Silly Police - Fine for blowing nose (Case now dropped)

[Easy_Rider]

I am not sure how it will pan out with it happening in Scotland.

But I suspect, that he will end up with a stiffer fine and costs.

Furthermore, simple question are you in proper control of your vehicle when blowing your nose? The fact the engine was running, and handbrake applied it seems matters not you are still considered driving.

Same if he had answered his mobile and would have been the offence charged before it became an offense in its own rights.

The offence is complete.

It does all seem abit silly when burglars and muggers walk away with probation orders etc.

Channa

I agree, it will be difficult for him to win, and that's why i call it bullying by the Police when they issue fines for such things they know you can't really contest it. Common sense would say it's nothing, but an officer on a power trip loves doing things like this. Training has changed in the Police force and they are taught more of a "us & them" attitude as the army is, and this breeds confrontation.

Sneezing while driving is rather dangerous, much more so than blowing your nose while stationary, I wonder how long it will be before they have sneeze cams to catch you out.

 

[perry]

How in control of your car do you need to be while sat in traffic ?

I of course only drive with my hands taped to the wheel while my assistant does the gears , they also handle the eye drops because my eyes are taped open so I don't miss anything ; but I don't need to mention this as we all do it , don't we ?

 

[channa]

I must admit, I dont think that the Police on occasion are seen to do a great deal to foster good relationships with the communities they serve.

To me their success is reliant upon good relationships with the people.

Whilst I fully understand the legalities of the alleged offence, I dont think that this type of prosecution does anyone any favours.

I have a close circle of friends and acquaintances who are police and magistrates, one has a particular interesting saying.

I uphold the law as it is, not necessarily how I would like it to be.

Channa

 

[Easy_Rider]

How in control of your car do you need to be while sat in traffic ?

I of course only drive with my hands taped to the wheel while my assistant does the gears , they also handle the eye drops because my eyes are taped open so I don't miss anything ; but I don't need to mention this as we all do it , don't we ?

And now we have the added distraction of watching that speedo needle like a hawk, because there is no common sense in speeding cases either.... there are 30 zones i'll do 20 in because of parked cars, narrow roads, schools etc etc, but there are 30's that are wide open, no houses junctions, but these will be where they hide to catch you doing 32.... i can name 2 places like this in my home town, and one is on a steep decent and they hide at the bottom. They are "close" to a place where accidents took place, so that makes it ok. Road conditions, time of day, traffic etc etc are non arguments. Yes you can argue that if you go over you are over, but there comes a point that watching your speedo too much is more dangerous than plod just using a bit of common sense :roll:

It all leads to a very stressful driving experience for most of us. Whenever I drive on the continent (France, Switzerland, Italy, Spain) I genuinly feel relieved, like a big weight lifted off.

 

[tintin40]

Somebody needs a good slap...

i bloody big one at that

 

[Easy_Rider]

....
I uphold the law as it is, not necessarily how I would like it to be.

Without wishing to be rude, and not wanting to cause offence but, that is the problem. There needs to be some thought process before "upholding" the law, because a lot of them are quite vague.

 

[LeeDevelopment]

For them it's tick boxes and targets, they don't care.....

 

[channa]

....
I uphold the law as it is, not necessarily how I would like it to be.

Without wishing to be rude, and not wanting to cause offence but, that is the problem. There needs to be some thought process before "upholding" the law, because a lot of them are quite vague.

I am far from offended Easyrider.

The problem as I see it is especially in respect of sentencing.

Magistrates have guidlines which in a lot of respect are far from guidelines, If the guideline says 1 weeks pay fine and 3 points, there seems little that can be done in terms of mitigation.

In my mind this is what irritates a lot of people.

I suspect the reason is because has things stand and the flaws we have in the system we have a simple situation.

Our mate who blows his nose, the offence is complete for failure to have proper control of a motor vehicle. 3 points and a fine plus costs.

He has never been in trouble before, and there is a financial penalty and points so higher insurance perhaps. Because the sentence will never be custodial he doesnt qualify for legal aid ( in England at least ) and so therefore has to defend himself and the stress of that or employ a solicitor.

Meanwhile a burglar gets legal aid, but because the courts are instructed to avoid particularly with younger persons custodial sentences, we get the conditional discharge community penalties, probation situation.

There really is no wonder that the casual observer is of the opinion the system is seriously flawed.

Sentencing guidelines in the context of how appropriate I am assured are frequently reviewed by a committee made up of various people.

You have probably worked out I lean more towards sceptisism than optimism in their effectiveness.

Channa

 

[Easy_Rider]

But thats my point, we are trying to follow everything to the letter and not standing back and looking at the bigger picture. They don't issue fines for ridiculous "offences" in the europe, why? There is no law writted than one must not blow their nose whilst parked up in traffic!
We have become obssesed with rules, coupled with the "targets" culture of the Police and other public bodies that this has lead to ridiculous cases, such as fines for putting wheelie bins out early, or your family being spied on because your "maybe" trying to get your kid into a school not in your area and so on.

We have become a society so scared that it became most prominant recently. Schools were shut because of the snow, but nobody wanted to clear the snow for fear of being sued if they did not do it correctly and then someone injured themselvs, this was also true for clearing paths outside our own homes. The rest of the world works together and clears the snow as a community, we are scared of being sued if we do. Even in the US, the home of sueing culture, people clear the snow, and in some states its a legal obligation to do so outside ones home. There was a discussion in the house of lords about this, and they were urging the government to speak out and say that it's nonsence that you can be sued for negligence.... they never spoke out, so what is the truth?

I diverse :roll:

Our mate who blows his nose, the offence is complete for failure to have proper control of a motor vehicle. 3 points and a fine plus costs.

Because it's not written in law that blowing your nose (in effect a parked vehicle) is against the law, then whose judment is it that he's not in proper control of the vehicle? I'm more likely to see it this way, he is parked up in traffic, needs to blow his nose, he probably looked at those officers and they didn't like the way he looked at them...result = fine for jo. Otherwise why couldn't the officer just walk by, or just talk to the guy about the possible "dangers". To issue the fine tells me he didn't like either the way he looked at him or spoke to him or whatever, another officer on a power trip.

 

[channa]

They don't issue fines for ridiculous "offences" in the europe, why? There is no law writted than one must not blow their nose whilst parked up in traffic!

There isnt here, the man in question is being prosecuted for failure to have proper control of his vehicle.( blowing noses, smoking, eating fish and chips, ladies applying eye shadow are the ' offending behaviour' not the charge that is the important bit

He was offered a Conditional offer of a fixed penalty which offers the biggest discount on tarriff 3 points £60 lighter life carries on.

He has chosen not to, he will have been reported to the CPS and they HAVE decided that they can get a conviction.

And therefore it will be tried by a magistrates court made up of normal people.

My point was they might as well be muppets because of the rigidity in sentencing guidelines.

It is at this point I have difficulty because common sense flies through the window. If the CPS prove the case, the sentence is in effect pre described.

Forgive me for sharing my understanding of how courts work :shock:

I just think it is important to understand the process so that pressure where necessary can change things.

I hope I am making a little sense, And in terms of diversyfying.....I is a master :roll:

FFS DOnt get me started on S44 of the Anti terrorism Act , that will be fun and mek your toes curl !!

Channa