[Travel] Sentencing for 110mph wankpanzer driver. (Sorry can't find original thread)

[portlock seagull]

A question.

If a middle aged housewife or a 70 year old killed someone on the roads, whilst 3x over the DD limit, with no previous convictions …. what sentence should they receive?

My instinct, but I‘m open to be corrected, is that other than @Stat Brother everyone would not enthusiastically want ‘a throw away the keys’ sentence. But people would if it was a 25 year old male.

Does society and possible the courts have double standards. Although there are sentencing guidelines, judges have a lot of power through mitigation after hearing hard luck and hardship tales.

I’m not sure why age is a factor in these circumstances? If you’re 3x over the limit, and kill someone consequently, you should receive 10-12 years whatever the penalty is regardless shouldn’t you?

 

[1066familyman]

Tragic incident. Made all the worse by the continued woeful sentencing for any car related offences of this nature.

This is odd reporting though...

Bearded Kazem has since had his leg amputated and appeared at Isleworth Crown Court today (Weds) wearing a white t-shirt and black trousers, using crutches.

What's the beard and what clothes he wore to court got to do with anything?

 

[Weststander]

I’m not sure why age is a factor in these circumstances? If you’re 3x over the limit, and kill someone consequently, you should receive 10-12 years whatever the penalty is regardless shouldn’t you?

I’ve an inkling that the middle class/middle age upwards, would be treated more tolerantly by a judge at sentencing.

A side issue, I could be wrong.

 

[1066familyman]

Driving is a really weird one under the law, instead of being guilty and getting a punishment you get warning after warning (points on license).

If someone sat down and rewrote the laws you’d think speeding would mean an actual punishment (lose license for x months/years).

It gets weirder than that.

Have a glance through the job pages and you'll see nearly every driving job still willing to take someone with up to 6 points on their licence, and in some cases, 9 points!

That's really scary to me.

 

[dsr-burnley]

And i suggest that means speeding. 20%* over the limit, go directly to jail.

I think that's excessive. If you get caught in one of those traps, eg. in Liverpool, where the dual carriageway is 40 mph and it's raining and you don't know the road and you're watching the traffic, and then you come to the single block that looks like all the others and you miss the sign that says 30 mph and you get caught by the carefully placed speed trap - is that worth jail?

One problem with speed cameras now is that their intention is mostly to catch the person speeding by mistake, while letting those who speed on purpose and have the equipment to do it, go free. Sending people to jail for harmless mistakes is excessive.

 

[portlock seagull]

I’ve an inkling that the middle class/middle age upwards, would be treated more tolerantly by a judge at sentencing.

A side issue, I could be wrong.

Bias almost certainly does exist, yes, you’re right. Sorry I thought you were saying age and class should be mitigating factors.

 

[portlock seagull]

I think that's excessive. If you get caught in one of those traps, eg. in Liverpool, where the dual carriageway is 40 mph and it's raining and you don't know the road and you're watching the traffic, and then you come to the single block that looks like all the others and you miss the sign that says 30 mph and you get caught by the carefully placed speed trap - is that worth jail?

One problem with speed cameras now is that their intention is mostly to catch the person speeding by mistake, while letting those who speed on purpose and have the equipment to do it, go free. Sending people to jail for harmless mistakes is excessive.

It is.

However it is more definitive so is easier to penalise and prosecute than dangerous driving which is subjective and therefore contestable. Nicked for 41mph in a 40 zone seems harsh. But that’s opinion and facts (it’s illegal) win every time!

 

[Weststander]

Bias almost certainly does exist, yes, you’re right. Sorry I thought you were saying age and class should be mitigating factors.

I explained it badly, I meant a level playing field.

I’ve seen convictions for serious traffic offences before or just clocking up 12 points, where older folk plea it would make them a prisoner of their village/small town, stop them seeing grandkids, you name it. 8,000 drivers a year get away without a ban despite reaching 12 points, one in five offenders!
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money...00-motorists-12-points-avoided-bans-2017.html
Why? All part of the downplaying by society of motoring offences, defence solicitors who’ll do anything and magistrates enjoying their power.

