Thicko returned fixed penalty notice claiming it wasn't him driving, and identifying an associate(!) as the driver. Police checked showed that at the time of the incident the associate was in jail :-D
Cyclist's head cam revealed Thicko was driving at the time.
But he still only got the usual light sentence when convicted (6 months including perverting justice conviction) - when will Courts get tough with dangerous drivers ?
I'm a bit surprised by the perversion of justice business. I would have thought large numbers of guilty suspects would lie about it but few are convicted of perverting the course of justice.
//I'm a bit surprised by the perversion of justice business. I would have thought large numbers of guilty suspects would lie about it but few are convicted of perverting the course of justice.//
Here’s a few to be going on with (under the heading “how to turn £100 and three points into a few month’s free board and lodging at one of Her Majesty’s hotels"). Note the “celebrity” couple in the first link:
There’s plenty more where that came from. I could find you another dozen without really trying. And that’s because the police will always, always prosecute PCOJ in such circumstances.
I remember the Huhne/Price affair. A prominent LibDem MP and candidate for party leader. Both ended up doing time for what was probably a £100/3-pointer.
NJ, you've linked to a few, but in the wider world of people not telling the truth, that seems a very small percentage. What distinguishes lying to police from perverting justice?
jno: "What distinguishes lying to police from perverting justice? " - well in the case of speeding etc, it starts when they falsify the NIP claiming someone else is driving as in the Huhne and Onasanya cases.
Saying (for example) that someone else was driving when you know they were not because you were, puts them at risk of a criminal conviction and you at risk of evading justice. The form that is completed when you are "pinged" by a speed camera which provides the driver's details is a statement which can be used in court. In fact when the driver is finally confirmed it forms the only evidence the police have to prove who was driving and without it a conviction for speeding (or any other offence where the vehicle was not stopped at the time) cannot succeed. That's the difference.