Prison for 77 year old "taking son's points"

[recycled]

True -- amazing isn't it how shooting someone in the back as they run away from you is self defence....but lets not go down this road...:bannana:

It is not self defence. It is self offence but they should not have been there in the first place.i wonder how and old man is going to take on two young thugs. Let them run so they can come back tomorrow
How many of us here have been victims of really violent crime where you ended up in hospital for weeks?
The justice system is soft end of story.
It seems to only come down hard on those who commit financial acts against the government. Like they say. cash is King.

Let us not go down this road please

 

[recycled]

My own point is not whether the old man should go to prison or not. frankly i could not care less.
My point is one rule for some and another for the others, e.g police /footy players/ rich people with big lawyers e.t.c. and smackheads who beat pensioners to a stupor for passbooks.
If jails are full as we are saying and there is lack of space, then we need to look at who is going to jail and who is not.
In any civilised world beating or assaulting /burglary is far worse than taking points for someone IMHO so if there is only one cell left in the country, who should be filling it?
Sadly when money is involved, i do not trust the CPS too much.
Believe me i have been at the receiving end of it.

 

[miro]

I figure that grandparents are our role models. Being a model prisoner is probably a good example to the rest of us.

 

[Guy]

The Judge was trying to deter people who might be asked to do this, surely?

Who on this forum, having read about the sentence, would consider doing the same?

Of course there is good personal mitigation, but that's exactly why drug importers often choose penniless pregnant women, telling them they can earn £1000 and won't go to prison if they get caught.

If courts didn't impose deterrent sentences, flights into the UK would be full of penniless pregnant drug mules.

There will be a few worried footballers too, if they read about the case...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6762815.stm

 

[Turbo2ol2]

I always think it's extremely difficult to give a 'What if it were me' type response because usually when the proverbial hits the fan we tend to react in an unpredictable fashion.

If it were me and I had nine points.......

First off, if I NEEDED my licence to provide for my family then I'm letting myself down by accumulating that amount of points. Hand on heart and speaking realistically, I would drive on eggshells way before it got to that state, but there is absolutely.... 100% unequivocal way that I would allow a family member take responsibility for my indiscretions, that to me would be something I just could not imagine, but we are all different and if someone wants to take the hit and I accept it is common practise, then they must be prepared to accept the consequences. I only mentioned the appeal procedure because it is a possibility. Regarding the other statements about 'Hanging Judges' I understand what you mean and accept that some judges have differing standards, but they are still accountable and in this modern age any judge that was OTT would very quickly be up before the boss. It is clear that folks have differing opinions on this issue and perhaps it appears I am on the side of locking this person up no matter what, but I'm not. I just like to think that folks who are aware of all the circumstances might be in a better position to make a judgement. At least we are having a reasoned debate without setting light our keyboards.

I wonder why the son didn't try to say the number plate had been cloned? The car had been stolen? He went out drinking and someone drove him home but he had no idea who it was? etc etc. There are countless options he and a good lawyer could have tried, but he made a conscious decision to take the path he did. His choice, his decision and now he has to take responsibility. Win some, loose some.

John

Good discussion and some very interesting views and replies, however i have to give my vote to glojo, i agree you do have to take responsibility for your own actions, he knew the risk and got caught therefore there can be no excuses and lying under oath is a no no, regards

Dave

 

[recycled]

how can this 77yr old be worse than this

http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/...0.man_escapes_jail_for_blinding_96yearold.php

maybe they realised there was no money to be made.

 

[PaulE230]

I don't think they should have sent him to jail he is 77 ! and all he was trying to do was to help his family

Imagine the family now I bet they are all in pieces!



Some of the sentences handed out today are laughable and for a LOT more serious offences

 

[Mudster]

The moral of this story is nothing to do with just sentences or inconsistency. The true moral is learn to keep your mouth shut.

I face tax fraud on a daily basis, there isn't a single day goes by when a customer asks me if I will do a sale for cash to avoid the VAT. If you aren't aware this is now an imprison-able offence (for both me and the customer if the judge feels so inclined). I chose to take the legal high ground and as a result lose sales daily.

