£86,000 fine for drink driving
Discussion
Old Merc said:
He was pissed and the Judge is taking the piss. What`s the bet that the people he crashed into will now sue him for £000000000000000`s.
Surely if someone crashed into you, you’d want recompense for you personal injury and uninsured losses. His net worth doesn’t have a bearing on how much they can claim.Edited by KungFuPanda on Monday 16th April 16:26
Presumably that's the output of a standard formula based on income and outgoings.
Reading the report with the 'victim' statement from the driver of the car he hit, it sounds like they're chav scum rolling the wicket for a big pay-day. Look forward to seeing them on the front page of the Wail with obligatory sad faces any day now.
Reading the report with the 'victim' statement from the driver of the car he hit, it sounds like they're chav scum rolling the wicket for a big pay-day. Look forward to seeing them on the front page of the Wail with obligatory sad faces any day now.
Integroo said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
One law for the rich and another for the poor. 
It's the same law. Fines are meant to punish. £300 fine for someone earning 130k a week is not a punishment.He is worth millions so the fine and any "victim" compensation payment will not hurt. Also he will employ a driver 24/7 from now on.
What is going to hurt is the damage to his reputation and future career. Ant & Dec are/were squeaky clean, no smut jokes etc etc. They are/were the golden boys of TV. It could be the end of Ant & Dec ? Only time will tell .
Ant has clearly got some sort of problem,I hope he gets help and can sort it out.
What is going to hurt is the damage to his reputation and future career. Ant & Dec are/were squeaky clean, no smut jokes etc etc. They are/were the golden boys of TV. It could be the end of Ant & Dec ? Only time will tell .
Ant has clearly got some sort of problem,I hope he gets help and can sort it out.
Zod said:
vikingaero said:
With his bank balance, I'm surprised he didn't employ that weasel celebrity lawyer to the stars for motoring offences, Nick Freeman, to get him off on a technicality.
There aren't really any technicalities to get a person off a drink-drive conviction.I went to court about 4 years ago. A guy I'd stopped for running a red light at 3am spectacularly failed the road side breath test. I arrested him and took him back to the station, booked him on and carried out the evidential test, which he also failed miserably. He was bedded down and the early turn charged him for me and he was in court a week or so later, banged to rights surely.
He went not guilty so about 2 months later I was stood in court with some 'specialist' motoring defence brief trying to make my life difficult. His clients defence was that he was drinking the alcohol hand gel from the dispensers that are dotted about the custody area, hence why he failed the evidential test and was charged.
I explain it simply didn't happen, got called a liar, told that I'd left him unattended for periods of time, during which the chap was necking alcohol gel etc.
Things changed once the prosecution wheeled out the CCTV and the 'specialist' brief crawled back into his hole. He'd made up a completely fabricated story and fortunately ended up looking utterly stupid.
Zod said:
vikingaero said:
With his bank balance, I'm surprised he didn't employ that weasel celebrity lawyer to the stars for motoring offences, Nick Freeman, to get him off on a technicality.
There aren't really any technicalities to get a person off a drink-drive conviction.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff