Seat Leon 154mph A11

[agtlaw]

What do you think this deserves? (Assume a clean licence, driving for 3 years)

The offence charged is speeding. This offence carries 3-6 points or a ban of any length. The fine is anything up to £1000 for a non-motorway offence - but that will be determined on the offender's income - so it would be a bit silly trying to guess the fine. I'd anticipate a level C fine.

I like that he pleaded guilty by post. Very optimistic!

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/crime/seat_leon_driver...

[agtlaw]

I might have read somewhere, that he was stopped at the roadside. If so that was never an option.

[agtlaw]

Tim Passmore = Helen Lovejoy.

[agtlaw]

spookly said:

Seems I was talking b0llocks, as this is being prosecuted as speeding.

Maximum ban for speeding is, so far as I can ascertain, 120 days.

The maximum ban for speeding is life

cmagire - I have a very good idea of the outcome, but that's not point of this discussion.

[agtlaw]

Back on topic:

- Should he be disqualified? [the available range is 1 day - life]

- If so, then for how long?

- Why? [What's the point of a ban?]

[agtlaw]

56 day ban and a £250 fine - and as you probably know, the fine was assessed according to his income (as a mechanic).

[agtlaw]

LeighW said:

So, 56 day ban and a £365 fine.

Fine was actually £250.

[agtlaw]

Yes, I'm sure that you've posted some nonsense about 56 day maximum and 120 days.

[agtlaw]

Red Devil said:

LayZ said:

LeighW said:

So, 56 day ban and a £365 fine.

Good result for him, pretty lenient.

Not yet. Suffolk Constabulary has made a formal request for the sentence be reviewed - http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/lakenheath_mecha...

Which can't happen. He should know better.

[agtlaw]

A policeman making up the law - that never happens.

Unlikely that the CPS were involved in this case. Doesn't stop him asking someone sensible before making foolish remarks to the press.

[agtlaw]

Good guess.

[agtlaw]

Fr0dders said:

agtlaw said:

Yes, I'm sure that you've posted some nonsense about 56 day maximum and 120 days.

Source ?

As far as I was aware, lifetime bans were available for the most serious offenses such as Death by Dangerous Driving, but were not given for the offense of speeding. Or are you saying that a lifetime ban is in theory available, although not recommended by sentencing guidelines ?

See s. 34(2) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

Your awareness level is poor. It isn't a theory.

[agtlaw]

Rusty569 said:

Puddenchucker said:

agtlaw said:

I might have read somewhere, that he was stopped at the roadside. If so that was never an option.

Correct, he was stopped at the time.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/motoring/seat_driver_caught...

I was stopped at the roadside on the A19 at 97mph and pleaded guilty by post. So just because its roadside doesn't mean you don't get the option

You've completely missed the point. The posts were about failing to respond to a s.172 notice. Nothing to do with pleading guilty by post.

[agtlaw]

No, that isn't right, it still isn't a theory and clearly you don't understand the process.

Parliament determines the maximum sentence for an offence. Some offences also have a minimum sentence.

The Sentencing Council issues guidelines for sentencers to follow within those parameters. Unless contrary to the interests of justice then the court must follow any relevant guideline.

Parliament has determined that the maximum sentence for speeding is a £2500 fine for motorway offences, or a £1000 fine in other cases. There is also a discretionary disqualification from driving - "for such period as the court thinks fit."

Whilst there is a Sentencing Council guideline for speeding, the guideline does not include a category range for speeds in excess of 110 mph and even if there were one then there is no duty on the court to impose a sentence within the category range.

Edited by agtlaw on Wednesday 3rd August 09:04

[agtlaw]

The longest ban I've had for a single speeding offence is three months. I've also had penalty points or very short bans (7 days, 14 days, etc) where the speed accepted by D was outside of the highest category range for speeding.

My private prediction was 1-3 months and most likely at the upper end of that range. I also predicted a band C fine. Without knowing his income, it's impossible to tell if £250 is band B or C. I started this thread asking what should he get? A few posters said 6 months - which is the minimum ban for repeat offenders. Although my personal view is that would be too long for a single offence, a crown court judge may not take the same view.

Apparently, he lives at home with his disabled mother. I expect that was a significant factor in the court's decision. He's also a mechanic - so there may be an element of needing a driving licence to do that.

[agtlaw]

scubadude said:

IMVHO He should therefore get a longer ban- so it hits him harder, he'll have to buy his mum more taxis and work at the back of a garage doing tyres and sweeping.

That would be punishment element covered - so long as he isn't sacked because of a lengthy ban.

The general purposes of disqualification were expressed by Lord Justice Treacy in a case in which I appeared; R v Backhouse [2010] EWCA Crim 1111:

"An order of disqualification has the purpose of protecting the public … disqualification is also intended to punish and deter offenders and others. A balance, however, has to be struck and the court should not disqualify for a period that is longer than necessary and should bear in mind the effects of a ban on employment or employment prospects".

[agtlaw]

Overall, a lucky combo of weak prosecutor, clerk and bench.

If I were on the bench then he'd be disqualified for at least 56 days and subject to a re-test; a massively underused discretionary power.

Contrary to silly comments in the press, there isn't going to be an appeal. There's also a misguided campaign by an East Anglia newspaper - to increase the maximum disqualification period. Presumably to something in excess of one lifetime.

[agtlaw]

Glasgowrob said:

Quick question for the PH masses


if he had refused to identify the driver would he have been limited to 6 points?

No, and that's not an option when you're stopped at the roadside - as in the instant case.

[agtlaw]

surveyor_101 said:

La Liga said:

He's been sentenced, it's done. If the police felt it was that bad they could have looked at driving standard offences.

People struggle to differentiate risk and outcome. Most road traffic legislation is designed to punish risk and prevent a bad outcome.

I saw the PCC is so upset he has asked the sentacing council to review.

Its mechanics like that who go out a rag customers cars, bit if he had done it in a punters car the rank & file on here would be up in arms.

Whatever an uninformed PCC might say, the SC has absolutely no power to change the outcome. The law permits a lifetime ban, so no point in a newspaper campaign. There is no prosecution right of appeal. Their efforts might be better directed at an internal review of the charging decision.

[agtlaw]

Too late to charge dangerous driving. Also:

"A Crown Prosecution Service spokesperson said it would probably not be able to take action to appeal the case." policeprofessional.com