I get every facet of society ask me this from police, to solicitors and on one occasion I've actually had an employee of HMRC ask me.

If any of you who have castigated the actions of the individuals in the aforementioned story never committed an offence of any description then fine, other wise you're hypocrites.

I've lost count of the number of people I know that have had others take points for them, most of them are intelligent enough to just keep quiet about it.

 

[smillion]

The moral of this story is nothing to do with just sentences or inconsistency. The true moral is learn to keep your mouth shut.

I face tax fraud on a daily basis, there isn't a single day goes by when a customer asks me if I will do a sale for cash to avoid the VAT. If you aren't aware this is now an imprison-able offence (for both me and the customer if the judge feels so inclined). I chose to take the legal high ground and as a result lose sales daily.

I get every facet of society ask me this from police, to solicitors and on one occasion I've actually had an employee of HMRC ask me.

If any of you who have castigated the actions of the individuals in the aforementioned story never committed an offence of any description then fine, other wise you're hypocrites.

I've lost count of the number of people I know that have had others take points for them, most of them are intelligent enough to just keep quiet about it.

Agree with everything you said.

 

[recycled]

totally agree.
but it still does not change the fact that the jails are full because the wrong people are in them.

 

[Apial]

3 years ago a driver I know of, got a friend to take the speeding points so as to avoid a ban. He probably did this so as to avoid losing his job in his fathers business driving a Mercedes Sprinter van.

Now you might feel sorry for this guy, but I don't one bit. He should have been sent to prison for at least a year, and I'll tell you why.

2 months later he was late for work again. So he decided that 90 mph was a suitable speed to get to work, overtaking cars in a dangerous way, on his way to work in the morning. He probably was sending a text message too, but who knows, because for some inexplicable reason on a straight section of road he veered off to the right.

That same morning my brother-in-law, Steven, an anaesthetist at a local hospital set off for work waving goodbye to his pregnant wife and two young children. It was to be the last time that he was to see them.

Minutes later he had to take avoiding action as out of the blue an oncoming large white Sprinter van headed across the middle of the road for no reason.

His car was struck head on. God knows what his last thoughts were, but it must have been at least a very swift death. His watch was found in the back seat. The roof buckled skyward like a pyramid. The "accident" investigators put the vans speed at 80mph, and the cars at 50mph.

Now tell my sister-in-law that a 77 year old will have his lfe ruined by spending 6 1/2 weeks in prison for taking his sons points. I don't think she will be very sympathetic.

The person who took the speeding points was never prosecuted.

 

[glojo]

totally agree.
but it still does not change the fact that the jails are full because the wrong people are in them.

Having recently witnessed a so called pop singer laughing at our judicial system that still refuses to imprison this person, I feel it highlights just how difficult it is to imprison someone. Does anyone know what previous convictions these so called persecuted harrassed, innocent, victimised people may, or may not have?

John

 

[recycled]

3 years ago a driver I know of, got a friend to take the speeding points so as to avoid a ban. He probably did this so as to avoid losing his job in his fathers business driving a Mercedes Sprinter van.

Now you might feel sorry for this guy, but I don't one bit. He should have been sent to prison for at least a year, and I'll tell you why.

2 months later he was late for work again. So he decided that 90 mph was a suitable speed to get to work, overtaking cars in a dangerous way, on his way to work in the morning. He probably was sending a text message too, but who knows, because for some inexplicable reason on a straight section of road he veered off to the right.

That same morning my brother-in-law, Steven, an anaesthetist at a local hospital set off for work waving goodbye to his pregnant wife and two young children. It was to be the last time that he was to see them.

Minutes later he had to take avoiding action as out of the blue an oncoming large white Sprinter van headed across the middle of the road for no reason.

His car was struck head on. God knows what his last thoughts were, but it must have been at least a very swift death. His watch was found in the back seat. The roof buckled skyward like a pyramid. The "accident" investigators put the vans speed at 80mph, and the cars at 50mph.

