Owzat, The speeding ticket Options

[motormad]

If you are bringing a topic to the forefront of discussion you should supply the relevant main article in your opening post. It's only

a) polite
b.) reasonable.

[biggus_richus]

Over what, 3 points and a £60 fine? What a serious offense that is! If he had 9 points already he would have probably gotten let off without a ban because he would claim hardship from loss of license.

I think he did already have nine points.

But it's really not about the speeding fine any more.

[Weavers Walk]

If you are bringing a topic to the forefront of discussion you should supply the relevant main article in your opening post.

Have to say that I knew what he was going on about. But perhaps for the more 'special needs' amongst us, extra allowances have to be made.

[Andy Capp]

Over what, 3 points and a £60 fine? What a serious offense that is! If he had 9 points already he would have probably gotten let off without a ban because he would claim hardship from loss of license.

If you are bringing a topic to the forefront of discussion you should supply the relevant main article in your opening post. It's only

a) polite
b.) reasonable.

It would also help if people like you would also do a bit of research before firing from the hip.

In an attempt to avoid losing his licence, he got his missus to take the rap. He then spent 2 years denying that he had, and then, only when it become clear he couldn't wriggle out of it, he changed his plea, costing everyone a lot of money in the process.

Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice is a gaolable offence, meaning it is a serious offence. Perhaps you don't mind MPs breaking the law and lying in such a way, but this is a person who we might entrust to represent us in a democratic system.

[lordtup]

I am not entirely sure why we get so irate over the nefarious activities of the " honourable " members of Parliament .
The dust has hardly settled over the expenses scandal and further misdemeanour's comes to light .

Maybe if we shot a few it would encourage a more responsible attitude.

[motormad]

It would also help if people like you would also do a bit of research before firing from the hip.

In an attempt to avoid losing his licence, he got his missus to take the rap. He then spent 2 years denying that he had, and then, only when it become clear he couldn't wriggle out of it, he changed his plea, costing everyone a lot of money in the process.

Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice is a gaolable offence, meaning it is a serious offence. Perhaps you don't mind MPs breaking the law and lying in such a way, but this is a person who we might entrust to represent us in a democratic system.

I have done the research and read the articles.
The story only came to light AFTER an affair and which point the wife decided that as some sort of payback, the speeding thing should now come on. All MPs lie and I think there are bigger fish to fry.
"Perverting" course of justice is one thing for like a murder but for a minor traffic offense, bigger things to worry about in the world.

[Andy Capp]

I have done the research and read the articles. The story only came to light AFTER an affair and which point the wife decided that as some sort of payback, the speeding thing should now come on. All MPs lie and I think there are bigger fish to fry.
"Perverting" course of justice is one thing for like a murder but for a minor traffic offense, bigger things to worry about in the world.

Not all MPs lie, but to treat contempt of court in such a laissez-faire manner would only seek to make it more likely that they would. There shouldn't be a different law for MPs as there is for 'plebs'.

[motormad]

I agree Andy.
I'm just saying that shifting points around in a relationship is something that a lot of people do and to me personally not a major issue.

The fact the MP did it or not is irrelevant, everyone lies, rightly or wrongly. We expect the members in the government to be honest however we have found that consistently to not be true.

This is a bitchy family drama with a pissed-off wife seeking revenge.

[Exhausted]

Not all MPs lie, but to treat contempt of court in such a laissez-faire manner would only seek to make it more likely that they would. There shouldn't be a different law for MPs as there is for 'plebs'.

Just to be clear, there has been no contempt of court. The charge is perverting the course of justice. Both he and his ex missus have been charged so she shot herself in the foot by trying to, and quite succesfuly, ruining the man and his career. She now has to face the same charge as she was considered to be as guilty as he was of the perveting charge. Let's see now, what has she acheived by her vindictive action. She has ruined him and he is now unemployed. Any money for maintenance has gone for a ball of chalk. She may join him in prison if the full weight of the law falls upon the two of them. But she may feel good because she has got her own back on him and his new squeeze. Woman scorned and all that......

Whilst we may feel that taking someone elses points for speeding is a minor infringement, it actually isn't. The whole point of a driving licence is fitness to drive. A person who is a consistent speeder or feels that other points offences don't matter is wrong. The safety of other road users depend on the majority of us driving within the rules and points give an offender an opportunity to modify his/her road behaviour.

Speeding is a fairly minor traffic offence and most of us are guilty at some time, hence the first offence will normally give the offender the opportunity to go on a speed awareness course without points or a fine. But, perverting the course of justice is a criminal offence and will result, in the event of a guilty plea or conviction, a criminal record and normally carries a prison sentence. Obviously as an MP, this is a serious charge and if he thought it through at the time, he would have known that he was risking all to not get a few points on his licence and possibly lose it as he had already accrued nine points. Not a criminal offence but it would have cost him money and judging by the way the MP's laundered their expenses just goes to prove that there is or was an inbuilt financial greed and a lack of responsibility.

[motormad]

Whilst we may feel that taking someone elses points for speeding is a minor infringement, it actually isn't. The whole point of a driving licence is fitness to drive. A person who is a consistent speeder or feels that other points offences don't matter is wrong. The safety of other road users depend on the majority of us driving within the rules and points give an offender an opportunity to modify his/her road behaviour.

It's not though is it?
There are plenty of people who have clean driving licenses who do not speed and who are a COMPLETE DANGER to the population at large.
Likewise I'm sure Lewis Hamilton has his fair share of points and is a far less likely to have an accident than any of us.

My Granddad is the worlds absolute worse driver, he crashed into the back of a bus and said "didn't see it".
I refuse to go on the car with him. Yet he pays pennies for his insurance (or at least paid )

The driving test is driving around Newbury for 25 minutes and then parking at the test centre, it's not hard.

[Exhausted]

It's not though is it?
There are plenty of people who have clean driving licenses who do not speed and who are a COMPLETE DANGER to the population at large.
Likewise I'm sure Lewis Hamilton has his fair share of points and is a far less likely to have an accident than any of us.

My Granddad is the worlds absolute worse driver, he crashed into the back of a bus and said "didn't see it".
I refuse to go on the car with him. Yet he pays pennies for his insurance (or at least paid )

The driving test is driving around Newbury for 25 minutes and then parking at the test centre, it's not hard.

There are always exceptions to any rule but generally, people who have clean licences are competent drivers and if they are not, then the probability is that they will generate points and if they get enough then they will lose it.

I do a lot of miles and don't see as many dangerous drivers as you appear to. My issue, to be honest, is with drivers who have probably only held a licence for a couple of years driving like maniacs and creating mayhem because of their aggression and need for speed. Sadly the statistics on road accidents and fatalities bear this out.

You are duty bound to argue this point so I will leave you to it.

Oh as you need links, here's one for you.

http://www.admiral.com/press-releases/106/...ivers-revealed/

[Andy Capp]

Just to be clear, there has been no contempt of court. The charge is perverting the course of justice. Both he and his ex missus have been charged so she shot herself in the foot by trying to, and quite succesfuly, ruining the man and his career. She now has to face the same charge as she was considered to be as guilty as he was of the perveting charge. Let's see now, what has she acheived by her vindictive action. She has ruined him and he is now unemployed. Any money for maintenance has gone for a ball of chalk. She may join him in prison if the full weight of the law falls upon the two of them. But she may feel good because she has got her own back on him and his new squeeze. Woman scorned and all that......

I think the motive of the woman is immaterial, and her case is now sub judice I believe. He has brought this on by himself. Had he got a ban, he would have been embarrassed, but would still have a careerer. He has shown a contemptuous attitude towards the law. Whether others do it is besides the point.

The lesson is, if you want to be an MP, you can expect to lead an extraordinary life and your conduct, however natural, will come under spot light. If you have affairs or try to duck the law, you will be found out.

[JeffG]

People with clean driving licences demonstrate that they are paying full attention because they see the police car in their rear view mirror. That is why they are safe.

[newres]

People with clean driving licences demonstrate that they are paying full attention because they see the police car in their rear view mirror. That is why they are safe.

That doesn't always work though because police officers have a habit of saying they were following someone when actually they weren't, but that's besides the point.

I don't get the bit about not admitting the offence and the cost to the public purse. So what? That is his right. Both sides use processes and procedures. That is our system.

Neither of the parties come out well, although in my opinion neither should go to prison. However, if one does, both should.

[Strafin]

Have to say that I knew what he was going on about. But perhaps for the more 'special needs' amongst us, extra allowances have to be made.

I spend about an hour a day on the internet looking at news and a few other things of interest, and I used to like giving this forum a bit of that time. The forum used to be quite good but now has about ten regular posters, who think they own it and no new members or different points of view. Imagine for a second that you have not ever been on this forum and read the OP again. It is not at all obvious what it relates to, but if you question you get called "special needs". Imagine that you might have a special needs son or daughter for starters and think about how offensive that could be. Secondly ask yourself how likely you are to contribute to a thread, (again with no link, no summary of the story and no relevent title), when if you ask a question you are ridiculed. You lot who have all the time in the world to go over everything that is happening and think you know everything wont have too much of a problem, but it's not always like that for everybody.

[Exhausted]

I spend about an hour a day on the internet looking at news and a few other things of interest........

......and you missed the Chris Huhne story. When I started the thread I added an explanation, "the speeding ticket". so I thought that it would have been on everybody's list of what's going on. If you didn't understand the thread, I apologise for that but in truth, you could have either waited until it became clearer to you or just ignored it. I don't think there is anyone that claims ownership to the Newbury Today Forum and as you are one of the more prolific posters, I suspect you know that. Apart from the irritating habit of the spellcheckers to jump in at the slightest excuse, it's a quite friendly area for keyboard banter and unlike the pub discussion that takes a wrong direction you are not likely to get a punch on the nose.

[spartacus]

Just to be clear, there has been no contempt of court. The charge is perverting the course of justice. Both he and his ex missus have been charged so she shot herself in the foot by trying to, and quite succesfuly, ruining the man and his career. She now has to face the same charge as she was considered to be as guilty as he was of the perveting charge. Let's see now, what has she acheived by her vindictive action. She has ruined him and he is now unemployed. Any money for maintenance has gone for a ball of chalk. She may join him in prison if the full weight of the law falls upon the two of them. But she may feel good because she has got her own back on him and his new squeeze. Woman scorned and all that......

The whole story is a wonderful reinforcement of the strong bonds that exist within families.

On one hand we have the sweet Mrs H and on the other we have their offspring Peter Huhne also showing his undying love for his father...

Peter’s texts to his dad:
CH: Peter, just to say, I’m thinking of you and I love you very much. It would be great to talk to you, Dad.
PH: f*** off
CH: I understand that I have really offended you but I hope that the passage of time will provide some perspective… I love you and I will be there to support you if you ever need it.
PH: I don’t want to speak to you, you disgust me, f**k off.
CH: Happy Christmas. I love you
PH: I hate you so f**k off.
CH: Well I’m proud and I love you, Dad.
PH: Leave me alone, you have no place in my life and no right to be proud. Don’t contact me again you make me feel sick.

"I HATE you!! You make me sick......."


Much as I'm finding this implosion amusing, I can't help but think of the future.

If I were CH, I would take what's coming on the chin, and do my few months in pokey. Make sure that my debt to society is paid, and that I am on the straight and narrow. I'd count the cost of this misadventure, subtract it from my net worth of 3.5M quid, and crack on.

I'd begin cracking on by:

1. Find a new squeeze. Carina's just not up to much. Possibly ask a friend with 20/20 eyesight to help.
2. Crucify the evil *****-from-Hades ex-wife who couldn't keep her gob shut.
3. Crucify the gobby little sod that calls himself my son. Oxford? Cambridge? Oh no, sunshine. It's McD's or BK for you pal. When you can show some contrition for speaking to me like that, then we'll talk. Until then, sayonara...........

[Andy Capp]

I'd begin cracking on by:

1. Find a new squeeze. Carina's just not up to much. Possibly ask a friend with 20/20 eyesight to help.
2. Crucify the evil *****-from-Hades ex-wife who couldn't keep her gob shut.
3. Crucify the gobby little sod that calls himself my son. Oxford? Cambridge? Oh no, sunshine. It's McD's or BK for you pal. When you can show some contrition for speaking to me like that, then we'll talk. Until then, sayonara...........

I respect much more the apparent dignified and contrite approach adopted by Jonathan Aitken than the rather vengeful method you appear to advocate. Surely text message exchanges cannot give the full story.

[spartacus]

Well Mr Aitkin's ex-wife didn't seem to have quite the same 'woman scorned fury' about her and perhaps he was therefore less inclined to feel the need to resort to revenge. His two daughters also were supportive despite his 'indiscretions'.

It seems Mr Huhne hasn't been quite so fortunate in the family loyalty stakes

[On the edge]

The whole story is a wonderful ...........................

As you've described would make cracking TV; hope you get the film rights!