StressedDave wrote:You base things on .....
waremark wrote:StressedDave wrote:You base things on .....
ETA Post crossed with more specific version from MGF. No reason to suspect inappropriate speed in this case.
StressedDave wrote:MGF wrote:Factors against him from new sentencing guidelines:-
I've been away from it for 5 years now (yay!), so I wasn't up to date on the new guidelines. When I was working, it was incredibly rare to see even a 50% sentence for a guilty plea...jbsportstech wrote:'No reason to suspect inappropraite speed'???? Except witness who saw the vehicle shortly b4 impact claimed he was travleing at, at least 90mph the police officier who investigated the crash said he was suprised by the speed and the level of dribk involed (He was more than twice the limit) also I read someone he did not see the vehicle and did not have time to slow down as he was asleep due to drinking and only having 2 hours of sleep.
The investigating officer can't have been in the job long to be surprised by 90 mph on a motorway and double the drink-drive limit... of course these days the investigating officer is a CID suit rather than a traffic officer.
jbsportstech wrote:Might be worth reading more than just the beeb snippet on the case before commenting on aspects of it as it just shows your lack of knowledge in the particular instance.
Return to General Car Chat Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests