More scum thrown-up from the gene pool
29 June 2011, 09:11 AM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More scum thrown-up from the gene pool
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/ne...side_1_2813370
A DRINK-DRIVER who packed a group of young children unrestrained in the back of his car for a 1am trip to the seaside has been banned from driving.
David Hyde, of Great Holme Court, Thorplands, Northampton, had been drinking when he was discussing with a visitor where he should take the children for the weekend.
They agreed to go to the coast, as the youngsters had never seen the beach, but he decided to leave in the small hours to avoid Easter bank holiday traffic.
However the 45-year-old lost his way at Cambridge and was picked up by police in Barton Road, on his way to the M11, when they saw his brake lights being continually activated.
Once they had stopped the Citroen Xantia, they found the rear seats had been folded down and that four children, including Hyde’s seven-year-old daughter, were unrestrained in the back.
The driver was said to be unsteady on his feet as he got out of the car and was found to have 62mg of alcohol in 100ml of breath. The legal limit is 35mg.
Magistrates disqualified Hyde for 20 months for offences of driving above the alcohol limit and carrying passengers in a motor vehicle in a manner likely to cause danger.
He was also fined £100 and ordered to pay £40 costs, as well as a £15 victim surcharge, after presiding magistrates Dr Christine Shaw said she was “mindful of the children in the back of the car”.
He will be able to reduce the disqualification by five months if he completes a drink-drive rehabilitation course by July 2012.
However the ban means Hyde, who claims incapacity benefit after an accident working on a farm in 2005, will have to rely on others’ transportation in order to see his daughter.
**** poor fines hardly worth the bother and he gets a reduction if he takes a course, he should have time added on to his ban if he doesn't take the course!
as for not seeing his daughter - get a bloody bus or spend some of his booze money on a taxi - if the ****** can afford to get drunk he can afford to travel at his own expense to see his daughter - if he can be bothered that is...Still i am sure some some do-gooder will claim it is not his fault and he is the real victim...
A DRINK-DRIVER who packed a group of young children unrestrained in the back of his car for a 1am trip to the seaside has been banned from driving.
David Hyde, of Great Holme Court, Thorplands, Northampton, had been drinking when he was discussing with a visitor where he should take the children for the weekend.
They agreed to go to the coast, as the youngsters had never seen the beach, but he decided to leave in the small hours to avoid Easter bank holiday traffic.
However the 45-year-old lost his way at Cambridge and was picked up by police in Barton Road, on his way to the M11, when they saw his brake lights being continually activated.
Once they had stopped the Citroen Xantia, they found the rear seats had been folded down and that four children, including Hyde’s seven-year-old daughter, were unrestrained in the back.
The driver was said to be unsteady on his feet as he got out of the car and was found to have 62mg of alcohol in 100ml of breath. The legal limit is 35mg.
Magistrates disqualified Hyde for 20 months for offences of driving above the alcohol limit and carrying passengers in a motor vehicle in a manner likely to cause danger.
He was also fined £100 and ordered to pay £40 costs, as well as a £15 victim surcharge, after presiding magistrates Dr Christine Shaw said she was “mindful of the children in the back of the car”.
He will be able to reduce the disqualification by five months if he completes a drink-drive rehabilitation course by July 2012.
However the ban means Hyde, who claims incapacity benefit after an accident working on a farm in 2005, will have to rely on others’ transportation in order to see his daughter.
**** poor fines hardly worth the bother and he gets a reduction if he takes a course, he should have time added on to his ban if he doesn't take the course!
as for not seeing his daughter - get a bloody bus or spend some of his booze money on a taxi - if the ****** can afford to get drunk he can afford to travel at his own expense to see his daughter - if he can be bothered that is...Still i am sure some some do-gooder will claim it is not his fault and he is the real victim...
29 June 2011, 09:32 AM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A big town with sh1t shops: Northampton
Posts: 21,366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Knowing the area, it doesn't surprise me. Not that you should tar everyone with the same brush, but what were they thinking? Stupid!
29 June 2011, 09:45 AM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
every day of the week I see young children running loose in the backs of cars in Bradford. tiny babies, clinging onto headrests.
I rang the police a couple of years ago, as I saw 7 children (plus two adults) in a petrol station in a rover 45. dunno what happened, but maybe it made a difference.
I rang the police a couple of years ago, as I saw 7 children (plus two adults) in a petrol station in a rover 45. dunno what happened, but maybe it made a difference.
29 June 2011, 10:19 AM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Aberdare / Daventry
Posts: 5,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is so stupid! He should be banged up for taking kids along with him in that state. I wonder if the mother will revoke any form of custody on his half.
Trending Topics
29 June 2011, 08:45 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 3,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People like this only support the god argument.
I mean, given 50,000 years of evolution, cavemen, survival of the fittest and all that. How have these people, and other useless attributes for idle dole scrounging fatties managed to make it through? Surely they should have been bred out years ago.
5t.
I mean, given 50,000 years of evolution, cavemen, survival of the fittest and all that. How have these people, and other useless attributes for idle dole scrounging fatties managed to make it through? Surely they should have been bred out years ago.
5t.
