One law for the rich and another…..

Er… Yes

Hi All,
Your trying to tell me now that there is a different language as far as legal terms go ?
Question:- How do you plead ?
Answer :- Guilty
What is there to translate into Legal Terms/Speak/Language/Talk ????
The only other words that would be added is the sentence unless you make the case for any mitigating circumstances.

Geoff.

Wot Snafu said

Moggy

Bat, guess this was the important part of the post:

All put to the bench by somebody who speaks their language.

The funny handshake and the correct lodge phrase worked into the plea always works wonders, I believe…!;o)

Hi All,
Moogy,
I am sorry but I do not understand why you would still need a brief to plead guilty and accept the punishment ? I assume it’s not a legal requirement to have a brief when pleading guilt is it ? Please advise not being legally minded in the process of the law courts it would come in handy for future reference if needed :eagerness:

Geoff

… why not be honest and plead guilty to the charge ?

Which is exactly what I did. You can’t argue with the evidence of the crew of a traffic car with a corrected speedometer.

1) Guilty as charged

2) Horribly sorry

3) Hardship of a 12 month ban.

All put to the bench by somebody who speaks their language.

Moggy

I am sorry Moggy but I have to agree with Charlie.

Me too.

Maybe you can afford to live off one tin of supermarket value baked beans a day for a year so that a wealthy – sorry! expensive barrister can get you off (or as near as, damnit!) a speeding charge but that just smacks of not playing fair. Elitist, maybe, and legal too, but not fair.

Hi All,
I am sorry Moggy but I have to agree with Charlie. One question though if you knew you had been speeding why the need for a brief why not be honest and plead guilty to the charge ?

Geoff.

Moggy – undue sensitivity over your wealth or lack of it is not the point. For many people sacrificing all their resources would still not enable them to brief “a very expensive barrister” to use your own words.

Re 8

I have a friend; a former RAF helicopter pilot and ATPL now retired, who sits as a magistrate. Although it is ignored by the majority of the reprobates, anyone who appears wearing at least a tie and with a suitable demeanour and has acceptable mitigating circumstances receives – in some cases – a slightly more sympathetic hearing.

No it doesn’t.

As mentioned before I am, and was then, far from rich. I just prioritised my spending and bought the best barrister (on recommendation) for this nature of case that I could afford. It is a course open to anyone, though it may entail sacrifices elsewhere.

Moggy

” just a very expensive barrister”.

That phrase rather emphasises the point I originally made.

Re 2

This is interesting. I’m salivating at the prospect of learning a new wheeze to get me off some future hook !

Actually that was a memory fail, sorry. I did escape the, allegedly inevitable, twelve month ban, but ended up with 28 days.

Nothing magic, just a very expensive barrister, dress conservatively, act contrite, list the hardships that would be caused to the staff of the agency I ran if I couldn’t bring in the business, our remote location in the countryside outside Shrewsbury, the problems of getting my ‘son’ to school.

To be fair I think the bench realised that at 0200 on a clear dry morning and a near-deserted motorway I wasn’t actually likely to cause an inordinate amount of distress to the general population.

The thing that amazed me was that despite the hour, and the fact I was wearing a DJ having been to an industry awards presentation at the Dorchester, I wasn’t breathalised. Not that it would have made any difference as I had not had a drink for about three weeks before, it being Lent.

Moggy

Hi All,
Charlie unlike his cricket you are dead on! :highly_amused:

Geoff.

Precisely, Geoff. And he got caught 4 times in three years!! The phrase “exceptional hardship” suddenly takes on a whole new meanng…..:rolleyes:

Hi All,
This guy is a 1st class pillock he relies on driving to earn a living and to attend charity work ? He should have thought about that first and foremost, just another pampered star who has used his fame and status to his advantage. I drove HGV Class.1. until I ripped my back muscles, anyway my point is if you rely on your license for a living your just being a prat by speeding when you know you shouldn’t, so many times I have heard and read about ‘ I need my license it’s for my job’ what a load of cobblers you got caught so admit to what you were doing not bleat to the courts when you pass your test you are given the license as courtesy not a right and to many times drivers who regularly brake the speed limit put not only themselves at risk but pedestrians and other vehicle users at the same time, if they spent more time concentrating on the job at hand they would not end up like this pillock has.
Before anybody asks! Yes I have been done for speeding but not while on the job and was 36 in a 30 that was right at the start of my license and never since.

Geoff.

Re 2

This is interesting. I’m salivating at the prospect of learning a new wheeze to get me off some future hook ! Was it a lady magistrate and you put her on a promise ? Did you drop a hint to the Bench that you were privy to some insider dealing on a Stock Exchange somewhere and an increase in their fortune was therefore assured?

If you now clam up, we’ll all know that whatever the wheeze is it must be exceptional.

No comment – unless the Bentley is pre-war. Which I doubt. I am sure his wife could have managed some of the onerous driving duties plus a few taxis……..;)

Not being by any means rich I escaped a speeding ban when clocked at 127 mph on the M1.

I think your Bentley envy is distorting your vision on this one.

Moggy