Whilst at home his wife and son have to manage without another income.
I wonder if it will be long before they are asking the system for help, and yet more tax payers wallets are emptied due to a system that is having problems being consistant.
Do you actually get a criminal record for speeding--> Jail ?
Luckypants
03-03-09, 09:50 AM
Do you actually get a criminal record for speeding--> Jail ?
He was convicted of Dangerous Driving, which is a criminal offence. Speeding does not gain you a criminal record.
punyXpress
03-03-09, 06:37 PM
Look on the bright side!
Anyone in the soap / moulding business?
How about getting the HMP franchise for 'busa shaped soap on a rope - other models to be available shortly.
punyXpress
03-03-09, 06:42 PM
Only saw the vid on TV, but it never looks like 120+ to me, nor did I see signs of really hard braking to bring speed down to what looks quite sedate at the bend. Perhaps he just has a penchant for rough company in the showers!
Was it not discussed in the previous thread that the speeding occurred not on the pice of video, but previous to that?
Bluepete
03-03-09, 07:12 PM
No, the video shows the offence.
Don't forget, we don't know what focal length the video camera was zoomed to. It makes a huge difference to how we perceive objects, specifically, a long zoom lens will "compress" the appearence of the image, making the vehicle appear as if it is travelling slower than it is. Conversly, a wide angle lens will make the vehicle appear to be going faster.
This phenmonenon is well known about in photography and is used in all sorts of images to alter the way the image is seen.
It's noticable how many people on here say they don't believe the bike was travelling that fast. The guy riding it did and the evidence of the laser appears to show it to. (that is if you believe that lasers work for speed enforcement, but that's another issue)
Pete
He was convicted of Dangerous Driving, which is a criminal offence. Speeding does not gain you a criminal record.
He was a silly Billy to plead guilty to DD then, speeding is what was caught on camera.
speedplay
04-03-09, 02:44 PM
Do you actually get a criminal record for speeding--> Jail ?
http://www.whitedalton.co.uk/Road-Traffic-Offences/dangerous-driving.html
JohnMcL7
04-03-09, 02:45 PM
Was it not discussed in the previous thread that the speeding occurred not on the pice of video, but previous to that?
The laser reads 122mph in the video, that is the offence.
John
the_lone_wolf
04-03-09, 04:37 PM
The laser reads 122mph in the video, that is the offence.
John
nein, zat ist zee alleged offence, zee video izz zee evidence
und you should nevaaah qvestion zee ausorities...:rolleyes:
JohnMcL7
04-03-09, 04:50 PM
nein, zat ist zee alleged offence, zee video izz zee evidence
und you should nevaaah qvestion zee ausorities...:rolleyes:
I assume you missed my post earlier then?
the_lone_wolf
04-03-09, 04:53 PM
I assume you missed my post earlier then?
i did, it was just a general eye rolling at the scamera partnerships, not meant to be aimed at you in particular:cool:
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.