This usually gets a mixed response. What are your thoughts?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/7918212.stm
6 months in prison for speeding seems excessive to me (bearing in mind you can go out a nick a car, beat someone half to death or deal substantial
quantities of class A and get less) fair enough ban him for a couple of years and make him re-take his test. But 6 months for speeding?
I should make clear that I am not condoning it as looking at the picture its raining and he had a pillion passenger too. Just questioning the severity
of the punishment.
I sometimes think that we have our priorities wrong. Who would you rather see locked up?
David
[Edited on 2/3/09 by flak monkey]
TBH, looking at the conditions in the photo and the fact that he had his 14 yer old son riding pillion with no motorcycle gear on I'm not sure I
do disagree with the sentence.
I suspect a ban would have made little or no difference to his take on the offence, perhaps a custodial sentence will.
You may recall the link posted here a while back to the blog of a driver who found himself in prison after hitting a motorcyclist (can't recall
if it was fatal or not).
It would only have taken the slightest error or misjudgement for the imprisoned biker to have been in the same postion which could only have ended in
2 lives lost minimum 
The pillion passenger was his 14 yr old son who was not wearing any protective clothing...
Reckless if you ask me.
6 months......
You def don't want to here my thoughts
If every biker that did over 120mph was put in prison then probably half the bikers in Britain would be in prison ( Me included)
My wife nearly lost a leg in an accident.
The car driver had:
No driving licence.
No MOT.
No insurance.
He got 40 hrs community service.
40 BLOODY HRS......
Mind you he wern't a BIKER.
So I suppose that's ok
My wife got a perminant limp, and f***all
in compensation.( Non insured driver)
Barly covered her lost earnings.
[Edited on 2/3/09 by dogwood]
Yes Mr Dogwood that does seem completely unfair . as in your case an accident had happened and someone was seriously injured.
122mph sounds very foolhardy , but I'm guessing that a modern superbike can get to 122mph and back to 60 mph very very quickly, so the time of
danger would be very short.
It was pretty stupid to take those risks with his kid especially without safety gear , and he would have had a lifetime of punishment and regret had
something happened.
So 6 months? , dont know about that as there was actually no accident or injury.
Fact is he got off lightly, tbh I was hoping he’d get a few years, doesn’t matter if was a bike or a car, he was utterly reckless with everyone’s
lives both his sons and those other road users. Personally I don’t speed on the bike and have no time whatsoever for bikers who claim it’s acceptable
to do so. Fortunately not all bikers are lunatics but those who are get the good ones a bad rep.
Only yesterday I go passed in the village by three teenagers on a non-legal offroad bike and none of them were even wearing a helmet.
I would say the sentence would be fair if only the courts actually locked up some "real" criminals once in a while. How many repeat /
violent offenders walk away with small fines and short spells of community service.
So, given the precedents set for many years - what a waste of money to the taxpayer sending that guy to prison for 6 months. Personally i think he
would take more note talking to another convicted biker who had actually crashed and killed his own son through stupidity.
... was just about to post about this after seeing it on the news.
Looks like htey want to make an example of him,. the article on tv was carefully worded to make it look as bad as possible.
"here we can see his son holding on to the back rest" ... implicating that he was haning on for dear life, err, no!!! that is what the grab
rais is for and how it is supposed to be used, lack of gloves wa not clever though.
then the show him going round a "tight" corner FFS - he was hardly canted over hence the corner was not tight at all.
or what could he do if someone pulled out in fornt of him!?!?! well FA as a lot of motorcyclist know - cars pull out all the time without looking or
because they "are bigger".
outrageous.
very very angry here in a sunny S. Englandshire.
There are two ways of looking at this:
One is based on the crime vs the punishment, the second is the punishment vs. what "real" criminals get.
To be honest I think its a little harsh, I've done more than that on a bike with a pillion before - admittedly we were both leathered to the max,
and it was an empty motorway at 4 in the morning, but still - Do I deserve a sentance for it? Nope.
I think all is needed is a sence of perspective, if proper hardened criminals can do terrible things and get a tiny sentance then this needs to be
catorgorised vs. that touchstone, not some witch hunt mentality that demonises speed.
By the way, I've done far more than 120 on a race track, in perfect safety, as do hundreds and hundreds of track day fans each weekend - even in
the wet. Just something to bear in mind (I know its a closed circuit etc. but just saying - speed on its own is NOT dangerous)
Excessive. Mobile organ donors will pay with their lives eventually, so a fine that's appropriate is OK with me.
Hi, I would just like to say that as the rider pleaded guilty to dangerous driving (according to the news) the courts had no choise bo give him 6 months, otherwise other bad drivers could argue againts a similar sentance when convicted of dangerous driving .
