Jump to content
The mkiv Supra Owners Club

Jailed for riding at 166 mph


Westcoaster

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Difference his 166 on the GSXR (as Jamie says a bit pathetic) is a different kettle of fish to a big car like a supra doing say 100 which most members on here will happily do, that bike will go from 70 up to the 166 and back to 70 before most cars have have hit a 100 from 70. Not too many toddlers running round on A roads which sound like they are in the middle of nowhere either.

 

I got a year ban, £800 fine and 240 hrs community service for 'speed in excess of 149mph on my fireblade' and I had to retake my test!!!!!!! Which I failed for speeding !!!!!:search:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you should feel very lucky as the crown directs charges of dangerous driving for this type of speed in scotland.

 

Exactly, I think I was very lucky and the punishment was very lenient. A few things went my way leading up to the case though which helped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Difference his 166 on the GSXR (as Jamie says a bit pathetic) is a different kettle of fish to a big car like a supra doing say 100 which most members on here will happily do, that bike will go from 70 up to the 166 and back to 70 before most cars have have hit a 100 from 70. Not too many toddlers running round on A roads which sound like they are in the middle of nowhere either.

 

I got a year ban, £800 fine and 240 hrs community service for 'speed in excess of 149mph on my fireblade' and I had to retake my test!!!!!!! Which I failed for speeding !!!!!:search:

 

I watched an appeal case about 2 years back of a biker killing a student in glasgow at ~10pm (no toddlers out and about) high performance/ brakes etc his speed est ~120 out the clyde tunnel. Student did not have a chance, driver got 7 years. The performance of the vehicle is no defence as it is the drivers ability that is the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched an appeal case about 2 years back of a biker killing a student in glasgow at ~10pm (no toddlers out and about) high performance/ brakes etc his speed est ~120 out the clyde tunnel. Student did not have a chance, driver got 7 years. The performance of the vehicle is no defence as it is the drivers ability that is the problem.

 

That sounds pretty just IMO. I linked to a copper running down an old lady and killing her. To say its lenient is an understatement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched an appeal case about 2 years back of a biker killing a student in glasgow at ~10pm (no toddlers out and about) high performance/ brakes etc his speed est ~120 out the clyde tunnel. Student did not have a chance, driver got 7 years. The performance of the vehicle is no defence as it is the drivers ability that is the problem.

 

No you are quite right, 10pm, dark looking thru a visor and in an area where it was prob normal to find people walking, that would be irresponsible, but there are far more cars out there doing silly things than bikes and when it goes wrong in a car at high speed the consequences are far higher. You are missing the point here, the guy could see a clear road and open the throttle and be doing that speed in seconds, there is no 'build up' like most cars, he was not 'head down, arse up' winding it up, and trust me at those speeds on the road on a bike he would have been concentrating, still british justice wonderful thing , he should of downloaded some kiddy porn and groomed some 10 year olds he would of got less punishment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was an analogy, not a factual comparison.

 

What is the fastest known illegal driving speed in the UK? Did they get the same term? It seems like a grudge against the soliciter more than anything.

 

Think he would have got off as easy as this $#@! had the circumstances been different?

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1223111/Policeman-killed-grandmother-100mph-dash-deliver-sisters-birthday-card-jailed.html

 

Not defending what he did, but I knew Malcom. He worked at the same station as me, before that he was a gaoler at Lewisham where I also worked. He is a really nice bloke. He lived for the job and was a really good copper. Such a shame that his daft actions led to the death of that poor woman. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not defending what he did, but I knew Malcom. He worked at the same station as me, before that he was a gaoler at Lewisham where I also worked. He is a really nice bloke. He lived for the job and was a really good copper. Such a shame that his daft actions led to the death of that poor woman. :(

 

Hopefully lesson learned for a lot of people. It's the only good thing to come out of any of these situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doing nearly three times the speed limit! F**k him.

 

Have you ever owned something that could get to that speed very quickly and brake from it again? Have you ever actually driven at that speed? I doubt it very much, it's no biggy on a clear road. :rolleyes:

Courts are over zealous in their approach to high speeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever owned something that could get to that speed very quickly and brake from it again? Have you ever actually driven at that speed? I doubt it very much, it's no biggy on a clear road. :rolleyes:

Courts are over zealous in their approach to high speeds.

