Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by WalterWarry, Feb 25, 2009.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Words fail me.
He is to appeal FFS.
Should be able to put the fine on expenses, at least.
and you expected what ?? Justice ..................... oh how naive
I'm pleasantly surprised that he got a custodial sentence at all tbh
The Judge does say that the texting was unrelated to the death but that would appear more to be down to luck than judgement.
A lorry driver has been sentenced to three years in prison for causing death by driving without due care and attention. It was claimed he was using a laptop computer.
A waitress was sentenced to 21 months in prison for causing death by driving without due care and attention. She had been texting whilst driving prior to the accident.
A Lord and a Lord that had threatened the capital with 10,000 muslim protestors over the Gert Wilders appearance gets 12 weeks, out in 6
IS ANYONE EVEN REMOTELY SUPRISED
So it is really six weeks in jail...If that's what you get for being a government scapegoat, I did all the torture and Dave Milliband knows nothing. Not even about the torture!
It would appear Labourt peerages are good value.
Not like anyone's surprised ....
Also this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7907991.stm
It'd just show them for what they are
liars with their snouts to far into the trough to safely withdraw
Exactly how was the texting unrelated to the accident, would be interesting to hear how they worked that one out
SNP claim its a cover up - wow finger on the pulse there ......................
Back to the texting - isnt that by law now classed the same as drunken driving - ie in so doing he is guilty without the need to admit it??
So we now know what value the Labour Legal Affairs Department/CPS/SCD place on a human life. Â£500 and a couple of weeks in a hotel.
I find it strange that they concluded that;
They can prove that he wasn't actually texting at the time of impact but they cannot prove that he wasn't reading a text at the time of the accident. Wilkies statement is a dangerous conclusion and in turn allows the charge to be reduced from Death by Dangerous Driving to Dangerous Driving. The result is still 1 x dead person.
I sincerely hope that Ahmeds short stay in pokey allows him to become someone's 'biacth' and his hoop gets stretched over his forehead.
It will be interesting to see the penalties layed down on mere mortals for similar offences in the future.
Apparently he wasn't texting AT THE EXACT MOMENT of impact, rather the police checked his phone and found that he had been texting numerous times a few minutes earlier, which if correct would mean that it had no direct bearing on the accident.
Even though it's still an incredibly stupid thing to do.
Which is still a dangerous sweeping conclusion. It 'may' of had a bearing but there is no evidence to prove it (ie he could have been involved in using his phone at the time of impact).
So how did they know the exact moment of impact
Separate names with a comma.