Luke McCormick has 'No Insurance' charge dropped

[clippedgull]

Bailed until September 8th

Luke McCormick, the Plymouth Argyle goalkeeper, has been bailed to appear at Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court on September 8, when he will enter a plea on charges of causing death by dangerous driving and driving with excess alcohol.

The 24-year-old appeared in court for a preliminary hearing over the deaths of Arron Peak, 10, and his eight-year-old brother Ben. McCormick spoke only to confirm his identity and that he understood proceedings.

The family, along with three friends, were on their way to Silverstone racetrack on June 7 when the incident occurred.

A charge of driving without insurance against McCormick has been withdrawn after McCormick produced evidence that he was adequately insured. Prosecutor Robert Price blamed an administrative error for the absence of the footballer's insurance details on the national database.

 

[JJ McClure]

Any of you who wanted him locked up for life fancy any humble pie yet?

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

18 months suspended sentence , 2 year ban and a £500 fine.

 

[Skint Gull]

Any of you who wanted him locked up for life fancy any humble pie yet?

The insurance is a bit of a side issue isn't it really. Driving without insurance makes you a criminal, not any more of a dangerous driver.

The issue major issues of DRINK DRIVING and CAUSING DEATH BY CARELESS DRIVING still remain so I hardly think that this has changed much

 

[Gazwag]

Any of you who wanted him locked up for life fancy any humble pie yet?

just left with the minor offences of being drunk and causing death x 2 driving dangerously then

The victims mother/wife must be grateful

 

[Skint Gull]

18 months suspended sentence , 2 year ban and a £500 fine.

Is this a sweepstake?

 

[JJ McClure]

"one thing that pissed me off is that he had no insurance! why do footballer's think there above the law?!"

"An accident can and will happen but it's no accident to drive when you're pissed and got no insurance, it's not like he can't afford it"

"what a twat, no insurance and proberly get over a £1000 pw so its not as if he cant afford it."

Were just three of the comments on the original thread.

My point then as it is now, is that the law says you are innocent until proven guilty and yet people who don't know the facts want to lock him up and throw aeway the key. What's that you say about a fair trial?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Whatever happens from here the guy's life as he knew it is over. If he's convicted I can't see him ever gracing a football field again due, not only to the ethical issue of a team hiring him, plus the abuse he'd get, especially standing in goal, a few feet from the fans behind him for 90 minutes. Again, assuming he's convicted, he will almost certainly face a prison term and when he's released, he's going to have to try and rebuild a life where few people know him and he can be anonymous.

 

[Gully]

Again, assuming he's convicted, he will almost certainly face a prison term and when he's released, he's going to have to try and rebuild a life where few people know him and he can be anonymous.

...back in goal for Plymouth Argyle then!!!

 

[drew]

Whatever happens from here the guy's life as he knew it is over. If he's convicted I can't see him ever gracing a football field again due, not only to the ethical issue of a team hiring him, plus the abuse he'd get, especially standing in goal, a few feet from the fans behind him for 90 minutes. Again, assuming he's convicted, he will almost certainly face a prison term and when he's released, he's going to have to try and rebuild a life where few people know him and he can be anonymous.

Lee Hughes! At least McMormick didn't run away. Having said that, the case still needs to be proved, especially whether it was his driving that was at fault or someone elses.

With regard to the drink driving, do we know how much over the limit he was? Not condoning it but there is a considerably difference between being just over in the red and being absolutely paraletic and getting in a car. How many of those who immediately shout you shouldn't drink anything have seen people do it and not reported it to the Police?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Lee Hughes! At least McMormick didn't run away. Having said that, the case still needs to be proved, especially whether it was his driving that was at fault or someone elses.

With regard to the drink driving, do we know how much over the limit he was? Not condoning it but there is a considerably difference between being just over in the red and being absolutely paraletic and getting in a car. How many of those who immediately shout you shouldn't drink anything have seen people do it and not reported it to the Police?

Yeah appreciate Lee Hughes, don't how old his victims were (not that it should be relevant, although it surely is to the 'great' British footballing public) but you aren't going back onto a football pitch if you go down for killing two young boys.

Regardless of the alcohol in his system, he's still being charged with dangerous driving and the obliterated state of both cars involved shows that he must have been going like a maniac tbh.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

...back in goal for Plymouth Argyle then!!!

Highly inappropriate, but quality (if predictable!) humour there Gully.

 

[Cian]

Yeah appreciate Lee Hughes, don't how old his victims were (not that it should be relevant, although it surely is to the 'great' British footballing public) but you aren't going back onto a football pitch if you go down for killing two young boys.

The bloke who died was 56.

 

[saltash seagull]

Lee Hughes! At least McMormick didn't run away. Having said that, the case still needs to be proved, especially whether it was his driving that was at fault or someone elses.

With regard to the drink driving, do we know how much over the limit he was? Not condoning it but there is a considerably difference between being just over in the red and being absolutely paraletic and getting in a car. How many of those who immediately shout you shouldn't drink anything have seen people do it and not reported it to the Police?

he was double the limit

the understanding down here seems to be that he had a fall out with his girlfriend and decided rather stupidly to drive home anyone done anything silly like that after an argument?

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

I am sure the guy will have his own life sentance imposed if he has any concsience.

 

[withdeanwombat]

I am sure the guy will have his own life sentance imposed if he has any concsience.

Don't always agree with your views - and certainly not your spelling - but I agree with this.If he is guilty he will be punished according to the law.But he has to live with what happened and whatever people think, that will be a longer and a harsher punishment.

 

[Best Foot Forward]

If he's convicted I can't see him ever gracing a football field again due, not only to the ethical issue of a team hiring him, plus the abuse he'd get, especially standing in goal, a few feet from the fans behind him for 90 minutes.

He would be OK at Withdean then!!

 

[desprateseagull]

this is a tragi case, which may have been avoided if he wasn't (allegedly) drunk.

what i am concerned about is why his insurance details werent on the national database (isnt it sone automatically, precisely for this purpose?), and also what consequences there may be, regarding impending national ID cards- '

'sorry sir, you'tre not on the list- you cant come in' etc.. - what services may people get barred from using, or assumptions of guilt made, even if your quite valid ID / details are at home..?

 

[NMH]

"one thing that pissed me off is that he had no insurance! why do footballer's think there above the law?!"

"An accident can and will happen but it's no accident to drive when you're pissed and got no insurance, it's not like he can't afford it"

"what a twat, no insurance and proberly get over a £1000 pw so its not as if he cant afford it."

Were just three of the comments on the original thread.

My point then as it is now, is that the law says you are innocent until proven guilty and yet people who don't know the facts want to lock him up and throw aeway the key. What's that you say about a fair trial?

That has always been the case, so I'm not sure why this revelation about insurance has rattled your cage. The insurance is, like a previous poster said, a side issue to the court - and doesn't mean much to the dead and probably little to the bereaved.
Innocent til proved guilty is basic fact, but doesn't stop people having an opinion does it? On the news that an alcohol charge is presented, few people can shrug that off as a possible police error.

Anyway, if people aren't supposed to have an opinion about things non yet adjudged illegal - then I suppose you have to shrug off Archer and Belotti as 'legal chancers' and say good luck to them?