My main concern in these posts was the way we deal with the unlicensed driver. However a fellow magistrate picked up on the insurance post in his blog and this generated lots of comments on his blog.
2 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I agree with you. Had a case recently where younfg male stopped twice for driving with no insurance. He has no driving licence and never sat a test! The Chair said we should start at the FPN level for the first offence and then treat the other as aggravation. I couldn't seem to get through that for someone to drive without sitting a test or have licence and insurance should be treated as "very serious". My colleagues just kept quoting the JC's advice on this.
I find it quite extraordinary that on your blog site there are adverts for lawyers offering 'services' to try and get drivers who have clearly broken the law found not guilty because of some minor technicality. Thus they potentially enable dangerous drivers to continue driving and put others at risk. And they do this in the name of justice.
2 comments:
I agree with you. Had a case recently where younfg male stopped twice for driving with no insurance. He has no driving licence and never sat a test! The Chair said we should start at the FPN level for the first offence and then treat the other as aggravation. I couldn't seem to get through that for someone to drive without sitting a test or have licence and insurance should be treated as "very serious". My colleagues just kept quoting the JC's advice on this.
I find it quite extraordinary that on your blog site there are adverts for lawyers offering 'services' to try and get drivers who have clearly broken the law found not guilty because of some minor technicality. Thus they potentially enable dangerous drivers to continue driving and put others at risk. And they do this in the name of justice.
Post a Comment