No problem whatsoever with the sentence... bloody idiot had it coming!
Like many of you, I am annoyed that other offences don't attract such heavy (and harder) sentences than this though.
That was not dangerous driving, It is a travesty of justice. The road was straight and clear, there were no junctions and limited liklihood of another
vehicle crossing his path. It was not very sensible to carry his son without protective clothing at ANY speed, but let's face it; it is not a
legal requirement to wear protective clothing, and even if it was there is no minimum standard for protective clothing anyway so it's pot luck if
you get c**p clothing when you buy it anyway. The son was not holding on to the seat, he was holding on to the grab rail, which is exactly what it is
for.
Speeding? yes. Without Due Care? possibly. Dangerous Driving? absolutely not without any shadow of a doubt. If the guy is guilty of anything it is
stupidity for agreeing that it was dangerous, he should have been better represented, and probably would have been if he had realised he ran the risk
of a custodial sentence!
If he'd crashed and killed or maimed his son; absolutely, dangerous driving, but he got his son home safely without incident. That would suggest
he has considerable riding skill and experience. How can a subjective view of "he might have" or "he could have" get a guy a 6
month jail sentence???
I would never ride without full protective clothing and anyone who doesn't is risking losing a lot of skin but they're not guilty of
dangerous driving because of it.
This case makes my blood BOIL!!!!!
Some interesting responses.
My initial point (and annoyance) was about the severity of the sentence not matching the crime in comparison to some other criminal acts rather than
the acceptability of doing 122mph on a public road (which by all accounts is silly in the wet...)
I am entirley in agreement with the 'speed doesn't kill' ethos. However inappropriate speed can and does in some instances.
I cannot disagree that he should be punished, as 122 is over the top on a public road. But I cannot agree with the sentence...
Edited to add - he was clocked by a mobile camera van, not plod, which means he presumably carried on at speed after being caught by the camera
without any incidents or accidents....
David
[Edited on 2/3/09 by flak monkey]
Although i agree most punishments aren't severe enough, i think this guy got what he deserves.
see here
Speed Limit: 60 mph
Speed Alleged: 122 mph
Fixed Penalty Threshold: 86 mph
Guideline Penalty: disqualification for more than 56 days plus a fine of 100% or more of your take home pay. You may also be prosecuted for driving
without due care and attention or dangerous driving.
Am I likely to have to go to Court? Yes
I still think it rather harsh.
I have been listening to an interesting debate about pillion riders on radio 2, seems that there is a definite split on opinion about whether it
should be allowed full stop.
But 6 months?!?!?!? I bet his son is distraught at the thought of his dad in prison. Seems when it comes to the law some get away with little or no
punishment for the most heinous crimes.
Had he been on the autobahn, what punishment, if any would he have recieved?
As far as I know, (I don't have a bike) you don't buy a Hayabusa just to do 60mph! 120mph on a quiet dual carriageway is so far within a
superbikes performance envelope that I don't think it would be very dangerous at all, as long as the road conditions were good (apparently not
great in this case). But doing this speed in the conditions as they were with a pillion rider is definitely punishable, but a lengthy ban and a fine
is more appropriate I think.
I know it is a mandatory 6 months, but, I too wonder about the custodial sentance. It will not teach him anything that a long long ban wouldn't. It will cost us the tax payer too. The son is definitly not a winner here, there are access and job implications. And, there was, thankfully, no victim. I suppose he just didn't think of the consequences at the time or I'm sure he would never have done it.
The punishment is inappropriate, this was man who was dim but did he kill anyone, or injure anyone, no. He has had bad advice as others have said
speeding, yes, due care definatly as he didn't use the mirrors and see plod, but that is it. 6 months in Jail will cost us a huge amount, he may
loose his job so a community sentance, say working every weekend for 6 months is much more appropriate.
This sentance and the spin attached is designed, just before the weather picks up, as a reminder to the born again bikers to behave. Remember Labour
looked at banning bikes from national parks, have allowed road safety to be bypassed for raising cash and have spun everything to try to hide the
truth.
I posted this when it originally came up. The guy was foolish, reckless and he exceeded the speed-limit by a huge margin but..... since when has it
been illegal (by inference) to carry a pillion passenger, for that passenger to be not wearing gloves or protective trousers- foolhardy maybe but not
illegal.
My original question was whether a car driver exceeding the speed limit by a similar margin would have been handed down a jail sentence - I suspect
not.
Also the little scrotes who steal cars and lead police on a wild goose-chase at similar reckless speeds receive nothing like that sentence.
Its demonising bikers because they are any easy target.
Disgusted, Pewe
So what a lot of us is saying is that .... its perfectly legal to break the law. FFS - he was doing double the speed limit. Does that mean its ok for
me to do 60mph on a bike in a 30 zone?
Get a grip, anything could have happened. A cow could have stepped out, hidden junction, a silly motorist not paying 100% attention could have tried
an overtake on the opposite side to suddenly find the bike approaching twice as fast as it should.
Plus bear in mind - the guy on the biker can't have been paying that much attention. The speed camera vans are pretty obvious things as you go
past them and he was still doing 122mph. If he'd been approaching the van fair enough. To me that alone implies he was unsafe.
quote:
Originally posted by MikeR
So what a lot of us is saying is that .... its perfectly legal to break the law. FFS - he was doing double the speed limit. Does that mean its ok for me to do 60mph on a bike in a 30 zone?
Get a grip, anything could have happened. A cow could have stepped out, hidden junction, a silly motorist not paying 100% attention could have tried an overtake on the opposite side to suddenly find the bike approaching twice as fast as it should.
Plus bear in mind - the guy on the biker can't have been paying that much attention. The speed camera vans are pretty obvious things as you go past them and he was still doing 122mph. If he'd been approaching the van fair enough. To me that alone implies he was unsafe.
I am 100% of the view that this was reckless and dangerous, it was pretty wet in the footage I saw (as per my post on the original thread)!
However, I am 100% with Flak Monkey (makes a change after the gay parent debate 
) in-so-much as this sentence is so disproportionate in
relationship to what other REAL criminals get that it is completely laughable!
There is no parity in sentencing in this country and once again, motorists (motorcyclists) are being victimised and made examples of on the basis that
'speed kills'!
quote:
Originally posted by MikeR
So what a lot of us is saying is that .... its perfectly legal to break the law. FFS - he was doing double the speed limit. Does that mean its ok for me to do 60mph on a bike in a 30 zone?
No it is not legal to break the law and ytou know it. I doubt anyomne on here can stick their hand up and say they have not exceed any speed limit.
Get a grip, anything could have happened. A cow could have stepped out, hidden junction, a silly motorist not paying 100% attention could have tried an overtake on the opposite side to suddenly find the bike approaching twice as fast as it should.
Except that it didn't. Punishment should fit the crime not what could have happened.
Plus bear in mind - the guy on the biker can't have been paying that much attention. The speed camera vans are pretty obvious things as you go past them and he was still doing 122mph. If he'd been approaching the van fair enough. To me that alone implies he was unsafe.
Not true - he was concentrating on the road. IF that were the case, noone would ever be caught by speed cameras since they would have been spotted beforehand. And e know they do, even in 20 mph zones wehere there is plenty time.
quote:
The Labour peer Lord Ahmed was today jailed for 12 weeks for dangerous driving after admitting he was texting while driving on a motorway just before being involved in a fatal crash
quote:
Originally posted by flak monkey
quote:
Originally posted by MikeR
So what a lot of us is saying is that .... its perfectly legal to break the law. FFS - he was doing double the speed limit. Does that mean its ok for me to do 60mph on a bike in a 30 zone?
Get a grip, anything could have happened. A cow could have stepped out, hidden junction, a silly motorist not paying 100% attention could have tried an overtake on the opposite side to suddenly find the bike approaching twice as fast as it should.
Plus bear in mind - the guy on the biker can't have been paying that much attention. The speed camera vans are pretty obvious things as you go past them and he was still doing 122mph. If he'd been approaching the van fair enough. To me that alone implies he was unsafe.
I disagree, I think most are saying that, yes what he did was unlawful and dangerous, but doesnt deserve 6 months in clink...
quote:
Originally posted by Dangle_kt
I've done more than that on a bike with a pillion before - admittedly we were both leathered to the max
quote:
Originally posted by hobbsy
What? Speeding AND drunk?
I'm still building a car to get me from 0-60 asap... and ... to top out at what ever it will do ....
Sorry.....
I thought everyone else here had the same dream....
Obviously there are people here building high speed vehicles who have never been reckless .... and... never showed off there fast vehicles....
weired...
Anyway... i suppose locking him up will serve the public interest and be a good use of taxpayers money... yeah...right..
Don't know British law but this is a prime case for a 5 year deferred sentence - if he speeds again (even 5 mph over the limit) within five years
he does the time - otherwise if he behaves himself no time.
By putting Dad directly in jail with no options you are punishing the Kid and the rest of the family for Dad's stupidity & and a crime that
had no actual victims, only potential ones..
[Edited on 2/3/09 by Ivan]
quote:
Originally posted by johnemms
I'm still building a car to get me from 0-60 asap... and ... to top out at what ever it will do ....
Sorry.....
I thought everyone else here had the same dream....
Obviously there are people here building high speed vehicles who have never been reckless .... and... never showed off there fast vehicles.... weired...
Anyway... i suppose locking him up will serve the public interest and be a good use of taxpayers money... yeah...right..
Once the moral highground has been seized its very hard to get back down to mere mortal levels again.
Right I'm off to rag the ar$e out my sheddy volvo.
quote:
Originally posted by clairetoo
quote:
Originally posted by johnemms
I'm still building a car to get me from 0-60 asap... and ... to top out at what ever it will do ....
Sorry.....
I thought everyone else here had the same dream....
Obviously there are people here building high speed vehicles who have never been reckless .... and... never showed off there fast vehicles.... weired...
Anyway... i suppose locking him up will serve the public interest and be a good use of taxpayers money... yeah...right..
I agree - I never realised that this forum had so many `saints` and do-gooders .
I have a clean licence - despite the fact that I was dangerously and recklessly driving at more than the speed limit several times over the weekend .
I would go as far as to admit that every time I get behind the wheel I break the speed limit - I have a terrible habit of watching the road and taking my eyes off the speedo to do so - but the amazing bit is I am still alive , and I have not killed or injured anybody - ever .
Maybe I should be locked away for a long time ?
Hmm puts me of getting another bike.
Ive had bikes most years since a kid and want one this year.
If I got 6 months I would loose everything 
So who is going to povide for his familly whilst he is on holiday. So he could also loose everything.
Way aver the top !
Seriously P****d off rant !!!!!
I have watched the vid over and over.
I see NOTHING dangerous at all.
Stupid yes...but dangerous, definatly NOT.
I have 35 plus years motorcycling
Also advanced rider, and RAC/ACU instructor.
The court seemed to be making something ,off what MIGHT have happened.
I have seen dangerous riding,
Overtaking on the inside, blind bends, etc.
122mph in this case wasn't dangerous.
it was a bit wet, but the tyres are more than capable of handling it.
The corner in the vid was VERY shallow.
As has been pointed out, he barly canted over at all.
As for me...well (Yes I'll admit it)
I rode home from the South of France a few years back
doing over 100 mph all the way on the autoroute.
Was I being dangerous?????
I finaly got knocked off doing 20mph by a kid on a mobile phone deided to do a U turn without looking...
Was he being dangerous/
Not according to the police or courts
His punishment?????
F***all again.....
David
I never commented on the sentence as I honestly believe that it is terribly disproportionate. The idea of giving him a fine, community service, suspended sentence and making him resit his test appeals greatly (esp as he admitted guilt). My comments (and perhaps badly worded, i was having a bad day in the garage) where aimed at the people who didn't think he did anything wrong.
I don't often comment on these things as it's a bit of a "Busman's holiday".
I think the sentence is excessive . Unfortunately for him the judge is just sticking with the state issued guidelines - IE, a custodial sentence will
normally be imposed for Dangerous Driving. What is of concern is that he was entitled to a discount for his timely Guilty plea - that makes the
sentence around 9 months or so originally (before discount) and that is worryingly excessive and disproportionate.
However I would say that some of you are naive if you think he has been badly advised (to plead Guilty).
Dangerous driving is that which "falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver and it would have been obvious to a
competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous"
"dangerous" refers to the "danger either of injury to any person or of serious damage to property".
The issue is always one of fact and degree - there is (unfortunately for him) recognised case law that high speed (114 in a 70 limit) can amount to
dangerous driving, "even though the potential hazards were minimal"
If this case had gone to trial, then the jury would have had to consider whether they felt his manner of driving was, in their opinion, dangerous to
other road users. It would not matter whether he was deliberately reckless, careless, momentarily inattentive or even doing his incompetent best.
Can anyone honestly say that they would have advised this man that he would succeed with a not-guilty verdict on the basis of the above?
The issue here is that which David raised in the first place - not whether this driving was dangerous but whether the sentence is "fair" and
appropriate.
I think only a fool would think he wasn't doing anything wrong.
Yes he was speeding, and yes he got caught and deserves the punishment for that offence.
I feel he was made an example of.
another poke at bike riders.
As for his son, I'm sure he's been on the bike plenty of times and knows how his father rides.
Just remember speed had never killed anyone !!!!!!!
It's that sudden stop that gets Ya...
I have just watched the vid again..
If he was traveling at 122 mph.
How come he wasn't catching the car infront/
Also how come there was a car within a few yards behind him...
I'm begining to wonder if there is more to this than just the speed.
[Edited on 2/3/09 by dogwood]
or the heart attack just before the sudden stop!
Police riders do more than that speed in similar conditions in the course of their normal duties. Are they guilty of dangerous driving? Must be if they are doing that speed!