www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0 2222177 00.html A 42 day ban for doing 90 in a 60. OK for some!
In what way is that 'OK for some'? We'd have received exactly the same punishment.
|
Ah now that would be Meredydd ?do as I say not as I do? Hughes the outgoing ACPO Chair of Roads Policing.
Not his first speeding offence IIRC he has already been nicked for speeding on two previous occasions.
I think the real rub here however is the fact he has been quite outspoken in the past about those that speed, ahem, and the punishments that should be imposed upon them.
Mags guidelines suggest a 56-day ban for an offence of this type, however there must have been mitigating circumstances for ?speedy Meredydd? to only get 42 days.
Hold on though a 56-day ban would mean he would have had his licence revoked and he would have to re take his test.
Ahh it?s all becoming clear now
As always
Mark
|
|
do you have to re take a driving test now after a ban? or just for speeding offences? thanks
|
|
|
|
OK for some in that you or I would not have got off so lightly for exceeding the speed limit by 50%.See a post, after my original one, suggesting that he has been given a ban that will not require him to take another test and that the ban given was below the threshold suggested by sentencing guidelines
|
|
Is this retest after a ban something new I have never heard of it before. A few people I know in the 70s and 80s who had drink driving bans didn't have to have a retest they simply got the licence back after the ban.
|
Regional variations apply, so 90 in a 60 carries guidelines of between 28 and 56 days, (with points/fine).
In both cases that is "up to", so one imagines the magistrates took into account his mitigation plea to come up with the figure they did.
Doesn't look like preferential treatment, and anyway, it would be madness to pass a sentence not justifiable or that was any different to others because of the obvious scrutiny it would receive.
|
|
|
I don't believe there is a requirement for a retest; just that you need to reapply for your driving licence if the ban is more than 56 days. See www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/DriverLicensing/Endo...1
Andrew
|
Sorry Chaps
my error meant re-apply not re-take
Still as they say "once is unfortunate, twice is careless", what would it be when one is nicked "a la Hughes" for the third time :>)
As always
Mark
|
He was caught doing 90 mph in North Wales???????
Surely everyone knows that if you want to speed, North Wales is one place where you will not get away with it.
|
|
|
|
Is this thread saying anything more than "Na na na na na"?
|
Yes. I think it saying that a 3 time offender and 50% over a speed limit has come out of it better the a typical BR member might have. Aside from the fact that he was head of some speeding/Road Safety body as well!
|
A driving instructor who collects six points on his licence faces almost certain removal from the Register of Approved Driving Instructors, on the grounds that he is no longer a "Fit and Proper Person" to teach people to drive. A ban would take away the word "Almost".
As this guy was responsible for road policing I find it incredible that the same does not apply and he has not been told to find alternative employment.
--
|
|
He will face sanction from his Authority. Like most professionals Police Officers face discipline hearings after a conviction.
Edited by Pugugly {P} on 05/12/2007 at 23:19
|
I think he got off lightly, both the length of the ban and the fine, especially after messing the court about.
It does prove though, that exceeding an arbitary speed limit is not necessarily dangerous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It reminded me of the classic headline in "Yes Minister": "Home Secretary Charged With Drunken Driving".
|
and now this...
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7130028.stm
|
He should resign. The hypocrisy of the man beggars belief. He's presided over a massive increase in speed cameras which have failed to improve road safety while repeating the mantra 'speed kills', then being banned for the same offence that he claims to despise.
His statement that he should have been paying more attention to his speed is unbelievable. The difference between driving at 60mph and 90mph is obvious, even without looking at his speedo. If it were a few MPH over I'd have some sympathy, as it could happen to any of us, but 30mph shows it wasn't a simple slip-up, it was deliberate.
Looking at the road as shown on the BBC news last night I can see that 90mph when the road is empty would be perfectly safe, so he clearly was of the opinion that exceeding the speed limit is a safe thing to do given the correct conditions - totally at odds with his official policy.
|
He should resign. >>
He would probably get his full salary to retirement age and a multi-million pound pension pot. He should be demoted to washing the cars in the yard, like Norman Wisdom.
|
|
|
|
and now this... news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7130028.stm
I'm always completely astonished when any Police officer gets done - can you imagine how many must get away with it?
Most jobs have some kind of perk - I get to surf the web when I should be working!
|
My level of sympathy is zero for hypocrites.
But I do love the irony of the fact that he was speeding on the A5 and got nabbed by his often equally hypocritical Welsh compatriots...:-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What's for you won't pass you by
Edited by Stuartli on 06/12/2007 at 13:19
|
|
|
>> and now this... >> >> news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7130028.stm >>
>>
Their memory is notoriouly unreliable.
"I was proceeding along the A5 at 90 mph when I suddenly forgot who was driving at the time of the incident".
|
|
|
|
|
|
