madscoob

iTrader: (3)

as the cameras can only register 178mph as proved by top gear it was a shame as another 13mph and the camera wouldnt have registered . all plod would osf saw wasa error code on his gun

astraboy

If he's got any sense that'll be the basis of his appeal. I remember reading about some guy who successfully appealed his 400 quid speeding fine on the basis Princess Anne got the same fine and as her income was somewhat more than his, it was disproportionate.
A few examples of ******* stealing similar bikes and causing reasonable amounts of collateral damage, but getting less punishment, will see him alright.
astraboy.

p1mark

I'm not going to pontificate on the harshness of the sentence, but i will say times have changed over the years.

In '92 i got caught "varying between 111 and 143 MPH over a five mile stretch of road" on the A34 near Winchester.

Again, no one around in the early hours at all, wide flowing road etc.

I got 3 months on a pushbike and a fine of £250.

rbaz

iTrader: (1)

That sounds fair to me (maybe higher fine now and educational course) you would just take that on the chin and move on.

Leslie

In all fairness, what can you expect the authorities to do when someone is caught at a speed like that regardless of the state of the road in question? Jail is OTT in this case, but he cannot possibly expect a light sentence.

The old saw about speed not killing is nonsense anyway. When the accident occurs regardless of whose fault it is, the higher the speed the worse the consequences. The safety margins are so highly reduced as well.

We just have to accept that the roads are there for people to get about on, and not for the selfish ones to satisfy their egos regardless of others.

Les

22BUK

I'm surprised at you, Les. Surely, it depends on the circumstances...

I estimate that the police car was doing 100mph when I passed it at about 170. This was last Friday, 4am on an almost deserted autobahn.

GlesgaKiss

Was along the straight today... meant to get a pic with my phone from the layby! Will do it next time.

Leslie

I would not criticise him if he had been on a deserted autobahn where parts of it are derestricted, and where people expect that there will be very high speed vehicles.

This bloke was in this country with a national speed limit of 60 or 70 mph on a road where such speeds are not expected by other traffic.

He was a nutter to drive at that speed and to get caught for it even if the road was clear.

Do you think the authorities should have let him off scot free?

Les

andy97

iTrader: (1)

I dont see the speed (given it was supposedly on a straight, clear road) as a problem only the over reaction of the authorities. Fine, points and possibly a short ban, but there is no point in prison.

This is why I get my speed kicks on the French autobahns or German toll roads

22BUK

Scot free? No, but jail is over the top. Community service should suffice.
The judge acknowledged that the only person that he'd put in danger was himself.
I'm not sure I see the difference between what he did and a mountain climber getting into "difficulties" and causing rescuers to put their lives at risk to help him. Much worse IMO.

scoobeenut

Curious what would have happened if he had been on a stolen bike with no licence, insurance, MOT etc. Slap on the rists, community service and a driving ban? He could probably then sue the owner for allowing their bike to be stolen.

Leslie

Yes but if you read what I posted, I also said gaol was OTT.

I also agreed that he was on a straight deserted piece of road. But what I said was that the authorities could not ignore the way in which he broke the law and they had no option but to punish him severely as a warning to others as much as anything. No one can justify that kind of speed on a public road.

I bet we virtually are in overall agreement anyway!

Les

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

I'm not sure about the merits of using one type of inappropriate sentencing to highlight another form. However, in this case, the point that jailing someone for speeding being excessive is sound.

I think most of us would argue that 166mph is taking the **** even on an empty straight stretch of motorway. A 12 month ban and fine would be sufficient IMHO

RB5SCOTT

The thing with 1000cc bikes is that 160mph is so easy for them to do. Within 10 seconds and half a mile you can go from 100-160-100 without even touching a brake!

Timwinner

iTrader: (3)

I dont like to get involved (any many will say "well dont") in SN heavy debates anymore but.... I think its a fair sentence, I believe that sentences for other crimes are to light and along side those crimes it appears a heavy sentence. But taking the incident by itself and not comparing it to other stupidly light sentences that are handed out I believe its fair.

I have the right to be on any public road in GB, I dont expect anyone to be doing 160+ on those roads, Its reported it was clear, maybe it was but I wasnt there to judge that part but I know this much, if that had hit a car at those speeds it would have wiped out the car and occupants too.

Sentences for other crimes need to be increased, no doubt, and I would not argue otherwise but these speeds are just stupid. If you want to drive that fast go on a track day.
I think taking a vehicle on the roads and do over 160 is selfish and does need to be punished.