Jezza gets away with 82 in a 50 (allegedly)
08 September 2007, 08:24 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Jezza gets away with 82 in a 50 (allegedly)
BBC NEWS | England | Clarkson speeding case dismissed
Mr. Loophole strikes again and the authorities fail to get public enemy number one
Mr. Loophole strikes again and the authorities fail to get public enemy number one
08 September 2007, 08:53 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Runway two seven right.
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 September 2007, 10:16 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
A mate told me about a guy he knows who was caught going rather quickly around Selby Ring Road (IIRC) in a Porker. He contacted Nick Freeman and was assured he'd get off with it, for a fee of 20k 
A drop in the ocean to Jezza though. Another friend who wanted to book him for a 2hr after-dinner speech was quoted 25k, plus 5k for a PA to answer his phone whilst on stage (again, IIRC). Nice work if you can get it 
A drop in the ocean to Jezza though. Another friend who wanted to book him for a 2hr after-dinner speech was quoted 25k, plus 5k for a PA to answer his phone whilst on stage (again, IIRC). Nice work if you can get it
Trending Topics
09 September 2007, 12:13 AM
#10
No, that means (AFAIK) court costs. It's usually less than £200. If you read verdicts of other cases you'll hear something like "and he had to pay a fine of £250 and costs of £75". No, Clarkson's escape has been bought with real money.
And my estimation of him has taken a real beating: instead of taking like a man he reached for a lawyer.
M
09 September 2007, 12:22 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Soccer played in one of the Sundays today done for 102 mph in a 50 zone. 3 points and £100 fine 
Only £40 more than I got for 39 in a 30 - what's going on???
Only £40 more than I got for 39 in a 30 - what's going on???
09 September 2007, 01:13 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A perfect need for variable speed limits!
10 September 2007, 07:57 AM
#15
This isnt a speeding case, but a Section 172 offence. Reading the BBC report, Alfa cars didnt know who the car was booked out to, but assumed it was Clarkson.
J Clarkson not being the registered keeper and possibly not the person keeping the vehicle, doesnt have to exercise reasonable diligence in naming the driver, but only any information in his power to give. If he didnt know or have that information it is for the prosecution to prove he did (Mohindra).
A nice little victory for N Freeman as the prosecution were bound to fail wthout any form of testimony from J Clarkson( he has no obligation to testify)
So J clarkson didnt get off, he won his case. Some of the solictors costs will be met by the magistrates.
J Clarkson not being the registered keeper and possibly not the person keeping the vehicle, doesnt have to exercise reasonable diligence in naming the driver, but only any information in his power to give. If he didnt know or have that information it is for the prosecution to prove he did (Mohindra).
A nice little victory for N Freeman as the prosecution were bound to fail wthout any form of testimony from J Clarkson( he has no obligation to testify)
So J clarkson didnt get off, he won his case. Some of the solictors costs will be met by the magistrates.
10 September 2007, 09:13 AM
#16
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Best of luck to him and LOL at the usual holier than thou comments.
The funniest bit in the report is where it is stated that it is an enormnous weight of Jeremy's mind only to be followed up with the fact he didn't attend the court hearing Fair play to him, why even waste your time turning up if they can't get their case into some semblence of order.
The funniest bit in the report is where it is stated that it is an enormnous weight of Jeremy's mind only to be followed up with the fact he didn't attend the court hearing
Fair play to him, why even waste your time turning up if they can't get their case into some semblence of order.
10 September 2007, 09:20 AM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10 September 2007, 10:20 AM
#18
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fact remains that the prosecution offered no evidence in relation to the case, maybe because the case was far from watertight or is it just becuase they offer no evidence in cases involving wealthy people
Can't help but feel you are missing the point here.
10 September 2007, 10:30 AM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do I detect a hint of the green eyed monster here? So what if he can afford it and you or I can't. That's the way life goes I'm afraid, get used to it.
The fact remains that the prosecution offered no evidence in relation to the case, maybe because the case was far from watertight or is it just becuase they offer no evidence in cases involving wealthy people Can't help but feel you are missing the point here.
The fact remains that the prosecution offered no evidence in relation to the case, maybe because the case was far from watertight or is it just becuase they offer no evidence in cases involving wealthy people
Can't help but feel you are missing the point here.I mean the case against Clarkson was obviously flawed, and he was rightly acquitted, but I can't help thinking that if it were Joe Bloggs, they would have copped it, and that can't be right.
10 September 2007, 10:35 AM
#20
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am also fine with that someone spending a lot of money with a lawyer if they have the money and desire to do so.
Let's face it most people don't fight their corner in cases like this as they don't have the ***** to regardless of the financial situation and the more people like Clarkson who show how flawed the system is the better quite frankly.
At the end of the day if you want the best you have to pay good money, it's like that in everything, why should lawyers be any different?
10 September 2007, 10:38 AM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that in 99.99% of cases if you have the money you can buy the best. i just don't happen to think that solicitors, Barristers and Justice should necessarily fall under that banner.
10 September 2007, 11:29 AM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not at all.
I am suggesting that there be soem control on whether you are prosecuted or nor depends more on the size of your wallet, rather than if you did the crime, under the current system.
How you resolve it I am not sure.
I am suggesting that there be soem control on whether you are prosecuted or nor depends more on the size of your wallet, rather than if you did the crime, under the current system.
How you resolve it I am not sure.
10 September 2007, 11:47 AM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Les, the sretch of road in question is dual, and used to national speed limit (so 80 would have been pretty acceptable). Because traffic builds up so much at rush hour(s), they reduced it 50. Out of these times though (particularly late at night) the 50 limit is just crazy. Funnily eneough they thought a camera or two might catch people fed up with doing 50 along a perfectly good, empty dual at 2 in the morning
A perfect need for variable speed limits!
A perfect need for variable speed limits!
Les
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
robski
ScoobyNet General
3
12 February 2001 05:16 PM