Banned from driving ? Explain !
Discussion
Can any of the resident BiB or anyone else explain this ?
I recall the bloke with the warning sign being banned, but this is even more ridiculous ; as far as I can see the "justice" has absolutely nothing to do with the crime at all.
Is a driving ban now being used as random punishment ?
=======================================================
Six men banned from driving after they were caught hare coursing illegally on farmland in West Norfolk have appealed against their sentence.
King's Lynn magistrates were yesterday due to sen-tence another four members of the gang spotted at Terrington Marsh, near Lynn, but adjourned for the outcome of the co-offenders' appeal.
As reported in the EDP last month, the six men were disqualified until April 1 and fined a total of £4000 after they admitted trespassing in purs-uit of game with 11 lurcher-type dogs on November 17.
The offenders are: Joseph Jefford, 21, of Cambridge; James Crickmore, 24, and William Winter, 27, of separate addresses in Chesterton, near Cambridge; Joseph Lee, 17, of Landbeach, near Cambridge; Matthew Wenman, 20, of Horsham, West Sussex; and Joe Winter, 31, of Cambridge.
They have had their disqualifications suspended until their appeal is heard at crown court on April 7.
The other members – John Jefford, 28, Christopher Jenkins, 19, Henry Lee, 26, all of Chesterton, near Cambridge, and John Lee, 31, of Wellingborough – were all convicted in their absence at the previous hearing.
I recall the bloke with the warning sign being banned, but this is even more ridiculous ; as far as I can see the "justice" has absolutely nothing to do with the crime at all.
Is a driving ban now being used as random punishment ?
=======================================================
Six men banned from driving after they were caught hare coursing illegally on farmland in West Norfolk have appealed against their sentence.
King's Lynn magistrates were yesterday due to sen-tence another four members of the gang spotted at Terrington Marsh, near Lynn, but adjourned for the outcome of the co-offenders' appeal.
As reported in the EDP last month, the six men were disqualified until April 1 and fined a total of £4000 after they admitted trespassing in purs-uit of game with 11 lurcher-type dogs on November 17.
The offenders are: Joseph Jefford, 21, of Cambridge; James Crickmore, 24, and William Winter, 27, of separate addresses in Chesterton, near Cambridge; Joseph Lee, 17, of Landbeach, near Cambridge; Matthew Wenman, 20, of Horsham, West Sussex; and Joe Winter, 31, of Cambridge.
They have had their disqualifications suspended until their appeal is heard at crown court on April 7.
The other members – John Jefford, 28, Christopher Jenkins, 19, Henry Lee, 26, all of Chesterton, near Cambridge, and John Lee, 31, of Wellingborough – were all convicted in their absence at the previous hearing.
Section 146 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 enables the court to impose a driving disqualification on any person convicted of an offence after 31st December 1997. It states:-
146 (1) The court by or before which a person is convicted of an offence committed after 31st December 1997 may, instead of or in addition to dealing with him in any other way, order him to be disqualified, for such period as it thinks fit, from holding or obtaining a driving licence.
Streaky
146 (1) The court by or before which a person is convicted of an offence committed after 31st December 1997 may, instead of or in addition to dealing with him in any other way, order him to be disqualified, for such period as it thinks fit, from holding or obtaining a driving licence.
Streaky
.....and why not A?
Section 146 Power of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 gives the power of disqualification for ANY offence commited after 31.12.97. Remember the chap that was done for warning of a speed trap on foot. he got a ban.
As to the Lurcher Brigade any County Plod will tell you what a bloody nuisnace they are illegally poaching, coursing etc at the same time as gathering intelligence on likely houses to turn over.
There was a time up here there was nothing virtually moving in the fields and hedgerows having been hunted to death.
Disqualification may go some way top stop the burghers moving.
DVD
Section 146 Power of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 gives the power of disqualification for ANY offence commited after 31.12.97. Remember the chap that was done for warning of a speed trap on foot. he got a ban.
As to the Lurcher Brigade any County Plod will tell you what a bloody nuisnace they are illegally poaching, coursing etc at the same time as gathering intelligence on likely houses to turn over.
There was a time up here there was nothing virtually moving in the fields and hedgerows having been hunted to death.
Disqualification may go some way top stop the burghers moving.
DVD
streaky said:
Section 146 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 enables the court to impose a driving disqualification on any person convicted of an offence after 31st December 1997. It states:-
146 (1) The court by or before which a person is convicted of an offence committed after 31st December 1997 may, instead of or in addition to dealing with him in any other way, order him to be disqualified, for such period as it thinks fit, from holding or obtaining a driving licence.
Streaky
So basically, yes
What a f**ked up country we live in.
autismuk said:
Section 146 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 enables the court to impose a driving disqualification on any person convicted of an offence after 31st December 1997. It states:-
146 (1) The court by or before which a person is convicted of an offence committed after 31st December 1997 may, instead of or in addition to dealing with him in any other way, order him to be disqualified, for such period as it thinks fit, from holding or obtaining a driving licence.
Streaky
So basically, yes
What a f**ked up country we live in.
Agreed! Stupidity like this is why I no longer live in the UK.
I dont like hare coursing, but i do not see what the hell a driving ban has to do with commiiting an offence in another area of life.
So someone goes shoplifting and gets a driving ban? WTF is WRONG with the court system???????
Never heard of relevance to the offence?
Morons all of em.
So someone goes shoplifting and gets a driving ban? WTF is WRONG with the court system???????
Never heard of relevance to the offence?
Morons all of em.
I've two views on this.
On the rare occurrence that someone is prosecuted for an offence, very seldom is that person given a punishment that fits their crime. I therefore think adding a driving ban is a good thing.
However, this is only because the legal system in this country is so
ed that people are rarely punished with a fine and/or sentence that fits their crime and creates both a punishment and a deterrent.
So, in an ideal world, a driving ban would only apply to serious endorseable driving offences and other crimes would be dealt with by large fines and proper stays at Her Majesty's.
Unfortunately Bliar has made sure that we do not live anywhere near this "ideal world"...
On the rare occurrence that someone is prosecuted for an offence, very seldom is that person given a punishment that fits their crime. I therefore think adding a driving ban is a good thing.
However, this is only because the legal system in this country is so
ed that people are rarely punished with a fine and/or sentence that fits their crime and creates both a punishment and a deterrent. So, in an ideal world, a driving ban would only apply to serious endorseable driving offences and other crimes would be dealt with by large fines and proper stays at Her Majesty's.
Unfortunately Bliar has made sure that we do not live anywhere near this "ideal world"...
Dwight VanDriver said:Probably, but how does handing out a driving bans guard against actions like that? How does handing out a driving ban encourage respect for the law? It’s not impossible that they turn those of previous good character towards crime, especially if they lose their jobs are lost because of it.
As to the Lurcher Brigade any County Plod will tell you what a bloody nuisnace they are illegally poaching, coursing etc at the same time as gathering intelligence on likely houses to turn over.
I wonder if sentences like this could be considered to be 'cruel and unusual’?
mk6fiesta said:Do these burglars even have licences in the first place? I mean; they have to STEAL the cars anyway. With automated plod guarding our roads, who’s to stop them?
Those of us who live in the sticks are often burgled by scum who drive from town to do it. Driving ban on top of any other sentance? - yes please. Would have far greater effect than a fine or short stay at her majestys.
Agreed, almost all of the crime (and 100% of the car crime) in the small village where my parents live is committed by scum who travel the 20 odd miles from Hull on a night time, nick a car, drive it home and then burn it out.
Im not sure whether these people would actually heed a ban, but its better then giving them 2hrs community service!
Blair’s Britain is too soft; bring back flogging I say
Those who support this might consider this scenario. You could be convicted of an offence completely unrelated to driving and this could be something quite stupid such as not having a TV licence because you just forget to buy one. Or, perhaps, for joining in a protest march against something you feel strongly about but which is anti-gov't (Iraq war, for instance).
