Safe Speed Forums

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 762537.stm

Nurse jailed for driving fine lie

A Devon nurse who lied about not being the driver of a speeding car has been sent to jail for six months.

Joy Rees, 39, from Plymouth, was caught travelling at 51mph in a 40mph zone while driving a friend's car.

She responded to a fixed penalty notice saying an American resident had been at the wheel. Photographic evidence later identified Ms Rees as the driver.

She was given a six-month driving ban and sentenced to six months in jail at Plymouth Crown Court on Thursday.

Ms Rees, a psychiatric nurse, told the Devon and Cornwall Safety Camera Partnership that Joanne Aiken, her former sister-in-law and a US resident since 1993, had driven the car.

The case was initially heard in absentia in February 2006. Ms Aiken was found guilty, fined £105 by Plymouth Magistrates' Court, and had her licence endorsed.

The DVLA found Ms Rees had falsified the information when they tried to contact Ms Aikens at a UK address.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Safe Speed issued the following PR at 19:06 this evening:

PR312: Unreasonable pressure on reasonable people

news: for immediate release

The case of a nurse jailed as a direct consequence of a trivial speeding
offence highlights a bad application of the law says Safe Speed.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "The overzealous application of our speeding laws
is putting good people under too much pressure. Not only are we pushing them
outside the law, we're also making them worse as drivers."

"I'm certain that this case is the minute tip of the iceberg. For every
individual caught evading the law like this there are thousands - or tens of
thousands - who get away with it."

"This is just one more way that speed cameras damage respect for the law."

"The law must be targeted at those causing a danger on our roads. It is quite
absurd to claim that responsible careful drivers a few miles per hour over the
speed limit are causing a danger."

<ends>

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

If you look at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sout ... 762787.stm you'll see that 6 months imprisonment is the maximum that you can receive for nailing a Badger to a tree. Words fail me, over both the excessive and the inadequate powers of the law.

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

I suspect that the six months wasn't for speeding - it was for perjury!

Whatever, there is currently a shortage of psychiatric nurses in the Plymouth area, so the Crown Court's decision not only affects the nurse, it might have dire effects on the community. I wonder how many EMI patients and other mentally ill will be condemned to inapropriate care directly because of this case?

_________________
Will

She quite blatently broke the law. However I fail to see how six months in prison serves the public?
How much will it cost to keep her in prison?
How much will it cost to replace her in the NHS?
What is the minimum penalty to send an effective short sharp shock to this nurse?
Was a community sentance considered?

Why did this nurse get prison and the taxi driver who pulled me out of my car. kicked and punched me , gave me concussion and a broken tooth just cautioned?

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Still, in proportion to the tariff for some theft offences, it seems a bit harsh.

You are right, she deliberately broke the law but, as Paul intimates above, the probable reason for this was the disproportionate penalty which could be imposed for the original offence.

It puzzles me that things like contempt of court and perverting the course of justice are treated with greater severity than GBH and the like but I suppose that we need rules to try to ensure that court proceedings are fair.

What I don't understand is why a commumity punishment was not felt appropriate in this case. I can just hear the judge now. "... must make an example ... dignity of the law ... warning to others ..."

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Yeah, but who wants a lying nurse? The sentence is clearly for the perjury, the speeding is irrelevant.

There are many others who would do the same, she was just unlucky to have got caught. And as malcolmw says “... dignity of the law ... warning to others ..."

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

It's only purjury if you lie under oath in court, and nothing in this article suggests that was the case. Perverting the course of justice, maybe, but 6 months still seems very harsh...

_________________
Carl Prescott

I think 'lying' is something that many reasonable people do in response to unreasonable pressure. And I don't think 'speeding is irrelevant', because the application of the law was the unreasonable pressure that caused the behaviour.

Neither can I see that public interest has been served by the justice process.

In fact it may soon be recognised in international law that the S172 procedure is a violation of the right to silence. I wonder where this case would be then?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Precisely. If she'd been asked a reasonable question she probably wouldn't have lied.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

I suspect if she had named someone else who lived in the UK and was prepared to take the fine and points, then the authorities wouldn't have pursued the case.

It's only when you name a foreign resident that the alarm bells start ringing.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

David Simmonite, father of the well-known rally driving Simmonite sisters, got 4 months for virtually the same thing.
To be a bit cynical (what, moi?), if this nurse got 6 months for lying about who was driving a car at slightly over a speed limit, how long should Tony Blair get for lying about the 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' which have cost the UK armed forces over 100 fatalities and who knows how many Iraqi civilians have been killed?
There are thousands of people taking the points for other people throughout the UK and probably well over 99.9% of them get away with it. It's worth 'points-sharing' within families to avoid loss of jobs, careers, homes and possibly having deprived children, as a result of our crazy cash-camera schemes. If doing this, however, one must have the photos to see what the 'other side' have as evidence before going down this route.
A safet way to proceed might be to ignore all correspondence and not open it yourself. Then, if you receive a summons for failing to confess or name someone who will you can deny ever receiving anything asking you to and confirm this under oath if necessary. To find you guilty of something of which you have no knowledge may infringe your human rights and that could be a winner.
The more the NiP's get ignored, the more likely the scammers are to just give up and go for the easy option - i.e. those who just pay up. If only 20% of those NiP'ed totally ignored them the entire scamming system would collapse through lack of human resource.
What a pity Callaghan can't post on here any more, this would really 'wind him up'.

And it's only a confession or a guilty plea that proves the case.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Even MP, minister, Dr stephen Ladyman considered sharing the points with his wife.... It is public record... on top gear.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

The problem is that offences like perverting the course of justice were never designed for cases like this. They are supposed to be for things like making a false rape accusation.

And remember, driving offences are the only type of offence where it is illegal not to make a confession. She was denied the basic right to remain silent: is it morally wrong to lie (if it gets no one else in trouble) when there is no legal way to avoid having a confession taken?

The 'justice' system in this country is sickening. 6 months in jail for such a trivial offence and a trivial lie, (probably because she was worried about her career and a ban). 28 days in jail for the vicar who refused to pay an excessive council tax increase. But hijack a plane at gun-point and terrify everyone on board and you get a life sentence of freedom and free housing.

_________________
Why can't we just use Common Sense?

It seams that penalties for small crimes, accidental crimes are being treated harsher than pre-meditaed crimes. God help you if you forget to take your library book back!

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Oh the inhumanity, oh the injustice, oh how badly treated this woman has been, lied under pressure as anyone would do....woah, just stop a second.

The individual lied in order to mislead. This was hardly a spur of the moment decision, it was a conscious decision taken in the obvious hope of evading the consequences. Bearing in mind the jsutice system does not see the enforcement of the speed limit as being trivial, not least 51 in a 40 limit, what else were/are they supposed to do in such circumstances?