Now tell my sister-in-law that a 77 year old will have his lfe ruined by spending 6 1/2 weeks in prison for taking his sons points. I don't think she will be very sympathetic.

The person who took the speeding points was never prosecuted.

sorry about your sister in law.
no one says people should not be punished for lying in court, but people should also be punished for blinding people in the eye.
The van driver is a bad driver and giving him points on his licence will not stop him driving at whatever speed he likes.
Many accidents are caused by banned drivers anyway who still drive thus rendering cameras ineffective.
We should get our priorities right.
the priority here for this justice system seems to be car and drivers only and fines and revenue.
I can not begin to tell you how many of my relatives have died. it is not the point.

And since you knew all these why did you not speak to the relevant authorities.
I know i would.

Do not forget that the next time this guy attacks someone in the tube, it could be some pregnant womans husband and he may kill the person.

My point is. lying for points or even under oath is not a bigger crime than hitting someone until he is blind in one eye.
the court is angry because someone took them for a ride. more like i will show you who is in charge in this country.

 

[glojo]

My point is. lying for points or even under oath is not a bigger crime than hitting someone until he is blind in one eye.
the court is angry because someone took them for a ride. more like i will show you who is in charge in this country.

With the very greatest of respect, I'm not sure your right. I say this because we might not know all the facts behind these cases. Blinding someone in just one eye is still an evil act and no way am I condoning it, nor will I attempt to defend it. Lying under oath can be a minor act, or it can result in death! Again we are not aware of all the facts but what I do know without a shadow of a single doubt....... Is that our
judicial system is crazily in favour of the accused. To get an offender to court will be a huge challenge for the police to overcome. To get a conviction will be a huge achievement. I cannot even imagine what it would take to get a prison sentence for a first offence? Murder springs to mind Would it be fair to suggest that the courts might be right, and the media are making a story out of an attractive headline? Who cares what the truth might be? Who will even bother to ask?

John

 

[crockers]

Apial - that is a tragic story - But i do agree with recycled - have you given these details to the police - can you prove this or is this heresay?

What happened to this van driver? Did he survive?

 

[Bloatus]

Am I the only one that thinks an inflexable system that sends 77yr old to jail for a "minor" offences a poor attempt at justice?

 

[glojo]

Am I the only one that thinks an inflexable system that sends 77yr old to jail for a "minor" offences a poor attempt at justice?

What previous convictions did this 77 yr old person have?

Regards
John

 

[recycled]

probably the same number as the burglars get before they can even think of taking them to court.
how many burglaries do you need to commit before you can see the inside of a jail cell?

 

[Parrot of Doom]

how can this 77yr old be worse than this

http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/...0.man_escapes_jail_for_blinding_96yearold.php

maybe they realised there was no money to be made.

Because the attacker is suffering from a mental illness and the judge decided that prison would not be the best means of ensuring it didn't happen again.

Since a disproportionate number of prison 'guests' suffer mental problems, I agree.

 

[kingsize]

Perjury is perjury is perjury.

The assumption has to be made, even if it is somewhat unrealistic, that when you take an oath in Court or attest to a true statement in the course of an investigation, you are going to tell the truth.

Now, if the prosecution can prove to the criminal standard that you have lied, surely they are duty bound to prosecute? After all, once you apply a sliding scale i.e 'it's only a wee bit of perjury', you lose the cornerstone of the judicial system - would it be better to assume that everyone lies on oath, and just not bother about it?

If someone attests to that which they know not to be true, and that is allowed to pass unpunished, there is less incentive to keep people honest.

As for sentencing, that is within the power of the Judge, and you can be assured that he has much more information at hand than any reporter, or indeed poster.

To draw a correlation between specific cases of indistinct type is a fruitless exercise, and one which inevitably leads to ill-informed hyperbole.

I have dealt with many, many cases where the reportage bears little resemblance to what actually transpired in Court.

I say this not as a critiscism, but by way of admonition - one should be wary of commenting on such matters without the full facts.

My fee is £750.00 + VAT.