 

[drew]

I think that's excessive. If you get caught in one of those traps, eg. in Liverpool, where the dual carriageway is 40 mph and it's raining and you don't know the road and you're watching the traffic, and then you come to the single block that looks like all the others and you miss the sign that says 30 mph and you get caught by the carefully placed speed trap - is that worth jail?

One problem with speed cameras now is that their intention is mostly to catch the person speeding by mistake, while letting those who speed on purpose and have the equipment to do it, go free. Sending people to jail for harmless mistakes is excessive.

Speeding isn't by accident, it's either reckless (ie not paying attention to your speedo or road signs) or deliberate (ie ignoring your speedo and/or road signs).

 

[portlock seagull]

I explained it badly, I meant a level playing field.

I’ve seen convictions for serious traffic offences before or just clocking up 12 points, where older folk plea it would make them a prisoner of their village/small town, stop them seeing grandkids, you name it. 8,000 drivers a year get away without a ban despite reaching 12 points, one in five offenders!
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money...00-motorists-12-points-avoided-bans-2017.html
Why? All part of the downplaying by society of motoring offences, defence solicitors who’ll do anything and magistrates enjoying their

I explained it badly, I meant a level playing field.

I’ve seen convictions for serious traffic offences before or just clocking up 12 points, where older folk plea it would make them a prisoner of their village/small town, stop them seeing grandkids, you name it. 8,000 drivers a year get away without a ban despite reaching 12 points, one in five offenders!
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money...00-motorists-12-points-avoided-bans-2017.html
Why? All part of the downplaying by society of motoring offences, defence solicitors who’ll do anything and magistrates enjoying their power.

That’s quite a statistic. Tellingly so.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Speeding isn't by accident, it's either reckless (ie not paying attention to your speedo or road signs) or deliberate (ie ignoring your speedo and/or road signs).

Driving with one eye on the speedo and one on the road signs, isn't the safest way to get about. When are you more likely to hit the child running out in the road - when you are watching for loose children, or when you're watching the speedo in case it hits 31?

Obviously you're a more patient person than me. When driving on a motorway, what speed do you aim for? Can't be 70, presumably, for fear of flicking over to 71.

 

[happypig]

A question.

If a middle aged housewife or a 70 year old killed someone on the roads, whilst 3x over the DD limit, with no previous convictions …. what sentence should they receive?

My instinct, but I‘m open to be corrected, is that other than @Stat Brother everyone would not enthusiastically want ‘a throw away the keys’ sentence. But people would if it was a 25 year old male.

Does society and possible the courts have double standards. Although there are sentencing guidelines, judges have a lot of power through mitigation after hearing hard luck and hardship tales.

Drink Driving is one of the few crimes that crosses all social/economic boundaries; you're as likely to see a 70 year old retired bank manager as a 20 year old unemployed person.

I’ve an inkling that the middle class/middle age upwards, would be treated more tolerantly by a judge at sentencing.

A side issue, I could be wrong.

You're wrong. The only time age would make a difference is if there were significant age-related issues that would make imprisonment unduly harsh; don't get me wrong on this, it's expected to be harsh, by overly hars I mean difficult for the prison service to manage (such as someone with complex medical issues).

I explained it badly, I meant a level playing field.

I’ve seen convictions for serious traffic offences before or just clocking up 12 points, where older folk plea it would make them a prisoner of their village/small town, stop them seeing grandkids, you name it. 8,000 drivers a year get away without a ban despite reaching 12 points, one in five offenders!
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money...00-motorists-12-points-avoided-bans-2017.html
Why? All part of the downplaying by society of motoring offences, defence solicitors who’ll do anything and magistrates enjoying their power.