 

You like you doubting, don't you, Ern. Sign of deeper issues is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are missing the point here, the guy could see a clear road and open the throttle and be doing that speed in seconds, there is no 'build up' like most cars, he was not 'head down, arse up' winding it up, and trust me at those speeds on the road on a bike he would have been concentrating

 

 

Yet with all his concentration and the clear road he still didn't spot the police camera. :shrug:

 

If he couldn't see the camera and slow down in time, then instead of a camera it could have been something that was an obstacle of some kind.

 

If it were me, would I be hoping I would get the points and fine end of the stick? Of course I would, but I would only be doing that kind of speed knowing that I may get the s**ttier end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

166 is just a number really.

People can die at 20mph or 800mph.

 

Unfortunately the UK has a fixation on speed as the root of all evil. When in reality there are far more serious things that cause far more deaths both on the roads and off.

 

Jail term for 'speeding' is way over the top compared to what other more serious crimes are given.

 

 

For example, I have been to Germany numerous times and gone over 170mph on the autobahn in my Supra, now in Germany they have a more responsible and realistic attitude to speed but if I were to do that here in the UK then I would be locked away. But having travelled at over 170mph I do not see myself as insane or a reckless criminal with intent on causing death to others.

Infact in a car like the Supra travelling at 150+ is quite a smooth, confident, controlled experience. (In the right places of course....not suggesting that anyone should travel at such speeds where the conditions are not right).

 

Its all a comparative thing and because here in the UK minority pressure groups seem to have much bigger influence and control than the general majority we find ourselves hearing about mis-carriages of justice every day.

 

(All in my own opinion of course)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

166 is just a number really.

People can die at 20mph or 800mph.

 

Unfortunately the UK has a fixation on speed as the root of all evil. When in reality there are far more serious things that cause far more deaths both on the roads and off.

 

Jail term for 'speeding' is way over the top compared to what other more serious crimes are given.

 

So true. But 'speed' is easy define, unlike 'danger'.

 

It's not right to get jail for speeding alone, there has to be something more, or you're trashing someone's life for a number. And it's just not factually correct to say that anything over an arbitrary speed is dangerous.

 

There's a huge shortfall in the law between 'careless' and 'dangerous'. I think most of you would agree that this lorry driver deserved a harsher penalty, certainly the difference between his sentence and the rider doing 166 mph should be a lot more than 15 months!!! ...

 

A “CALLOUS” lorry driver has been jailed for two years after knocking a cyclist off his bike and trying to ditch the evidence.

 

Andrew Stubbs, from George Street, Bicester, was imprisoned for perverting the course of justice after a court heard how he collided with cyclist Anthony Spink, who died after the collision.

 

The bike became trapped under Stubbs’s truck during the incident in Wakefield, in July 2007, while Spink was left in the road.

 

Stubbs carried on before getting out of his cab a few miles down the road and throwing the bike – along with some of Mr Spink’s personal documents – into undergrowth.

 

The 41-year-old was also convicted of careless driving after a trial, but he was cleared of causing death by dangerous driving.

 

During the trial the court heard from a witness that Mr Spink, of Normanton, in West Yorkshire, could be seen banging on the front of the cab to get the driver’s attention before being dragged under after the two vehicles collided.

 

... (Full story: http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/4713083.Trucker_jailed_over_cyclist___s_death_crash/)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jail terms for speeding IMO are extreme if the speeds are carried out on open stretches of roads.

 

Yes we all speed, some more than others, not may of us drive or ride close to the top speed of our vehicles. (I for one do so on a regular basis but more so when I have vast clear stretches as idiots still pull out on you on empyty roads without reason).

 

I have lost my licence for 12months for 138mph in a car, only avoided jail as I was in my final year of my degree. It was hard not being able to work freely here and there, getting about I managed to scrounge lifts/cycled etc but work wise it a major blow. No fines or points, just a straight 12month ban.

 

IMO, its better to try and hit harder such as general bans + community service + fine. Jail, IMO, is there for those who are really bad such as killers, thugs/mugs, typical criminals, repeat offenders etc not speeding motorists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about...

refusing to stop for the police

a "dangerous high-speed pursuit lasting more than 20 minutes"

90 along the M4

90 in a 60

60 in a 30

through a red light

while trying to inject heroin

in a stolen car

while uninsured

 

Sentence? 12 months suspended for a year.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6897772.ece

 

(Please add these two stories to the "Britain is f*cked" pile)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. You might also be interested in our Guidelines, Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.