RE: Gaol for camera trashing attempt?
Thursday 10th August 2006
Bang!A man who attempted to blow up a speed camera was convicted yesterday after pleading guilty to causing £11,700-worth of damage to the device.
Gaol for camera trashing attempt?
Guilty plea as scamera snap betrays explosive user's identity
Bang!
Craig Moore's guilty plea was forced by the fact that, in its dying moments, the camera flashed and captured the perpetrator's number plate -- he'd parked in range of the camera. The number safely stored, the railway worker's store of explosive welding material failed to destroy the camera -- it just jogged it into taking a picture.
The attempt followed the camera having captured him allegedly exceeding the limit on Mottram Road, Hyde, Greater Manchester. He then felt his job might have been at risk as faced a potential 12 points under totting up.
Moore was released on conditional bail pending a sentence. He faces up to ten years in gaol.
Discussion
He hasn't got 10 years, he's been remanded on conditional bail for sentencing.
It's up to 10 years because that's the maximum sentence for criminal damage & pray when has anyone received the maximum custodial sentence for anything ?
Don't look at the headline, look behind it.
It's up to 10 years because that's the maximum sentence for criminal damage & pray when has anyone received the maximum custodial sentence for anything ?
Don't look at the headline, look behind it.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 10th August 10:53
Why didn't he hire a truck, park BEHIND the camera, attach a chain to the supporting arm (bit between the camera mounting post and the actual camera), and yank the thing out of the ground?
Of course, I'd never condone such lawless behaviour.
PS. "Gaol" is the correct English spelling of the American "Jail"
Of course, I'd never condone such lawless behaviour.
PS. "Gaol" is the correct English spelling of the American "Jail"
Edited by flurbyjim on Thursday 10th August 11:45
Edited by flurbyjim on Thursday 10th August 11:48
for parking in sight of the damn thing...
I find myself looking beyond the story and at the man himself.
Here is a guy, a rail worker working for a living, trying to protect that living from being taken away. He is fearful of accruing 12 points. How did this occur? Is he a mad driver or simply caught as most of us now are committing a non-crime i.e. 35mph in a 30mph zone. He attempts an extreme action and gets caught for whatever reasons. His action could have injured or killed himself and others. Police and court time and money has been spent on this incident. Tax payers money i might add. No doubt the scamera was replaced again using tax payers money. This guy may go to gaol or face a large fine or both. Who else will suffer fallout from this? His family maybe.
Why did this happen? Is it right to say the guy should have accepted the rule of law and accrued the 12 points and dealt with it?
Or is the rule of law, as it stands, that which is causing this type of thing?
This is the true legacy of the Scamera.
Here is a guy, a rail worker working for a living, trying to protect that living from being taken away. He is fearful of accruing 12 points. How did this occur? Is he a mad driver or simply caught as most of us now are committing a non-crime i.e. 35mph in a 30mph zone. He attempts an extreme action and gets caught for whatever reasons. His action could have injured or killed himself and others. Police and court time and money has been spent on this incident. Tax payers money i might add. No doubt the scamera was replaced again using tax payers money. This guy may go to gaol or face a large fine or both. Who else will suffer fallout from this? His family maybe.
Why did this happen? Is it right to say the guy should have accepted the rule of law and accrued the 12 points and dealt with it?
Or is the rule of law, as it stands, that which is causing this type of thing?
This is the true legacy of the Scamera.
swilly said:
This is the true legacy of the Scamera.
Yep.
Anytime a law or a government 'initiative' actually encourages others to break different (more serious) laws to protect themselves against said law/initiative, then it can be argued that there is injustice present.
Of course, that's nothing new to most on here...but persuading the government and the rest of the population will be a VERY difficult thing...I never cease to be surprised by the number of people who actually BELIEVE the government crap about speed and cameras!!!
havoc said:
Anytime a law or a government 'initiative' actually encourages others to break different (more serious) laws to protect themselves against said law/initiative, then it can be argued that there is injustice present.
So anyone who perverted the course of justice through witness intimidation (threats to kill) in order to get off a simple street robbery charge would be justified in doing so ?
swilly said:
I find myself looking beyond the story and at the man himself.
Here is a guy, a rail worker working for a living, trying to protect that living from being taken away. He is fearful of accruing 12 points. How did this occur? Is he a mad driver or simply caught as most of us now are committing a non-crime i.e. 35mph in a 30mph zone. He attempts an extreme action and gets caught for whatever reasons. His action could have injured or killed himself and others. Police and court time and money has been spent on this incident. Tax payers money i might add. No doubt the scamera was replaced again using tax payers money. This guy may go to gaol or face a large fine or both. Who else will suffer fallout from this? His family maybe.
Why did this happen? Is it right to say the guy should have accepted the rule of law and accrued the 12 points and dealt with it?
Or is the rule of law, as it stands, that which is causing this type of thing?
This is the true legacy of the Scamera.
Here is a guy, a rail worker working for a living, trying to protect that living from being taken away. He is fearful of accruing 12 points. How did this occur? Is he a mad driver or simply caught as most of us now are committing a non-crime i.e. 35mph in a 30mph zone. He attempts an extreme action and gets caught for whatever reasons. His action could have injured or killed himself and others. Police and court time and money has been spent on this incident. Tax payers money i might add. No doubt the scamera was replaced again using tax payers money. This guy may go to gaol or face a large fine or both. Who else will suffer fallout from this? His family maybe.
Why did this happen? Is it right to say the guy should have accepted the rule of law and accrued the 12 points and dealt with it?
Or is the rule of law, as it stands, that which is causing this type of thing?
This is the true legacy of the Scamera.
Yes and to further add to that Swilly, one has to ask if this man would have ever considered any other type of crime, or is he a victim of his own uncontrollable outrage.
When the law reaches a level that is of an amoral standard, those who stand up to it in this way, however foolishly, have to be admired for their true grit.
They at least, are doing something about it.
jasandjules said:
A slightly different matter. For starters, a crime with a victim, unlike speeding. Secondly, threatening another human with physical violence as opposed to damaging a non-sentient camera.
OK a driver commits an offence of no insurance. At court he steals the original report from the case file in order to get off.
Quite simply the original statement
havoc said:
Anytime a law or a government 'initiative' actually encourages others to break different (more serious) laws to protect themselves against said law/initiative, then it can be argued that there is injustice present.
is complete tosh.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff