Well according to a radio report I heard this morning the driver of the Peugeot had 3 previous bans from drink driving, the 2nd of which should have resulted in a custodial sentence apparently but didn't
Quiite why that didn't happen then or after the 3rd ban isn't yet clear. Whilst being interviewed, the Lawyer - Nick "Mr Fixit" Freeman - was explaining how this tragedy was in no way relevant to the cases he defends in which he seeks to ensure his clients (who are being prosecuted for offences such as drink/dangerous driving) are acquitted due to procedural errors made by the authorities. Based on the available information, he argued that in this case the man in question didn't appear to have been punished in accordance with normal procedure and had he been he may well have learned his lesson some time ago and changed his habits. I can see his point except for the fact that every time he gets someone off on what may be a relatively minor technicality, that person may well not learn the lesson they would have had they felt the full weight of the law at that point and go on to repeat the sort of behaviour that in this case resulted in so many deaths.
---------- Post added at 08:58 ---------- Previous post was at 08:55 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by WHISTLED
I agree in principal but a good portion of those people arrested for drink driving or in that 3000 are the morning after... They had no idea they were over the limit, I wouldnt like to see them getting a custodial sentence.
|
Surely anyone who's old enough to drink and drive a car must know that alcohol stays in the system for some so if they drink the night before there's a real risk of them still being over the limit the next morning. As they say, ignorance isn't a defence.....