Can't believe you missed this "let-off"

MattBlackBigBoysBMX

Ok, it's from the sun so it might not be true:

"EX-EastEnder Dean Gaffney escaped a driving ban yesterday after speeding at almost 100mph while chatting on a mobile.

A cop saw his Audi TT weave across lanes at 98mph in a 50mph roadworks zone on the M25 in Surrey.

Gaffney, 29, who played street cleaner Robbie Jackson, had his phone to his ear — which can mean a ban or two years’ jail under new laws.

But despite failing to turn up at court, Guildford JPs fined the I’m A Celeb star just £115 with three points for speeding and no insurance. "

Speeding: 3 points
Phone use: 3 points
No insurance: 6 points

Why the hell wasn't he banned?
I can only assume the CPS didn't do their jobs properly, and he probably used Nick "Mr Loophole" Freeman to get him off, like he did when he was caught at 131mph.

Something definitely doesn't add up.

plusgourmande

who gives a schit

redddraggon

plusgourmande wrote:

who gives a schit

I thought you were leaving? You ignorant fool.

spen666

MattBlackBigBoysBMX wrote:

Ok, it's from the sun so it might not be true:

"EX-EastEnder Dean Gaffney escaped a driving ban yesterday after speeding at almost 100mph while chatting on a mobile.

A cop saw his Audi TT weave across lanes at 98mph in a 50mph roadworks zone on the M25 in Surrey.

Gaffney, 29, who played street cleaner Robbie Jackson, had his phone to his ear — which can mean a ban or two years’ jail under new laws.

But despite failing to turn up at court, Guildford JPs fined the I’m A Celeb star just £115 with three points for speeding and no insurance. "

Speeding: 3 points
Phone use: 3 points
No insurance: 6 points

Why the hell wasn't he banned?
I can only assume the CPS didn't do their jobs properly, and he probably used Nick "Mr Loophole" Freeman to get him off, like he did when he was caught at 131mph.

Something definitely doesn't add up.

so what exactly did the CPS not do?

They presented the facts of the case to the court- clearly this was done as he was sentenced for the offences. The fact the journalist reports the facts indicates they were given in court.

Sentencing is for the bench- not for the CPS. The CPS do not play a part in sentencing other than outlining the facts.

The CPS do not recommend sentences or tell the court what should be given as a sentence- it is outside their legal position

dannygcp

Whether it was the CPS not putting together a strong enough case, or the courts being too lenient, the verdict amounts to no more than a gentle slap on the wrist.

The justice system still seems to regard this kind of behaviour as a minor transgression, rather than a potentially lethal crime.

Personally I think people who are engaged in such dangerous driving ought to be charged with attempted murder, and, if convicted, sentenced accordingly. That's the only way to educate the many drivers who still think it is accpetable to speed, talk on a mobile phone while driving, or as in this case do both at the same time.

spen666

dannygcp wrote:

Whether it was the CPS not putting together a strong enough case, or the courts being too lenient, the verdict amounts to no more than a gentle slap on the wrist.

The justice system still seems to regard this kind of behaviour as a minor transgression, rather than a potentially lethal crime.

Personally I think people who are engaged in such dangerous driving ought to be charged with attempted murder, and, if convicted, sentenced accordingly. That's the only way to educate the many drivers who still think it is accpetable to speed, talk on a mobile phone while driving, or as in this case do both at the same time.

Great charge them with attempted murder and see them walk away scott free - surely better to charge an offence you have a chance of getting a conviction on than wasting taxpayers money on charges that are not possible to prove

The reason they are not charged with attempted murder is because it is not attempted murder. No jury in the land would be able to convict of such an offence as none of the elements of the crime of attempted murder are made out.

You might as well charge the driver with priacy on the high seas - you will have as much chance of getting a conviction based on the evidence

flattythehurdler

Priacy on the high seas would be an interesting offence :shock:

spen666

flattythehurdler wrote:

Priacy on the high seas would be an interesting offence :shock:

Arson in Her Majesty's Shipyard is my preferred offence

slowfen

Is that still punishable by hanging??

flattythehurdler

Her majesty's shipyard. Now there's a thought to put you off dinner. :shock: :shock:

MattBlackBigBoysBMX

spen666 wrote:

so what exactly did the CPS not do?

They presented the facts of the case to the court- clearly this was done as he was sentenced for the offences. The fact the journalist reports the facts indicates they were given in court.

Sentencing is for the bench- not for the CPS. The CPS do not play a part in sentencing other than outlining the facts.

The CPS do not recommend sentences or tell the court what should be given as a sentence- it is outside their legal position

I am well aware of court procedure. It looks like sentencing was far below the norm, hence my thoughts.
Why else would such a lenient sentence be given?

spen666

MattBlackBigBoysBMX wrote:

spen666 wrote:

so what exactly did the CPS not do?

They presented the facts of the case to the court- clearly this was done as he was sentenced for the offences. The fact the journalist reports the facts indicates they were given in court.

Sentencing is for the bench- not for the CPS. The CPS do not play a part in sentencing other than outlining the facts.

The CPS do not recommend sentences or tell the court what should be given as a sentence- it is outside their legal position

I am well aware of court procedure. It looks like sentencing was far below the norm, hence my thoughts.
Why else would such a lenient sentence be given?

If you knew the court procedure, then you would not be making such baseless accusations against the CPS.

You are blaming the wrong body ( if there is any blame)


also interestingly you quote that he was done for no insurance but only got 3 points- that is not correct as the points for no insurance are 6-8 points. I wouldn't place any reliance on anything you read in the Wapping Liar

SteveR_100Milers

If I was thinking about getting into my car and driving at 75 mph would that also by definition man I was guilty of conspiracy to murder? And what about the car manufacturers who design cars capable of travelling at illegal speeds?
Does anyone seriously believe that less than 70 mph is somehow "safe" on a motorway. And what about Germany where it's deemed acceptable to drive at 155mph, which is part of the EU? "Attempted murder" simply can't work from an ethical or a practicable legislative perspective.

john ponting

dannygcp wrote:

...
Personally I think people who are engaged in such dangerous driving ought to be charged with attempted murder ... .

Attempted murder of whom?

Qualified people with evidence considered if it was "such dangerous driving" and decided it wasn't. Neither you nor I were there.

and don't forget that this thread started with

Ok, it's from the sun so it might not be true:

Cunobelin

Arson in Her Majesty's Shipyard is my preferred offence

In what way?

To defend?
To prosecute?
To perform?

spen666

Cunobelin wrote:

Arson in Her Majesty's Shipyard is my preferred offence

In what way?

To defend?
To prosecute?
To perform?

"After speaking to my legal adviser I am not prepared to answer that question"

:oops:

Cunobelin

Arson in a Royal Dockyard was the last civilian crime to cease being a capital offence!

As late as 1965 there were Treason, Piracy (with Violence) and Arson in a Royal Dockyard.

It wasn't until 1971 that it ceased to be a capital offence!



Weirder is that the Death Penalty under Military jurisdiction remained until 1998!

spen666

Cunobelin wrote:

Arson in a Royal Dockyard was the last civilian crime to cease being a capital offence!

As late as 1965 there were Treason, Piracy (with Violence) and Arson in a Royal Dockyard.

It wasn't until 1971 that it ceased to be a capital offence!



Weirder is that the Death Penalty under Military jurisdiction remained until 1998!

I think there were still civilian offences carrying death penalty until 1998. I think treason and possibly piracy as well as the Arson one were not finally removed from carrying death penalty until 1998, but I am not 100% sure

Cunobelin

We had a personal issue with this as we had an arsonist at the Royal Hospital Haslar in the early 80's.

When caught there was a lot of discyussion over what he could be charged with because Haslar was technically "Her MAjesty's Dockyard " as a Naval establishment, and the rumour mill was rife with whetehr the death penalty could stioll be applied!

spen666

Re abolition of death penalty

http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.c ... olish.html


Distinguishes between military and civilian offences

seems that 1965 was effective end of death penalty in civilian cases as its use was suspended then and was extinguished in 1969 but not till 1998 for military offences