12 points gets you a disqualification. You can ask not to be disqualified by claiming "exceptional hardship", meaning that a disqualification would be more onerous than is usual (losing your job isn't considered exceptional). It should be noted that the reason for exceptional hardship, if accepted by the court, cannot be offered for a subsequent offence.
I have heard exceptional hardship arguments many times and it's as common to refuse them as to allow them.

 

[Weststander]

Drink Driving is one of the few crimes that crosses all social/economic boundaries; you're as likely to see a 70 year old retired bank manager as a 20 year old unemployed person.



You're wrong. The only time age would make a difference is if there were significant age-related issues that would make imprisonment unduly harsh; don't get me wrong on this, it's expected to be harsh, by overly hars I mean difficult for the prison service to manage (such as someone with complex medical issues).


12 points gets you a disqualification. You can ask not to be disqualified by claiming "exceptional hardship", meaning that a disqualification would be more onerous than is usual (losing your job isn't considered exceptional). It should be noted that the reason for exceptional hardship, if accepted by the court, cannot be offered for a subsequent offence.
I have heard exceptional hardship arguments many times and it's as common to refuse them as to allow them.

1 in 5 based on those real stats get out of a ban due to claiming financial hardship.

Seems wrong. Thought should’ve been given as the points accumulated, early doors. And relatively unfair on those not bothering to claim it. Shirley the life consequences of clocking up 12 points are part of the punishment and deterrant.

If you live in a village or have a driving job, think before committing a series of offences.

 

[dazzer6666]

Nah. Crank up the sentencing. These trustafarians driving steroid cars paid for by daddy will think again only when there is clear evidence of a whole lot of painful jail time awaiting if they f*** up. And i suggest that means speeding. 20%* over the limit, go directly to jail.

Beyond that, there is no way of stopping the 'haven't got a clue' from folly. Maybe jail the parents too. Any rich parent buying their feckless offspring a cock car deserves jail time if it goes tits up.

* On a motorway that means more than 84 MPH. Feels very fair to me. But in Faversham with its 20 MPH limit, that means 25 MPH. Well, welll, well. With some of the driving I still see in town....I say....Bring It On!

I’ve recently done a speed awareness course (first offence in over 20 years) - was carelessness on my part, driving home late on a quiet (empty apart from me at the time) road where there was a camera on the edge of a village. Would argue going to jail for it (36mph in a 30mph limit) would be somewhat harsh.

 

[sparkie]

I don't know what manufacturer/model the name 'wankpanzer' refers to but the term is so splendid that I'll give it to my next hooptie.

 

[zefarelly]

As a car driver, I agree, selfish is about right, and it does seem to be getting worse………but there are also a lot of cyclists who don’t cover themselves in glory as well.

Very true.

Given they're allowed on the road unqualified, uninsured and generally ill educated, it's hardly a surprise.

at least we have a good excuse for belittling car drivers.

The sad thing is Darwin award winning fuckwittery is positively defended these days.

 

[zefarelly]

I don't know what manufacturer/model the name 'wankpanzer' refers to but the term is so splendid that I'll give it to my next hooptie.

There are plenty!

2 great examples

matt black Mercedes G wagen . . . On my road, used to take a small dog to the park

White BMW X5 used by a fat lass to drive from Shoreham beach to central Shoreham to work.

and the general classic . . .

Any number of US sized 'Ute's' used by below average height tradesmen to carry a clipboard and a tape measure.

 

[BN9 BHA]

I don't know what manufacturer/model the name 'wankpanzer' refers to but the term is so splendid that I'll give it to my next hooptie.

Clue in the opening post Tweet

 

[Stat Brother]

I’ve an inkling that the middle class/middle age upwards, would be treated more tolerantly by a judge at sentencing.

A side issue, I could be wrong.

I believe when the Wimbledon case comes to court your inkling will be proven correct.

 

[schmunk]

I believe when the Wimbledon case comes to court your inkling will be proven correct.

Well, there may be some different circumstances involved: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/wimbledon-school-crash-driver-seizure-bit-tongue/


(This is from The Sun's "a source", so may need to be taken with salt)