From what I understand a disqual penalty could be applied. So, then, you lose your job and your career. Are you happy with this? In other words, a spiteful gov't could use this to prevent the exercising of your democratic rights.
You think I exagerate? Maybe, but this is the thin end of the wedge. Police state coming?
You think it will prevent criminals and burglars from being able to get to and from the scenes of their crimes? That's so naive. Why would a driving ban stop them. It would simnply mean that they are uninsured whilst on their way to and from the scene of crime - big deal for them, I'm sure.
What does the Human Rights Act say about depriving someone of the ability to earn their living for an unrelated offence? I suppose those disqualified in this way can just go on the dole and let us taxpayers pay their bills.
The way we are going in this country we shall have to let the muggers and rapists out of the nick to make room for those caught driving whilst disqualified.
From what I understand a disqual penalty could be applied. So, then, you lose your job and your career. Are you happy with this? In other words, a spiteful gov't could use this to prevent the exercising of your democratic rights.
You think I exagerate? Maybe, but this is the thin end of the wedge. Police state coming?
You think it will prevent criminals and burglars from being able to get to and from the scenes of their crimes? That's so naive. Why would a driving ban stop them. It would simnply mean that they are uninsured whilst on their way to and from the scene of crime - big deal for them, I'm sure.
What does the Human Rights Act say about depriving someone of the ability to earn their living for an unrelated offence? I suppose those disqualified in this way can just go on the dole and let us taxpayers pay their bills.
The way we are going in this country we shall have to let the muggers and rapists out of the nick to make room for those caught driving whilst disqualified.
towman said:
Human Rights Act blah blah blah. If someone burgles my house I would be overjoyed if they lost their job.
Whilst I appreciate the sentiment lets turn it around.
Something happens to a member of your family that incenses you so much you dish out a bit of personal justice. Everyone has a limit and lets say that limit has been breached.
Do you think its right that you should lose your job as a truck driver, something completely unrelated to the motive for dishing out a kicking?
Its lunacy by any other name.
Deltafox said:
I dont like hare coursing, but i do not see what the hell a driving ban has to do with commiiting an offence in another area of life.
So someone goes shoplifting and gets a driving ban? WTF is WRONG with the court system???????
Never heard of relevance to the offence?
Morons all of em.
Fail to pay your CSA maintenance and they can take you to court and guess what?
Get you banned from driving!
towman said:
Human Rights Act blah blah blah. If someone burgles my house I would be overjoyed if they lost their job.
They would not because house burglars are usually professionals or those with no job anyway.
As all burglars are saved from the treat of jail by the advice of the Lord Chancellor, they will not be under threat of losing anything at all!
gone said:
I dont like hare coursing, but i do not see what the hell a driving ban has to do with commiiting an offence in another area of life.
So someone goes shoplifting and gets a driving ban? WTF is WRONG with the court system???????
Never heard of relevance to the offence?
Morons all of em.
Fail to pay your CSA maintenance and they can take you to court and guess what?
Get you banned from driving!
Please tell me that is not true.
Doesnt that sort of entirely defeat the point of the CSA mechanism?
On Monday, the gangsters who shot dead two innocent teenage girls outside a New Year party in Birmingham were jailed for a minimum of 35 years each.
The judge told Marcus Ellis, Michael Gregory, Nathan Martin and Rodrigo Simms that "no society can permit this sort of behaviour to take place without the gravest of retribution."
1) I always thought the "gravest of retribution" actually involved a grave - dug somewhere in unconsecrated ground in the prison in which the condemned was hanged.
2) [with tongue firmly in cheek] - "gravest of retribution" ... and they DIDN'T get a driving ban?!
Streaky
The judge told Marcus Ellis, Michael Gregory, Nathan Martin and Rodrigo Simms that "no society can permit this sort of behaviour to take place without the gravest of retribution."
1) I always thought the "gravest of retribution" actually involved a grave - dug somewhere in unconsecrated ground in the prison in which the condemned was hanged.
2) [with tongue firmly in cheek] - "gravest of retribution" ... and they DIDN'T get a driving ban?!
Streaky
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff